Was asking OP about the statement...........

Just saw that Anthem has gotten so much pushback from professionals in health care that they have recinded this policy.

UHC CEO and other execs unload over $100 million in shares less than two weeks before stock tanks because of DOJ investigation.

We can't afford regular Medicare, plus a supplemental, or Medigap or whatever. Advantage covers more than regular Medicare, almost always at the same price as regular Medicare (which is deducted from our Social Security checks).

With original Medicare A there's a $1676 deductible, before it starts to pay.

For Part B, there's the $174/month premium out of your social security check, and a $240 deductible before it starts to pay. And then, it'll only pay 80% of costs for covered services, you pay the other 20%.

You also have to pay 20% of *MOST* (not all) approved inpatient hospital doctors services not covered by Medicare A.

You pay co-pays for doctor visits beyond the mandatory preventative coverage (which might or might not still exist next year).

Neither A nor B cover prescription medicines, you'd have to get part D, and pay the premium for that, to get coverage (which is really just reduced cost for most drugs, 0 cost if you can get mail-order).

If you want all those co-pays to be covered, you ALSO have to get Medigap, to pay for the deductibles and co-insurances/co-pays. Medigap has its own premium costs.

So you can pay - double what Social Security checks take out ($174/month) to get the same coverage that Medicare Advantage covers, or you can pay just the $174/month to get that coverage.

The problem isn't with the plan. The problem is with the entire system. Basic medical care should be 100% covered, no premiums, no co-pays, no co-insurance, no deductible, for EVERYONE in this country. Citizens or non-citizens, legal or not legal. Prisoners get better health care than some people in this country right now. That's just not right.

Yearly checkup, vaccines, antibiotics to treat infection, yearly labs/bloodwork, wound care, prostate exam, mammography, colonoscopy, yearly skin check, twice-yearly dental cleaning or perio maintenance and yearly x-rays, a vision and hearing test every year. This should ALL be covered by the taxpayer dollar.

Once you get all THAT covered - then people can be required to decide which ADDITIONAL services they want with insurance (or not). It shouldn't be competitive. Companies shouldn't be profiting off the gamble that someone will be healthy, and the patient betting on being sick. ALL health care should be non-prof. Not charitable - but non-prof. There's a difference between giving something away, and not making bank on profits.

Maybe I missed any words of compassion for the victim and his children. All I read was using the event to attack him and the industry. At least wait until after the funeral.

I can't begin to pull apart what you have stated without getting in trouble. I will only say that if every person paid taxes then the taxpayers, as you stated, could cover all medical expenses for everyone. And remove the stock market from all medical care, supplies and RX's. That would be a huge beginning.

A lot of what you say is correct. But if you step back a moment an recognize that for most of us, the responsibility for our health care is us. There is no universal guarantee to have the government provide any health care other than what you have paid for which may be Part A. And even there, it is not complete.

From that point, the choice is yours. Pay nothing and get nothing more, then face the charges as they occur. Pay the Part B Medicare charge and get the 80% benefit less the annual deductible. Expand coverage by a supplement at your cost or choose a Medicare Advantage option by accepting their conditions.

Your statement that all costs listed by you should be paid for by the government is idealistic and a wonderful wish. However, you have not paid for this service, nor has anyone else.

Based upon your background in the computer world then the "if this, then that" logic should be understood.

Under current laws, you get what is in the law. You understand what is in the law (or Plans).

Your complaint is with the system and your list requirements. Those listed requirements will not likely change in the near future and I wouldn't wait for that to happen before making my choice decisions. Currently have to deal with the present.

You echo my sentiments. While I certainly disagree with murder, I can, however, partially understand the frustration that would lead to this unfortunate situation. Also, it only takes less than one minute to find out what the CEO salary was. Try 10.4 million annually in salary, perks and benefits, which only adds to the frustration of someone who is unhinged. Another thought, I would bet that CEO and his family had better health insurance than what UHC offers to the general public.

thank you for how the assumption can be made. Yes, not stating something positive can be assumed/interpreted/judged to be negative. However, I learned from a person with whom i worked for many years:

assume positive intent until proven otherwise, ie, innocent until proven guilty.
so lack of typed compassion <> condoning the behavior
and yes, I/we don't condone the action, to be clear.

We are new to Medicare. Can you provide links to prove where the insurance agents commissions are higher if they get more signups for Advantage plans?

The whole system is setup to be so complicated that a person cannot compare apples to apples to make a good decision! Like it is a toss up!

God I his is more of a therapy session than an informative venue.
Time to get off this sight.

This took place just a couple of days ago and there are other plausible reasons why this took place other than his connection with UHC. I'm not saying it is not but why not give it time for the authorities to capture who is responsible and true reason behind it.

Anthem reversed their decision, announced 1st thing this am

But I would love to know who came up with the idea and the person that approved it!