Originally posted by sh76 I never said anything about gaming the system. But if premiums continue to skyrocket and insurance companies are forced to subsidize people with pre-existing conditions and 26 year olds who live with their parents, there's going to come a point where going without insurance may be a sound actuarial decision for a healthy working 27 year old. If those people dro ...[text shortened]... n, affect people on the margin, or there would be no point in having them in the first place.
Health insurance company's profits are at their highest point ever (and that's with extravagant compensation packages for their top management); if the lack of a mandate forces them to accept less profit, so be it. The mandate was adopted for their, and only, their benefit.
And you seem to have missed my main point; whether someone going without health insurance is a "sound actuarial decision" or not is irrelevant; the vast majority of people aren't actuaries. They're going to buy health insurance.
Originally posted by no1marauder Health insurance company's profits are at their highest point ever (and that's with extravagant compensation packages for their top management); if the lack of a mandate forces them to accept less profit, so be it. The mandate was adopted for their, and only, their benefit.
And you seem to have missed my main point; whether someone goin vant; the vast majority of people aren't actuaries. They're going to buy health insurance.
On the contrary. People are much more likely to underinsure themselves than to overinsure themselves because people don't like to give real money for speculative benefits and because people aren't really that foresighted.
Ask any life insurance agent if their biggest problem is that clients want to buy too much insurance or too little.
Edit: If word gets out that buying health insurance is a bad actuarial decision, watch it spread like wildfire. Most people aren't actuaries, but if the actuaries give them an excuse to save money, many of them will take it.
Originally posted by sh76 On the contrary. People are much more likely to underinsure themselves than to overinsure themselves because people don't like to give real money for speculative benefits and because people aren't really that foresighted.
Ask any life insurance agent if their biggest problem is that clients want to buy too much insurance or too little.
Edit: If word gets actuaries, but if the actuaries give them an excuse to save money, many of them will take it.
I suggest you actually look out at the real world once in a while.
The problem in the US is hardly that there are a bunch of people who can afford health insurance but don't buy it.
EDIT: The vast majority of people are very likely to pay a reasonably small amount now (esp. when the government is going to pay a good chunk of it) rather than risk a sizable amount of health care costs later.
Originally posted by Melanerpes So maybe the GOP could get the ball rolling now with their most excellent alternative way to provide the funding so that everyone can afford health insurance. Then, before we scrap the existing plan, we could compare their awesome new plan with the existing one and then decide which one is better.
Stop having the left hand try to find ways to pay for something that the right hand heavily restricts the supply of. Instead, allow a massive increase in the number of healthcare providers.
It is so simple. I sometimes wonder why no one get this?
Originally posted by sh76 On the contrary. People are much more likely to underinsure themselves than to overinsure themselves because people don't like to give real money for speculative benefits and because people aren't really that foresighted.
Ask any life insurance agent if their biggest problem is that clients want to buy too much insurance or too little.
Edit: If word gets ...[text shortened]... actuaries, but if the actuaries give them an excuse to save money, many of them will take it.
Originally posted by no1marauder I suggest you actually look out at the real world once in a while.
The problem in the US is hardly that there are a bunch of people who can afford health insurance but don't buy it.
EDIT: The vast majority of people are very likely to pay a reasonably small amount now (esp. when the government is going to pay a good chunk of it) rather than risk a sizable amount of health care costs later.
According to your logic, the individual mandate is completely unnecessary. So why bother having it?
In the "real world" insurance premiums have not risen to level of critical mass yet that would cause mass defections. If the premiums rise in the next 5 years like they have in the last 5 year, you'll start seeing those defections en masse.
Originally posted by spruce112358 Stop having the left hand try to find ways to pay for something that the right hand heavily restricts the supply of. Instead, allow a massive increase in the number of healthcare providers.
It is so simple. I sometimes wonder why no one get this?
I agree -- this should be a major part of the healthcare debate. Perhaps the GOP could get the ball rolling with their most awesome plan to greatly increase the number of people choosing healthcare as a career.
Instead of wasting valuable time on a fruitless attempt to repeal the current law, lets have a bipartisan discussion about how to greatly increase the supply of providers.
Originally posted by no1marauder I suggest you actually look out at the real world once in a while.
The problem in the US is hardly that there are a bunch of people who can afford health insurance but don't buy it.
EDIT: The vast majority of people are very likely to pay a reasonably small amount now (esp. when the government is going to pay a good chunk of it) rather than risk a sizable amount of health care costs later.
Incidentally, I am in the "real world." Because New York already imposes much of the long list of goodies mandated by Obamacare, premiums are out of sight in NY. I work for a small employer and so I have to deal with my own health insurance. Thankfully, I can get my insurance through Healthy NY which subsidizes the premiums to the point where they're just high and not completely insane. If not for Healthy NY I honestly don't know if I could afford what these companies want for a private family plan.
I do know that for people making far less than I who don't get health insurance through their work, getting unsubsidized health insurance would be impossible. How could anyone afford to pay 2 grand a month for health insurance with a medium income? Obamacare will undoubtedly give the rest of the country the benefit of these insane rates. All it will do is shift the pool of uninsured from the moderately low income people, as now, to the medium income people who make too much to get subsidies.
Originally posted by sh76 Incidentally, I am in the "real world." Because New York already imposes much of the long list of goodies mandated by Obamacare, premiums are out of sight in NY. I work for a small employer and so I have to deal with my own health insurance. Thankfully, I can get my insurance through Healthy NY which subsidizes the premiums to the point where they're just high ...[text shortened]... low income people, as now, to the medium income people who make too much to get subsidies.
What solution do you suggest to fix soaring health care costs?
Originally posted by sh76 Incidentally, I am in the "real world." Because New York already imposes much of the long list of goodies mandated by Obamacare, premiums are out of sight in NY. I work for a small employer and so I have to deal with my own health insurance. Thankfully, I can get my insurance through Healthy NY which subsidizes the premiums to the point where they're just high ...[text shortened]... low income people, as now, to the medium income people who make too much to get subsidies.
Originally posted by sh76 According to your logic, the individual mandate is completely unnecessary. So why bother having it?
In the "real world" insurance premiums have not risen to level of critical mass yet that would cause mass defections. If the premiums rise in the next 5 years like they have in the last 5 year, you'll start seeing those defections en masse.
To increase insurance companies profits.
Premiums won't have the double digit increases per year that they have had the past decade (with no "Obamacare"😉 once the exchanges are allowed to exclude companies that charge exorbitant rates. To wit:
states are authorized to demand that insurers justify rate increases and prices. If states are dissatisfied with the reasoning behind the changes, the plan offered can be taken off the exchange. Insurers will have to be more transparent about their pricing, and how they spend their revenues, especially if they want to be included on the exchanges.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra What solution do you suggest to fix soaring health care costs?
1) Give everyone the option of enrolling in Medicare; those under 65 pay market level premiums, which are reduced on a sliding scale based on income. Double the Medicare tax if that's what it takes (or triple it); it will save money in the long run.
2) Deregulate private insurance companies. Treat them like life insurance companies. They can write whatever policies they like based on whatever factors they like. I don't mean TOTAL deregulation, of course. But I'd eliminate requirements, such as forcing them to cover full grown adults just because they live with their parents.
3) Establish those death panels that hide in Sarah Palin's closet and go bump in the night. What I mean by that is that the government should not have to pay to continue the life of a brain dead patient, at the rate of 20 grand a day. No, I don't know exactly where to draw the line; but I'm willing to bet that someone could figure it out.
Originally posted by no1marauder To increase insurance companies profits.
Premiums won't have the double digit increases per year that they have had the past decade (with no "Obamacare"😉 once the exchanges are allowed to exclude companies that charge exorbitant rates. To wit:
states are authorized to demand that insurers justify rate increases and prices. If state ...[text shortened]... ersonaldividends.com/money/miranda/health-care-reform-how-will-state-insurance-exchanges-work
You can't save ALL the necessary money just by reducing insurance company profits. Sooner or later, you're going to have to provide less care to someone.
Originally posted by sh76 1) Give everyone the option of enrolling in Medicare; those under 65 pay market level premiums, which are reduced on a sliding scale based on income. Double the Medicare tax if that's what it takes (or triple it); it will save money in the long run.
2) Deregulate private insurance companies. Treat them like life insurance companies. They can write whatever p ...[text shortened]... w exactly where to draw the line; but I'm willing to bet that someone could figure it out.
Seems like an improvement over Obamacare anyway, too bad the American people will never want such a "socialist" European-style system.
Bad Statistics
20 Jan '11 22:29
Back to Top