I didn't see exclusion...so yeah...you are right on that.
-----Original Message----- From: Judah McAuley [mailto:ju...@wiredotter.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 18:30 To: cf-community Subject: Re: Oops! Wis Gov Thinks Caller is Koch On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Eric Roberts <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > Privatizing healthcare is what got us into this mess. Insurance > companies caused healthcare costs to rise because they weren't paying > what docs wanted them to pay, so they raised prices. People can't > afford insurance on their own or they can't get it because of > pre-existing conditions and thus have to go to the ER for their > healthcare and can't pay that bill either, so in order to recoup > costs, hospitals pull shit like charging $30/pill for a pill that costs $0.60 retail. I disagree with Gruss on a great deal of things when it comes to health insurance and health care reform, however, there are a some fundamentally wrong things with the above statement. Private health care and private health insurance has been the norm in the United States, not the exception, for our entire history. There are exceptions, of course, like Medicare and Medicaid on the insurance front and the VA and non-profit community health centers on the medical care front but these are the exceptions, not the rule, so I don't think you can say that "privitizing healthcare is what got us into this mess". I agree that the consolidation of health insurance companies has led to fewer choices and that the combined companies wield an unfair amount of influence over providers and do everything in their power to discourage competition, reform and meaningful change in healthcare delivery. Insurance profits also certainly play a role in the cost of healthcare to the end consumer. However, and this is a big however, the rise in non-insurance costs in healthcare is huge. Just astounding. I don't think you can blame all of or even a large part of the cost of health care increases on private insurance companies. > Eliminate anti-trust and they will do like the credit card > companies...flock to the states with the least restrictions (it's why > there are so many credit card companies in Delaware). I think you have this backwards, Eric. He said eliminate the antitrust *exclusion* for health insurance companies. That means that they would be subject to anti-trust law which is what we want. It should also be noted that insurance is also regulated state-by-state. If you want to offer a small business plan in Oregon (under 50 people), you have to run it by the powers that be in Oregon, in our case, the Oregon Insurance Division. Similarly, rate increases have to go through the same board and are subject to citizen input and feedback. If you want to look, info is here: http://insurance.oregon.gov/insurer/rates_forms/health_rate_filings/health-r ate-filing-search.html I also highly recommend looking at the report that OID puts out every year. The 2010 report looks at the evolution of employer-based coverage, growth in health care spending, and cost shifting in the marketplace amongst other things like the financial health of insurers in the Oregon marketplace, affordability, etc. http://www.cbs.state.or.us/ins/health_report/3458-health_report-2011.pdf Jud ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:334765 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
