Aetna CEO Sees Obama Health Law Doubling Some Premiums

Originally posted by NavyDoc
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

Well, there is no free lunch. Whenever government mandates free coverage or expanded coverage or insuring those with various preconceived conditions, then the cost premiums for everyone goes up. That's just the nature of the beast and one that many people do not understand. If government tomorrow was to mandate that car insurance also cover oil changes and the cost of gasoline, that insurance premium would skyrocket.

Of course, the intent is to make private insurance so expensive and untenable, that government will step in to take over and "fix" the problem it helped cause.

You think a fair comparison is uninsured and helpless people to additional coverages of vehicle maintenance? Not air at all.

How much does free Tricare cost you?.. nothing. The government?.. less than what they pay for my Blue Cross Blue Shield (DoD Civilian). And I still pay out of pocket. Don't see Tricare going out of business. If it can work for Tricare, then it can work for all. Problem is... greed.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

Are you really so naive that you can't recongize when insurance companies are fear mongering?

With the onset of healthcare, this behavior is more than predictable for these companies.

And you instantly took the bait, hook, line, and sinker.

Is it fear mongering when the increases are actually already occurring? Google it for yourself. People all over the country are complaining about huge spikes in insurance costs leading to many small companies and individuals losing what coverage they used to have. As the above poster mentioned, this was planned. The goal is single payer government controlled healthcare. Just look at the UK to see how that works out. Rationed health care will be the result in the end. AKA "death panels".

Ask the Navy Doctor how well his Tricare plan works out for him and his family. I don't need to look at the UK. I know personally that "single payer government controlled healthcare" can work without greedy insurance company CEOs making sure that their pockets are lined with millions each year.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

My insurance is under Tricare prime, (government sponsored health care) as my husband is a retired Marine, our premium already double, and by 2014 will triple

You don't even pay any out of pocket cost!!! I more than you for healthcare and still have to pay out of pocket! I noticed that as soon as I was retired! You have no reason to whine about a premium... that's for sure.

Originally posted by SilentKillah

Originally posted by NavyDoc
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

Well, there is no free lunch. Whenever government mandates free coverage or expanded coverage or insuring those with various preconceived conditions, then the cost premiums for everyone goes up. That's just the nature of the beast and one that many people do not understand. If government tomorrow was to mandate that car insurance also cover oil changes and the cost of gasoline, that insurance premium would skyrocket.

Of course, the intent is to make private insurance so expensive and untenable, that government will step in to take over and "fix" the problem it helped cause.

You think a fair comparison is uninsured and helpless people to additional coverages of vehicle maintenance? Not air at all.

How much does free Tricare cost you?.. nothing. The government?.. less than what they pay for my Blue Cross Blue Shield (DoD Civilian). And I still pay out of pocket. Don't see Tricare going out of business. If it can work for Tricare, then it can work for all. Problem is... greed.

When I was in Tricare, I did notice a lot of things. There is a lot of delay in treatment, waits, and disaproval of meds and treatments. Tricare is very expensive for the taxpayer. Obviously we need to provide care for the people we employ, but Tricare is in no way a bbusiness model to follow. It does not need to be profitable, all the government has to do is shell more money into it. Notice how large our defense buget is?

Of course it is an apt comparison. Catestrophic health insurance for things like a broken leg or a heart attack or cancer is not very expensive. One of the things that drives up the cost is maintenence---just like car insurance. Of course, unlike car insurance the government has made it unlawful to buy health insurance across state lines, thus stifling competition.

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo
just out of curiosity i would like to ask a couple questions

i have 3 kids, all of them are adults. 2 can't find jobs. the other is self-employed.
will they all have to pay for health insurance out of their own pockets, even if unemployed or self-employed?

No, but they will have to pay a fine that is less than the premium. What they will do is pay the fine and then have the taxpayer pick up their insurance bills for them.


.

how does a person without a job pay a fine? are they crazy?

Well yes, they are crazy. Just looking at the bill is evidence of that.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


How many of us here have been stating that costs are going to rise, and that not only was 0bama lying about costs lowering, that is seems it was the plan all along, as he is on record as stating he wants a single payer system.

Not surprised.

And if you are surprised, you have not been paying attention.

reply to post by macman


And when costs do what Obama claimed, what will you say?

Will you admit your paranoid fantasies were false?

Nope. You'll just pretend you never claimed this crap.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo
just out of curiosity i would like to ask a couple questions

i have 3 kids, all of them are adults. 2 can't find jobs. the other is self-employed.
will they all have to pay for health insurance out of their own pockets, even if unemployed or self-employed?

No, but they will have to pay a fine that is less than the premium. What they will do is pay the fine and then have the taxpayer pick up their insurance bills for them.


.

how does a person without a job pay a fine? are they crazy?

Well yes, they are crazy. Just looking at the bill is evidence of that.

If you'd ACTUALLY read the bill you could answer the question...

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

Are you really so naive that you can't recongize when insurance companies are fear mongering?

With the onset of healthcare, this behavior is more than predictable for these companies.

And you instantly took the bait, hook, line, and sinker.

WHAT!? Are you naïve??? Do you even possess a basic and cursory understanding of economics??? And, by the way, why would the insurance companies be blowing whistles given the potential windfall from new customers and higher premiums? I'll tell you why, because the net result is that the insurance companies collapse and medicine becomes socialized - which was dear leader's goal from the onset.

The math is simple... I have a policy, I pay $700 a month for it. It covers my insurance company's cost of ensuring I receive medical care. Now the insurance company has to provide the same level of care, if not higher, to someone who can't pay and the government says it will pay only $200 a month for the same policy. Who in the hell do you think will pick up the slack? Um, ME!!!

Keep defending this failure - as I know you will! In about 2 years from know the high will have worn off and reality will be biting you in the ass like a rabid dog. You will have only your naivette to blame.

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo
just out of curiosity i would like to ask a couple questions

i have 3 kids, all of them are adults. 2 can't find jobs. the other is self-employed.
will they all have to pay for health insurance out of their own pockets, even if unemployed or self-employed?

No, but they will have to pay a fine that is less than the premium. What they will do is pay the fine and then have the taxpayer pick up their insurance bills for them.


.

how does a person without a job pay a fine? are they crazy?

Well yes, they are crazy. Just looking at the bill is evidence of that.

If you'd ACTUALLY read the bill you could answer the question...

What do you mean? Costs are going up, taxes are going up, regulations are going up...it's all in there. Democratic senators who voted for it are already scrambling to exempt their constituents from it because they are seeing the first tax increases coming and recognize it will kill jobs in their states.

Sixteen Democratic senators who voted for the Affordable Care Act are asking that one of its fundraising mechanisms, a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices scheduled to take effect January 1, be delayed. Echoing arguments made by Republicans against Obamacare, the Democratic senators say the levy will cost jobs — in a statement Monday, Sen. Al Franken called it a “job-killing tax” — and also impair American competitiveness in the medical device field.

The senators, who made the request in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are Franken, Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer, Patty Murray, John Kerry, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Joseph Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Robert Casey, Debbie Stabenow, Barbara Mikulski, Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Jeanne Shaheen, and Richard Blumenthal. All voted for Obamacare.

Two other Democrats, senators-elect Joe Donnelly and Elizabeth Warren, also signed the letter. Donnelly voted for Obamacare as a member of the House. Warren was not in Congress at the time.

Don't you find it the height of illogic? To make healthcare "cheaper" by taxing healthcare equipment more?

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Catestrophic health insurance for things like a broken leg or a heart attack or cancer is not very expensive.

If you ever wanted solid proof that those on the right are divorced from reality, read this ^^^.

www.forbes.com...

Cancer is the ninth most expensive thing to treat.

Seventh is stroke, another catastrophic illness.

Fifth is heart attack.

In fact of the top ten most expensive illnesses, catastrophic ones account for at least half the list:

10. HIV $25,000

9. Cancer $49,000

8. Transplant $51,00

7. Stroke $61,000

6 Hemophilia $62,000

5. Heart Attack including Cardiac Revascularization (Angioplasty with or without Stent) $72,000

4. Coronary Artery Disease $75,000

3. Neonate (premature baby) with extreme problems $101,000

2. End-Stage Renal Disease $173,000

1. Respiratory Failure on Ventilator $314,000

But yeah sure, just go on making up crap NavyDoc, you're right to assume most people on the right will just believe what you're spouting without bothering to check if it's true.

Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by macman

 

And when costs do what Obama claimed, what will you say?

Will you admit your paranoid fantasies were false?

Nope. You'll just pretend you never claimed this crap.

Why pose a hypothetical that will never happen - can't happen - because it flies in the face of every economic principle!?

Please explain, in detail, how adding 30 million non-paying or marginally paying customers lowers costs! Please explain how increasing coverage and costs for the insurance company will cause rates to drop.

His paranoia is real and based on economic FACTS - you, on the other hand, are living in a fantasy. I will anxiously await your pearls of wisdom on how this will work.

You know, maybe if the insurance companies weren't trying to make inordinate profits this wouldn't be an issue.
It is very easy to blame Obama or any other politician for this, but it isn't their fault.
The fault lies squarely with the insurance companies who have allowed the price of medical care to become ridiculous. Is a thousand percent mark-up really necessary? I think not.
A brief background; I have working in the medical device industry for 20 years. I know the cost of manufacturing medical products intimately. I also know how much the mark up is to the public by the time it goes through a hospital. It routinely reaches HUNDREDS of percent. It is insane. It can cost approximately 80 cents to a 1 dollar to manufacture a cervical screw for a common fusion surgery. The manufacturing company sells it for 2 - 3 dollars The ortho companies charge 20 - 40 dollars for the same screw. The hospital charges sometimes in 50 - 150 dollars for the exact same screw. The insurance companies pay it. It has become a farce. The price of medical care has no logical need to be as high as it is. So, don't blame this president or the next. Blame the industry that has allowed it to happen. Again, the only reason that premiums would skyrocket is for the insurance companies to keep having record profits. It is unnecessary and wrong.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by undo
just out of curiosity i would like to ask a couple questions

i have 3 kids, all of them are adults. 2 can't find jobs. the other is self-employed.
will they all have to pay for health insurance out of their own pockets, even if unemployed or self-employed?

No, but they will have to pay a fine that is less than the premium. What they will do is pay the fine and then have the taxpayer pick up their insurance bills for them.


.

how does a person without a job pay a fine? are they crazy?

Well yes, they are crazy. Just looking at the bill is evidence of that.

If you'd ACTUALLY read the bill you could answer the question...

What do you mean? Costs are going up, taxes are going up, regulations are going up...it's all in there. Democratic senators who voted for it are already scrambling to exempt their constituents from it because they are seeing the first tax increases coming and recognize it will kill jobs in their states.

Sixteen Democratic senators who voted for the Affordable Care Act are asking that one of its fundraising mechanisms, a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices scheduled to take effect January 1, be delayed. Echoing arguments made by Republicans against Obamacare, the Democratic senators say the levy will cost jobs — in a statement Monday, Sen. Al Franken called it a “job-killing tax” — and also impair American competitiveness in the medical device field.

The senators, who made the request in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are Franken, Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer, Patty Murray, John Kerry, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Joseph Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Robert Casey, Debbie Stabenow, Barbara Mikulski, Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Jeanne Shaheen, and Richard Blumenthal. All voted for Obamacare.

Two other Democrats, senators-elect Joe Donnelly and Elizabeth Warren, also signed the letter. Donnelly voted for Obamacare as a member of the House. Warren was not in Congress at the time.

Don't you find it the height of illogic? To make healthcare "cheaper" by taxing healthcare equipment more?

You OBVIOUSLY have NO idea where the main costs of healthcare lie.

And again, you obviously haven't ACTUALLY read the bill, have you?

Tell us, if you don't have a job, how do you pay the fine?

Go on.

As for costs going up, tell me, what does the CBO say?

I'll help: the said to Boener that repealing it would cost more than keeping it, by about $109 billion.

www.cbo.gov...

Ever wonder why the GOP ACTUALLY wants to keep most of it? Because it ACTUALLY saves money.

Is it perfect? Hell no. But you know what, the US's healthcare system costs WAY too much and covers way to few people. Just to increase the profits of the middle man.

Originally posted by longlostbrother


And when costs do what Obama claimed, what will you say?

Will you admit your paranoid fantasies were false?

Nope. You'll just pretend you never claimed this crap.

Please, go back and research my time here.
When proven wrong, I will admit it.
I wish on every single first star at night that costs go down.................................But, by adding how many new people and increasing taxes, that is in direct conflict with economic principles.

I guess we shall see. But, the rising costs are already happening.

Oh, well...if the head of an insurance company says it...

Come on. The insurance business will lose some of their ability to price-gouge and deny coverage to those that need it most. They care about their obscene profits and little else.

Remember, when child labor and living-wage laws were proposed, corporate America cried and screamed that it was going to kill them. It didn't.

It amazes me that people will stand up and fight for the right of these behemoths to kill human beings in the name of profit.

reply to post by jtap66


I'm NOT fighting for the insurance companies to maintain insane profits. I AM fighting against having to pay for someone else's free ride and allowing the government to tell me what I have to buy with MY money!

There are other ways to address the insurance companies and costs - legislating ME to pay for it is pure crap!

Originally posted by kozmo

Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by macman

 

And when costs do what Obama claimed, what will you say?

Will you admit your paranoid fantasies were false?

Nope. You'll just pretend you never claimed this crap.

Why pose a hypothetical that will never happen - can't happen - because it flies in the face of every economic principle!?

Please explain, in detail, how adding 30 million non-paying or marginally paying customers lowers costs! Please explain how increasing coverage and costs for the insurance company will cause rates to drop.

His paranoia is real and based on economic FACTS - you, on the other hand, are living in a fantasy. I will anxiously await your pearls of wisdom on how this will work.

ACTUALLY.

Where does the US rank on the "value for money" scale, for it's healthcare?

Where does it rank on coverage of it's population?

Where does it rank on it's outcomes?

In other words, is it good value, does it cover everyone, and does it do a good job?

And sure, are people happy with it?

No, tell me, who does better? For less? With better outcomes?

And tell me, how do the systems that do it better for less pay for it? Are they private?

You're little, "it'll never happen" rant is ignoring the ACTUAL reality. Governement run, taxpayer funded healthcare, is the most successful and cheapest system going.

That's reality.

Here a list of the 36 best healthcare systems in the world:

www.businessinsider.com...

Guess where the US system came in that ranking?

How about this ranking:

U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives

www.commonwealthfund.org...

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by jtap66

 

I'm NOT fighting for the insurance companies to maintain insane profits. I AM fighting against having to pay for someone else's free ride and allowing the government to tell me what I have to buy with MY money!

There are other ways to address the insurance companies and costs - legislating ME to pay for it is pure crap!

This is the biggest delusion of all.

You ARE ALREADY paying for their free ride. And through the nose. You're so irrational you think that it's cheaper to pay for the poor to go to the emergency room as their PCP.

The UK has one of the best healthcare systems in the world (by all accounts except those on the far right). So does France. Both are Universal. Both countries spend FAR LESS per person than the US does.

In other words, you'd pay LESS for healthcare in both places, and have better healthcare, and have better outcomes and everyone would be covered.

And, if you wanted to, you could STILL spend extra money for super expensive crap if you wanted.

Cheaper, better, universal.

You can't ACTUALLY rebut that, except with ideology, but that ideology of yours is costing you money.

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Catestrophic health insurance for things like a broken leg or a heart attack or cancer is not very expensive.

If you ever wanted solid proof that those on the right are divorced from reality, read this ^^^.

www.forbes.com...

Cancer is the ninth most expensive thing to treat.

Seventh is stroke, another catastrophic illness.

Fifth is heart attack.

In fact of the top ten most expensive illnesses, catastrophic ones account for at least half the list:

10. HIV $25,000

9. Cancer $49,000

8. Transplant $51,00

7. Stroke $61,000

6 Hemophilia $62,000

5. Heart Attack including Cardiac Revascularization (Angioplasty with or without Stent) $72,000

4. Coronary Artery Disease $75,000

3. Neonate (premature baby) with extreme problems $101,000

2. End-Stage Renal Disease $173,000

1. Respiratory Failure on Ventilator $314,000

But yeah sure, just go on making up crap NavyDoc, you're right to assume most people on the right will just believe what you're spouting without bothering to check if it's true.

ANd if you want to see the lack of reading comprehension on the left, look at the above. What I said is that a catostrophic insurance policy is not that expensive, not that those illnesses were not expensive. That is the whole point of a catastrophic policy, that you cover yourself for the most expensive problems but pay out of pocket for less expensive issues. Catastrophic, where you buy insurance to cover you if a horrible thing happens, but not for routine care.

Catastrophic health insurance plans are designed to provide an emergency safety net to protect you against unexpected medical costs.

Catastrophic plans are individual and family health insurance plans that emphasize coverage for hospitalization or serious illness. The word "catastrophic" is not always used in the name of the plan - they may also be referred to as hospital-only or short-term plans. Catastrophic plans may not provide coverage for other services such as prescription drugs, regular doctor's visits, immunizations or checkups.

Monthly premiums for catastrophic plans may be lower than those of other health insurance plans but annual deductibles are usually higher.

www.ehealthinsurance.com...
And you were saying something about people being ignorant?