• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Health Care

Cowpuncher

Well-known member
There were some good thoughts on health care on another string so I thought it deserved one of its own.

It seems to me that, regardless of whether the system is public or private, it cannot succeed when health care cost for many people costs more that they have ever earned in their lives.

Can we spend millions on dying people who have never and will never contribute to our society.

Countries with public health care routinely deny high cost treatment to the elderly and dying. We have hundreds of thousands of people on medicaid where the government pays for healthcare and a whole lot of these people gave their assets away to avoid paying for nursing home care.

Anyone who thinks there is not colossal waste in health care and that litigation costs as well as unnecessary treatments to avoid litigation are not a significant part of our health care spending must be asleep.

Someone must have a solution to this, but it not me.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Well Canadian Health Care works great until you get sick. My Father was diagnosed with cancer. He had to wait two years to get operated on. Then they just opened and closed him because it was spread way to far to be treated.
I have also had US private health insurance for ten years. I was self employed so I bought it myself. I never got sick so I cant say much about it.
However I dont see why you should have to get health insurance from your employer. If anything this should be illegal. Make health insurance the same as auto insurance. Make it tax deductable. Insurance companies would have to offer affordable rates to individuals or they would go out of business if nobody could afford it. Outlaw group rates.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Roper, I too pay my own insurance as I suppose most on ranchers net do. I'd never want employer insurance, just pay me the money, I'll buy my own insurance - makes leaving jobs a little easier. I agree with making insurance dductible; any corporation can deduct their insurance costs. There was a schedule to do this, but I think we're stuch on 50% deductible.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
RoperAB said:
Well Canadian Health Care works great until you get sick. My Father was diagnosed with cancer. He had to wait two years to get operated on. Then they just opened and closed him because it was spread way to far to be treated.
I have also had US private health insurance for ten years. I was self employed so I bought it myself. I never got sick so I cant say much about it.
However I dont see why you should have to get health insurance from your employer. If anything this should be illegal. Make health insurance the same as auto insurance. Make it tax deductable. Insurance companies would have to offer affordable rates to individuals or they would go out of business if nobody could afford it. Outlaw group rates.

Insurance can be broken down into two parts: Routine and regular care (little sicknesses you go to your doctor and get antibiotics for, health checkups, etc.) and major medical which covers the big stuff. Everyone should be able to afford the first and the second is the biggie.

The benefit to health insurance through a large employer is that the risk pool is large. If you have a triple by-pass or car accident and are in a small group, the insurance rates for that small group skyrocket. Then the insurance company--or other insurance companies--try to shake off the poor risk or sign up all the good risk to another plan that leaves the high risk alone in a group by themselves. Then their insurance skyrockets and soon they are out of insurance with a major health problem.

This is exactly the opposite of the theory of insurance pooling risks.

Another problem with the health care system is that the demand is inelastic in the time frame services are needed (inelasticity is where most over market returns are made). If you have a heart attack and have to go to the emergency room, you do not have any way to shop rates. You don't even get to check on rates. You will pay whatever you must to see the doctor and get treated. This has lead to a system where insurance companies contract with doctors to provide the medical treatment at certain rates but if you come in without insurance your charges are likely to be 3 times as much as those contracted rates.

Thus there are structural deficiencies in the system.

If you think about it, we are all "self employed". This isn't Japan and now Japan isn't even the way it used to be with long term employment.

We need a basic health care system and the one we have we are all subsidizing in some way or another. Why should the middle class pay for most of the infrastructure that cares for the super wealthy as well?

Roper, sorry to hear about your father's medical experience. That is the problem with a national health care system that is not run well. It is metered medicine.

I hope you never have to use your medical insurance. You might find some things out about it that you didn't want to know.

Get a high deductable major medical insurance plan that is backed by a good insurer. They are getting more common with the Medical Savings Accounts (MSA),
 

CattleRMe

Well-known member
An accountant told me that at my age and the fact i doctor rarely to have a large deductable with lower premiums. Then you have the insurance so if a major medical happens but no need to carry the lower deductibles when you don't even meet them to use them.

As far as being a rancher and paying for them yes i do but we all know they are deductible too that helps.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
The benefit to health insurance through a large employer is that the risk pool is large. If you have a triple by-pass or car accident and are in a small group, the insurance rates for that small group skyrocket. Then the insurance company--or other insurance companies--try to shake off the poor risk or sign up all the good risk to another plan that leaves the high risk alone in a group by themselves. Then their insurance skyrockets and soon they are out of insurance with a major health problem.

This is exactly the opposite of the theory of insurance pooling risks.


Be a good consumer and buy insurance where you are part of a large pool - more proof a fool and his money are soon parted.

Here's what happens when you are part of a small pool, say 5 insureds: Suppose 1 person gets some high priced cardiac care, the "group" will have dramatically increased rates. The healthy members of the group will start to look for cheaper insurance, and when a few leave, the group shrinks even smaller and rates skyrocket. Very soon the cardiac paticient is all alone paying $30k per month. This isn't some dirty deed by the insurance company, its poor consumer choice. Now some want to have a nanny state protect us from our own stupidity, where would this control end?

Everyone should know the size of their pool,(and if it covers in cali); if you don't, ask your insurance agent. If its small - fewer than several hundred thousand, >1mil preferrably, you need different insurance and a different agent.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Roper, sorry to hear about your father's medical experience. That is the problem with a national health care system that is not run well. It is metered medicine.


Spoken like a true socialist. The US could only wish any of our government was as well run as Canada's medical system. Yeah, we're going to get socialized medicine in the US and the nurse's union will do to it what the NEA has done to education. When the bureaucrats get done with the US health care system, a witch doctor in hati will get US business.


The biggest problem with the US health care system is 1/3 of the population buys new cars instead of health care for their kids. The answer isn't ruin everyone else's health care.
 

CattleRMe

Well-known member
Brad S said:
Yeah, we're going to get socialized medicine in the US and the nurse's union will do to it what the NEA has done to education. When the bureaucrats get done with the US health care system, a witch doctor in hati will get US business.


How can you even compare people who save lives to a teachers union? If ever you see anyone do CPR and save a life you'd better respect the profession. Teacher's after they put in three years have the safty of keeping their job just on that not on the way they do their job. I myself never forsee the state letting incompetant people keep their jobs in the nursing profession. :?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
The benefit to health insurance through a large employer is that the risk pool is large. If you have a triple by-pass or car accident and are in a small group, the insurance rates for that small group skyrocket. Then the insurance company--or other insurance companies--try to shake off the poor risk or sign up all the good risk to another plan that leaves the high risk alone in a group by themselves. Then their insurance skyrockets and soon they are out of insurance with a major health problem.

This is exactly the opposite of the theory of insurance pooling risks.


Be a good consumer and buy insurance where you are part of a large pool - more proof a fool and his money are soon parted.

Here's what happens when you are part of a small pool, say 5 insureds: Suppose 1 person gets some high priced cardiac care, the "group" will have dramatically increased rates. The healthy members of the group will start to look for cheaper insurance, and when a few leave, the group shrinks even smaller and rates skyrocket. Very soon the cardiac paticient is all alone paying $30k per month. This isn't some dirty deed by the insurance company, its poor consumer choice. Now some want to have a nanny state protect us from our own stupidity, where would this control end?

Everyone should know the size of their pool,(and if it covers in cali); if you don't, ask your insurance agent. If its small - fewer than several hundred thousand, >1mil preferrably, you need different insurance and a different agent.

Many of the self employed insurance programs do exactly as you described, Brad S. There needs to be an independent source of the size of the pool and regulations restricting the shaking off of bad risks in efforts to increase insurer profitability.

I don't want a nanny state, but I do want a state that requires these risks to be spelled out to unsuspecting insurance buyers. Everyone should not have to know all of the ins and outs of the insurance scams to be able to make good choices-- The state should restrict some of these scams by their regulations instead of allowing the frauds to happen to thier citizens.
 
Top