Posted on 05/27/2011 10:39:13 AM PDT by Qbert
[Snip]
Simply repealing ObamaCare might save the country from the certain financial and health care disasters it would bring, but repeal alone doesn’t address the noble goal of ensuring as many people as possible, and the necessary goal of curbing runaway health care inflation.
[Snip]
...in health care have we somehow reached a place where we use insurance to pay for things that have very high probabilities of occurring.
[Snip]
Here’s where things go awry.
If an insurance company is certain that they’re going to pay, say, $2,500 in claims on a policy each year, then they need to collect at least $2,500 just to have a prayer of staying in business. In fact, with their own costs...[Snip] they might need to collect $5,000 just to have anything left over after paying out that $2,500.
“Well that sounds kind of stupid, having to send the insurance company $5,000 just so they can send $2,500 of it back.”
Hold that thought. Enter, Health Savings Accounts.
[Snip]
To demonstrate the difference, say you currently have a traditional “family plan” through your employer that costs the employer $12,000 a year
[Snip]
You see whatever doctors you want, and make “co-payments” of $25 per doctor visit.
[Snip]
With a Health Savings Account, your employer still spends $12,000 a year (in actuality, probably less). But they take $5,000 of the $12,000 and put it into an account with your name on it. The money is now legally yours...[Snip] With the remaining $7,000, they buy a “High Deductible Health Plan“, whose deductible just happens to be $5,000.
[Snip]
Next year, your employer deposits another $5,000 into the account and the process repeats. Over time, the balance in the HSA account can grow, and it’s yours to keep if you change employers.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.forbes.com ...
HSA’s are a good idea.
The only time they get hairy is early (first few months) in the process if something catastrophic happens and the deductible hasn’t been saved up yet.
It can be in a plan, but nothing sexy enough about that to get a nation on board.
If I have a HOT button, this is it. If People never smoked, used alcohol very little, slept a proper 8 hours, ate vegetables fruit and exercised, it they were monogamous, gave up being embittered, jealous, angry, anxious and worry, making peace with their in-laws, employers, if we could get them to wash their hands, watch their weight, consumption of sugar,...can you imagine how much LESS medical expenses this person would have. I was in Fresno, California, and the Foot Doctor said, AH COME ON, LET ME SEE YOUR FEET, IN THE END MEDICARE WILL PAY ME AND YOU WON’T OWE ME ANYTHING. I walked away, in pain, as I’m trying to save the next generation from picking up my tab. I’ve had malaria and hepatits and never went to a doctor. I’d LOVE to get some of the money back I’ve saved the government. I get angry seeing everyone want all kinds of procedures and free equipment.
“It can be in a plan, but nothing sexy enough about that to get a nation on board.”
I hear what you’re saying, but something needs to be done. And I think a greater focus on HSA’s could take the heat off Mediscare demagoguing if the GOP can’t get its act together in defending Ryan’s plan.
“We need cross state competition.
We need tort reform.
We need more...”
...And we need the Republicans to be hammering away at these issues. Where are they?
Monitoring the doctors and hospitals charges is a tough row to hoe. I know when I was in the hospital for a day and a half, the bill was $15,000. Try and figure that one out will drive you nuts. My question is, for those that don’t like SSI and Medicare, isn’t buying health insurance the same thing? You pay a little now, along with everyone else. That money goes into an account, supposedly, and picks up the tab if you have a problem. Insurance companies count on this. Granted, health insurance is voluntary but it works the same way. The main difference is that personal health insurance costs a lot more. Just thinking out of the box here.
I wonder historically what percentage of the time that has occurred.
Well stated.
What’s missing in the health care discussion is the fact that those people, hopefully citizens, that don’t conduct their lives along the lines as noted by you are the problem group and the group that uses up all the programs and services - always needing and wanting more. The same group will not allow input into their lifestyle - they want to do whatever, but they want someone else to pay - mostly later in life when the s%it hits the fan, health wise.
When you get right down to the truth of the matter - Medicare is a great value for those that have lived a healthy lifestyle, especially if they can also afford a supplement plan and RX coverage. Now, those that have created health issues over time - Medicare is not so good and, frankly, not built to handle millions of really sick and constantly needy people. Of course, if those really sick and constantly needy people are also poor, it’s a double whammy to the system with Medicaid coming into play - a plan that no one is paying for during their working life.
I say, expand Medicare payroll payments to include a higher level of cost to those people that are overweight, smokers, drinkers, drug takers, etc. They will either shape up or pay extra for their entire working life.
That only works so long as at least half our population still believes it is their responsibility to pay for their own health care and it is not a “human right”.
“That only works so long as at least half our population still believes it is their responsibility to pay for their own health care and it is not a “human right”.”
Well, if it’s set up on a scale so that most employers are involved, it would cover a large percentage of the population. The remain zombies not taking part can be content with the severe rationing they will experience from the bankrupt government health care programs.
The main difference is that personal health insurance costs a lot more
No, it's not the same thing...or it wouldn't be if Gov't got out of it.
The reason is that if private competition got into it (which would happen if Gov't got out) costs would be lowered. Yes, strictly private insurance companies save up the money, but they are MUCH more careful of your money overall because, as a business they need to watch their dollars. They need to provide quality care for less because their customers could leave if someone provided better service for less. Kind of like your local service station...if they are charging too much for changing your car battery, and the other guy down the street is charging 50% less, guess where the customers are going to go?
Now if Gov't is in it (and it is now with Medicare dollars flooding in to insurance companies with not nearly enough accountability) companies don't have to be so careful to either provide quality service OR low prices because they know they are getting paid regardless. Why? Because Congress has voted them their funds so they can get as much as the policians give them...and that's a lot if politicians are going into debt to do so (it has nothing to do with relations between the company and customer) and a law is WAAAAY harder to rescind than a customer paying out of pocket.
Gov't being in something ALWAYS makes it more expensive.
That is why it will not happen. Employers like to keep employees dependent. Too much financial independence encourages mobility.
My employer puts in $100 a month, I put in $50 a month. But I can use it for practically anything healthcare related--all the stuff the old plan wouldn't cover.
Bottom line is I am more aware than before that is in my best financial interest to make sure I take good care of myself.
Well, it’s not all that different from rollover 401(k)’s, and other retirement plans.
Really bad idea for 38 states.
Switch to HSAs and within 10 years there will be no specialists in high cost fields of medicine.
HSAs without catostrophic umbreela policies are a recipe for disaster that will lead to single payer system once the HSAs are exhausted for a large enough plurality of the population that everyone knows someone with a HSA sob story.
[QUOTE]
Here’s where things go awry.
If an insurance company is certain that they’re going to pay, say, $2,500 in claims on a policy each year, then they need to collect at least $2,500 just to have a prayer of staying in business. In fact, with their own costs...[Snip] they might need to collect $5,000 just to have anything left over after paying out that $2,500.
“Well that sounds kind of stupid, having to send the insurance company $5,000 just so they can send $2,500 of it back.”
Hold that thought. Enter, Health Savings Accounts.
[END QUOTE]
This is just patently false scaremongering.
In the state of New Jersey, for every dollar in premiums collected, the health insurance companies must set aside 82.5 cents for claims. ObamaCare sets a national standard of 80 cents of every premium dollar set aside for claims.
With that set aside money, the insurance companies invest in low risk low yield investments... this scaremonger is instigating private individuals to invest in higher risk investment strategies with very small sums of money playing roulette with their medical treatment needs.
This author is a paid shill.
Care to elaborate?
“This is just patently false scaremongering.
ObamaCare sets a national standard of 80 cents of every premium dollar set aside for claims.”
—Do you really think that Obamacare is going to be successful in that effort? When have price controls, or forced cost controls by the government, ever really worked? Something else has to give.
“With that set aside money, the insurance companies invest in low risk low yield investments... this scaremonger is instigating private individuals to invest in higher risk investment strategies with very small sums of money playing roulette with their medical treatment needs.”
—Who says that individuals have to put their money into risky investments? And why do we necessarily need to impose administrative costs on individuals- wouldn’t it make more sense for that extra amount of money to be invested as well (even in low risk investments)?
And besides... the alternative options are growing narrower and narrower each year as we rush headlong into bankruptcy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.