Go Back   HawaiiThreads.com > Ka Honua > The American Asylum
FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Search Latest Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 07:32 AM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickunga...day-halleluja/

I hope this is correct, I hope it does come to pass. It has to get past the notoriously biased political Republican supreme court and it can probably be undone with a repeal vote by Congress, but if it holds Americans might actually get the level of medical security that the people of every other industrialized nation in the world have enjoyed for decades.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 12:56 PM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

And another thing. The statistics. The private insurance companies are abandoning the market because they can't make a profit at a 20 % overhead rate, if the writer is correct. Wow, and Social Security and Medicare run at about 1.5 % overhead. What an incredible lie the American people have been fed about private industry always "doing it cheaper and better". In some cases, sure, no doubt about it, but health care is clearly not one of those cases. You do not need profit margins built into the cost of health care for parasitic paper shufflers who do NOTHING related to health care.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 02:19 PM
GeckoGeek's Avatar
GeckoGeek GeckoGeek is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,043
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Interesting, but AFAIK, the only difference between for-profit and non-profit organizations is that for-profit pays stock holders.

So what we'll be seeing is investors going somewhere else.

As far as I can tell with a few minutes of searching, HMSA is a non-profit organization. So this will change the face of health care how?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 07:15 PM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Heading toward single payer. Much lower overhead, a lot fewer exclusions, lower premiums.

I am suspicious of the TV ads for "free" diabetes blood test devices and power wheel chairs. Free if covered by medicare. Knowing that Congress (Republican) denied medicare the right to bargain for lower prices from the pharmaceutical industry as a result of pharmaceutical industry lobbying (bribes actually) I would be surprised if medicare is getting a good price on these 'free' devices. Maybe it is but that is not how our system works.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 09:27 PM
GeckoGeek's Avatar
GeckoGeek GeckoGeek is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,043
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
Heading toward single payer.

The operative word is "heading". Maybe. I re-read that article and the comments by the author. It's clear that in the author's opinion, this law won't create single payer systems, but rather just thin out the for-profit insurance companies. But if HMSA is a non-profit, how does this change anything? What percentage does HMSA currently spend?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
Much lower overhead, a lot fewer exclusions, lower premiums.
In theory, the most efficient business is a monopoly. The problem is that monopolies rarely have any incentive to be efficient. I don't see single payer as any guarantee of low rates.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
I am suspicious of the TV ads for "free" diabetes blood test devices and power wheel chairs. Free if covered by medicare. Knowing that Congress (Republican) denied medicare the right to bargain for lower prices from the pharmaceutical industry as a result of pharmaceutical industry lobbying (bribes actually) I would be surprised if medicare is getting a good price on these 'free' devices. Maybe it is but that is not how our system works.
Huh? You say you want single payer, but dislike how the government is running the "insurance" practice they currently control. How will single-payer be any different?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old December 3rd, 2011, 10:37 PM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Actually I like the gvt. running its insurance @ 1 1/2 % overhead, I do not like companies marketing what I suspect to be overpriced equipment with expensive TV campaigns and telling people its "free". Its not. No free lunches, no free diabetes monitors, no free motorized wheel chairs. If a person really needs it, no problem, but the whole purpose of TV advertising is to create demand. No other reason to advertise. Are the products over priced to Medicare? Maybe, maybe not, it just kind of smells. You have to be making a substantial profit to afford that much advertising. Money Medicare spends on overpriced equipment that people don't actually need is money that is not available for something more needed but not as glamorized with expensive glitzy advertising campaigns. Medicare can work but it needs to be protected from being ripped off.

If HMSA is not for profit it probably is running at under 20 % overhead already. It is not an unreasonable regulation to require 80 % of fees paid for something to actually pay for that thing. Kind of like expecting a charity you donate money to to actually spend it helping save those babies or those whales or puppies or whatever cause you donated for, not build lavish estates for executives.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old December 4th, 2011, 05:05 AM
lensperson's Avatar
lensperson lensperson is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 924
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Trying to implement health care exploded in the Clinton lap some time ago.
The business of sickness is very profitable.
One is tempted to say that "one can't fight city hall".
Tammany Hall.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old December 5th, 2011, 02:00 AM
GeckoGeek's Avatar
GeckoGeek GeckoGeek is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,043
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
I do not like companies marketing what I suspect to be overpriced equipment with expensive TV campaigns and telling people its "free". Its not. [...] Are the products over priced to Medicare? Maybe, maybe not, it just kind of smells. You have to be making a substantial profit to afford that much advertising.
I get that you don't like it. But what would you propose to do to change it?

I suspect that the government at some point sets a price for those devices and the manufacturers discovered that they could produce it for less, thus a sizable profit.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old December 5th, 2011, 02:04 PM
salmoned's Avatar
salmoned salmoned is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Centered - sides are for suckers
Posts: 1,527
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Exactly! If you factor in the fraud, waste and abuse, I doubt the government's 'overhead' would come out to less than 30%. Also, those 'paper shufflers' are not 'doing nothing' to earn their cut - they're accepting the risk of losing money - that's what insurance is and it's not nothing. The government doesn't concern itself with risk of capital or profitability, so its 'overhead' can appear amazingly small when it is actually unsustainably large.
__________________
May I always be found beneath your contempt.

Last edited by salmoned; December 5th, 2011 at 02:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old December 6th, 2011, 12:05 AM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Paper shufflers = insurance form coding, it runs on at least 2 levels, 2 levels of employees, profits, costs, all added in to the cost of an insurance claim and all unnecessary. Some of the big shots of the insurance companies have drawn compensation over $500 million. Like those charities you donate to, where the honchos live in luxurious mansions and the starving kids get a hell of a lot less than they should be. The stat I have repeatedly heard is Social Security and Medicare run at 1.5 % overhead. No big shot execs to pay, no stockholders, standardized forms mean you do not need levels of claim form coding. I can believe 1.5% but even if its 10 times that much its still running cheaper than private insurance.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old December 6th, 2011, 08:26 AM
matapule's Avatar
matapule matapule is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wherever I am, I'm there
Posts: 3,102
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmoned View Post
Exactly! If you factor in the fraud, waste and abuse, I doubt the government's 'overhead' would come out to less than 30%. Also, those 'paper shufflers' are not 'doing nothing' to earn their cut - they're accepting the risk of losing money - that's what insurance is and it's not nothing. The government doesn't concern itself with risk of capital or profitability, so its 'overhead' can appear amazingly small when it is actually unsustainably large.

What is your source for this "information", other than opinion?
__________________
Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old December 6th, 2011, 12:10 PM
GeckoGeek's Avatar
GeckoGeek GeckoGeek is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,043
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
The stat I have repeatedly heard is Social Security and Medicare run at 1.5 % overhead.
While initially impressive, describing it as a percentage hides what the cost of the whole program is. The overhead could be low because they do little to look for fraud and simply cut a check. Isn't that what encourages the "free for medicare" scooters?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old December 6th, 2011, 07:38 PM
salmoned's Avatar
salmoned salmoned is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Centered - sides are for suckers
Posts: 1,527
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by matapule View Post
What is your source for this "information", other than opinion?
To what information are you exactly referring? The definition of insurance, my low-ball estimate of actual government 'overhead' or some other aspect of the post you have chosen to quote? I know you can source information as well as any of us, why not just do it and save the banter? I've given my viewpoint and that's all I'm interested in offering here and now. You can set the terms of my further involvement in this thread during salary negotiations.
__________________
May I always be found beneath your contempt.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old December 7th, 2011, 08:56 AM
Kalalau Kalalau is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,427
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

administrative cost is what we are talking about, ~ 1.5 % for the gvt. agencies, over 20 % for the private ones. Gvt. does not bundle layers of bill coders with multiple layers of profit, rent, insurance, etc, a motorized wheel chair or diabetes meter would not count in administrative cost for either a private or public insurance company. If a gvt. agency works out of a gvt. building it doesn't even pay business rent. Of course you do not have top hot shot execs with their mansions, their yachts, their private islands, their corporate jets, you have gvt. employees drawing salaries you or I or other ordinary human beings might get. Lets get over standing up for the billionaires, we are not they, they are not us, they have too much money now anyway, that is one of the biggest reasons the economy is so bad now, its way overtime to bring the economy back into balance.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old December 7th, 2011, 12:16 PM
GeckoGeek's Avatar
GeckoGeek GeckoGeek is offline
Ali`i
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,043
Default Re: An Interesting Take On "Obamacare"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalalau View Post
over 20 % for the private ones.
Have you seen a source for that one? Again, the thing that started this thread was for-profit insurance companies.

And the percentage may not be a valid comparison. Since Medicare is for the over 65 and the under-65 that is permanently disabled, I would expect them to pay out much more per person covered then general private insurance which is more likely working class families with normal health issues.

Do you have a overhead figure for Medicaid? It seems like that would be a more comparable program.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
health

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

  Partner Sites: Hawaii Blog Hawaii News Hawaii Grinds Hawaii Social Media  
    Blogging the Aloha State. The Hawaii Star. Hawaii Food Blog. The story of Aloha 2.0.