http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124536864955329439.html

All I know is the more I read the more concerned. The government can not manage what it currently offers. It is ineffective. It is cheated. It is over charged. It is abused. Result? Nothing.

Now a much more complicated package. All kinds of controls on your doctor and on you. Who is going to police this new system? The same bungling idiots that can't find their butt with a map that are running the current programs?

There is only one thing for sure....if it is allowed to pass....those of us over 65 are going to become very unhappy with what they stand to lose or have to pay out of pocket to retain.

I don't understand how we the people just stand in line and wait to have their head split with an ax. Oh I guess I do....Obama said there is no way to get hurt standing in this line!!!!!!!!!!!

btk

why don't you hold the fear smear until the plan actually comes out and then debate its merits- the month old article is nothing like what was announced today.

Originally Posted by conn8757

why don't you hold the fear smear until the plan actually comes out and then debate its merits- the month old article is nothing like what was announced today.

Since you must have read the proposed 1008+ pages of the plan could you supply a link?
Thanks

Oh wow - frankly I didn't start the link. I am not trying to incite everyone when everything is still on the table. There are plenty of posts doing that before this ever got to the conference stage today. Anything to stir the pot - I guess that would be the tea pot.

I'll provide one: http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

In addition, the House's mirror bill is at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:

Got a lot of reading to do on the Senate bill, but the first few pages state pre-existing conditions are out, companies selling health insurance must take all comers, and health insurance companies must provide specific cost/payment information to the Secretary of Health and Human Services who will verify that, depending on the "profit" a rebate will be provided to customers.

It will be interesting to see how much this bill will actually jack up health insurance costs or cause several companies to stop selling health insurance due to federal interference and mandatory rebating based on federal review/certification.

Again, got a lot of reading to do. I wonder if/which any congressperson will do so as well.

Well, they like to throw numbers out there like 50 million don't have insurance but the real number is actually lower. If you take away the illegals, and people that can afford insurance but don't want it..the numbers are alot lower. Anyways, tell me again why it is an advantage to have the government run health care. Will they run it better then the Registry of Motor Vehicles? Tell me what the government runs well besides the military.
Do you want bureaucrats deciding your treatments? Do you want somebody setting back your hip replacement for months because they want the younger people to have it before you?
We have the government running car manufacturing companies and banks. How do you think that is going to work out? We have over 30 CZARS that don't have any oversight. The car Czar said he didn't know anything about cars. What's up with that.
If I sound apprehensive ....well....It all seems too much and too fast...and I know how it turns out when I have too much on my plate. OK

Rant Over...

Originally Posted by conn8757

Oh wow - frankly I didn't start the link. I am not trying to incite everyone when everything is still on the table. There are plenty of posts doing that before this ever got to the conference stage today. Anything to stir the pot - I guess that would be the tea pot.

Sometimes one could say "good morning" and it would stir the pot.

Off topic, but I see you once lived in Kewanee. We were there last Sunday @ Good's furniture are you familiar with it?

Originally Posted by ejp52

Since you must have read the proposed 1008+ pages of the plan could you supply a link?
Thanks

This link could make you nervous:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Thanks for providing those two links to the proposed House and Senate healthcare bills, Steve. I scanned the Senate bill, but haven't gotten to the House version yet. So far I'm left with a couple impressions (from the Senate version)...

• They seem to have closed a lot of loopholes that permitted insurance companies from enjoyng lots of profit while denying coverage to lots of people.
• If enacted as is, there could actually be a signifciant reduction in healthcare costs for those covered by policies which will be subject to the provsions of the bill. I reach that conclusion only with the "gut feel" that government involvement really has resulted in reduced costs, in the VA prescription drug program as an example, by limiting private companies from enjoying egregious profits under the umbrella of "friendly" legislation. Maybe that can be extended to doctors and hospitals, maybe not.
• Whether any cost reductions would pay for covering the millions of people who currently don't have health insurance is problematic. I'd have to see a couple of comparitive financial analyses by independent sources.
• The biggest weakness in the bills is the effect it might have on insurance companies being willing to stay in the health insurance business. Could the entire country suffer in the same way that homeowners are here in Florida as the result of government prescribing how the insurance business will be run? For those of you who don't know, a whole bunch of big homeowner's insurance compnaies simply withdrew from the Florida market. The result is that the State has become the insurer of last resort for losts of Floridians. Could that happen with health insurance companies? What would happen if a bunch of the big hospitalization insurance companies--say United Healthcare--concluded that staying in this business under these kinds of government restrictions and oversight simply wasn't worth it?

So the "ying" I've come down with so far is that the healthcare situation could actually get better. But the "yang" is that over-involvement by the government could actually result in a bunch of insurance companies throwing in the towel on this business. Then the government would become the principal provider of health insurance--truly the nationalized system that no one who's posted here desires.

This is not a risk-free proposition.

Has anyone taken the time to review the Republican plan which everyone says does not exist but does ?

I am not very good in this arena (healthcare) and we have a number of great "experts" that post on this board, but just want to say before I take my leave ...

I am tired of the congress and the WH making the comments about no alternative plans. Stupid me can find them !

And lastly, EVERYBODY wants the system to be changed...you cant find anyone who doesnt. So, why are we pushing through this particular plan with very little if any debate ?

I am for health care reform of some kind, but this issue along with all that this President and Congress had already done just about "cooks our goose"

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Thanks for providing those two links to the proposed House and Senate healthcare bills, Steve. I scanned the Senate bill, but haven't gotten to the House version yet. So far I'm left with a couple impressions (from the Senate version)...

• They seem to have closed a lot of loopholes that permitted insurance companies from enjoyng lots of profit while denying coverage to lots of people.
• If enacted as is, there could actually be a signifciant reduction in healthcare costs for those covered by policies which will be subject to the provsions of the bill. I reach that conclusion only with the "gut feel" that government involvement really has resulted in reduced costs, in the VA prescription drug program as an example, by limiting private companies from enjoying egregious profits under the umbrella of "friendly" legislation. Maybe that can be extended to doctors and hospitals, maybe not.
• Whether any cost reductions would pay for covering the millions of people who currently don't have health insurance is problematic. I'd have to see a couple of comparitive financial analyses by independent sources.
• The biggest weakness in the bills is the effect it might have on insurance companies being willing to stay in the health insurance business. Could the entire country suffer in the same way that homeowners are here in Florida as the result of government prescribing how the insurance business will be run? For those of you who don't know, a whole bunch of big homeowner's insurance compnaies simply withdrew from the Florida market. The result is that the State has become the insurer of last resort for losts of Floridians. Could that happen with health insurance companies? What would happen if a bunch of the big hospitalization insurance companies--say United Healthcare--concluded that staying in this business under these kinds of government restrictions and oversight simply wasn't worth it?

So the "ying" I've come down with so far is that the healthcare situation could actually get better. But the "yang" is that over-involvement by the government could actually result in a bunch of insurance companies throwing in the towel on this business. Then the government would become the principal provider of health insurance--truly the nationalized system that no one who's posted here desires.

This is not a risk-free proposition.

Insurance companies generally break their operations into corporate profit centers, so that if one business area goes down, the rest are immune. So, the "health insurance company" - as a separate corporate entity - of a major multi-line insurer is the entity most concerned with these bills.

The separated health insurance company will find its business practices having to align with whatever regulations (and reporting requirements) (and oversight) will come from a health care law. Allowable and retained "profit" will be determined by the Secretary, HHS under such law, which means deep access into company books will also occur. Insurers will make certain that the only records access for their operations will be with the separate "health insurance company (HIC)" within their conglomerates. The downstream battle will be when/if the SecHHC starts getting involved in HIC internal organization as to administration, quality control, et cetera; in effect "managing" the HIC by allowing/disallowing operational costs as acceptable overhead and impacting "profit" to be applied as consumer rebates. Depending on how the SecHHC to-be-created agency for handling HICs operates, major insurers abandoning health insurance as a business line for lack of profitability is indeed probable.

The Florida analogy is correct. Some smaller companies willing to live with the tighter profit margins sprung up, but testing their viability has not yet happened, and it's still a question how much State backing may yet have to occur should a significant disaster event happen.

Nothing has come forward to show whether any coordination of the development of this health care law with the major insurers occurred. It sounds like something the Administration/Congress is going to shove down insurers' throats in a take-it-or-leave-it manner, with the "leave it" resulting in an all-ages Medicare program run by SecHHS.

This will be interesting as it goes forward.

And then, what happens next for the insurance industry? There is ALWAYS a next step. Will life insurance and annuities be the next federal target after ithe fed acquires control of health care insurance? That would virtually place the lion's share of the financial world in the government's control?