Community >> View Post
·
Post By
Abby

In Reply To
Abby

Subj: I guess I got to caught up and didn't answer some questions..
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 at 04:10:34 am EST (Viewed 1196 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty Three dollars
Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 at 02:21:23 am EST (Viewed 1197 times)


But they or you are probably like who gives a &(* but here goes.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      Then you also have to deal with state laws, which would be really different between one state and the next regarding health insurance regulation. It's not like insurance rates would suddenly see a significant decrease, or that current insurance problems would be fixed.



    Quote:
    Federal Law trumps state law so hopefully that would make it easier for the insurance companies to be competitive with one another.


I think insurance companies would lower their rates if they had to compete against insurance companies in the other 50 states. Current problems such as getting denied coverage they said they would cover you on would hurt them in a Real free market system that health care just does not have now.

In a real free market system, especially now with the internet, people can look up which companies are reputable and which ones are not, but since insurance companies now only have 3 other companies at most to compete with, they know consumers really have no choice.



    Quote:

      Quote:
      One huge problem that I have with UHC. There is really no incentive for a person to prevent situations that would require healthcare. A great motivator to change any behavior is financial incentives/punishments, but that would be removed in this situation. Moral hazards are a huge problem in our society.


Yeah, lets punish that evil person who decided to buy candy corns and a coke! Evil, evil man!


    Quote:
    Smokers really should get more credit, I mean they pay the most for the Government services that we have. Yeah, I can see the Government regulating fast food restaurants to death (ok, this is a good regulation lol), charging extra tax on soft drinks, candy bars, why should certain people have to pay more for their own life style choices?



    Quote:
    Why should a someone who eats a lot of red meat, uses a ton of salt and butter but eats no vegetables live a cheaper life? This just is not the role of Government. What about Britain who is forcing kids that are a certain weight to go to fat camp?



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        The free market is the most sacred thing we have. Without it, there would be no advances in technology, competition Between AMD and Intel have lead us to these 3ghz processors, competition between Nvidia and Ati has also lead to these massive graphics cards we have now.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Another problem I have with UHC. What is the incentive for health care companies to really innovate? The US, while being the major lone country without UHC, is one of the leading innovators in healthcare products and services. 7 of the top 12 pharmaceutical companies are based in the US. I really have no way of knowing which companies are the most innovative in terms of medical procedures or research.



    Quote:
    I don't know for sure but there can be no denying there has been advances in medical technology. The private sector through the incentive of greed has always tried to come up with the next best thing to make money off of.



    Quote:
    Perhaps the insurance companies are not part of these advances (though they might be if they could lead to cheaper alternatives), but I'm sure the Politicians in Washington haven't made the advances in laser surgery for example. NASA



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I'm sure competition has done a lot for laser treatment in the medical sector as well and I for one would like to see technology keep progressing. The Government cannot (here's a word I bet MOST of you hate) constitutionally force you to buy anything like it's trying to do now with Health Care reform.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Well the current plan is basically just to provide a government option, meaning you could still have your own private insurance company. But I don't see how many people would opt for private ins over a government supplied one.



    Quote:
    Right, you just said it yourself, why would people choose private health insurance when they can just go to the Cheap Big Brother run plan that the private sector cannot hope to compete against. The Government does not have to worry about profits like the private sector does, so they can charge quite cheaply and have us pay for it later.



    Quote:
    It also just seems unfair for an insurance company to compete against an entity that dictates the rules. It's sort of like say during a basketball game, at some point during the 3rd quarter, the referee just decides to join a certain team (SEIU). Gee, I wonder which team would win (sorry about lame last sentence).



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Lots of questions that we still have to see the answers too. How does the private sector respond, by dropping employee health plans? How does the plan get funded? Who ultimately makes the decisions for the patients?


Indeed, how does the private sector respond, none of us are psychic but we all have our own guesses. I think at the very least, we should let people by insurance nation wide, do tort reform first, and see if that works. Maybe just revamp medicaid (but that things about but busted broke), it sounds like some people should be eligible for it that are not.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.5.8 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software