English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It seems like all they are doing is taking our money to deny us medical care. How do they contribute to the health of the nation?

2007-11-06 23:12:45 · 9 answers · asked by Fancy That 6 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

9 answers

I have said it before, and I'm a-gonna say again:

The Health Insurance Industry is to Healthcare, what Pimps are to the Prostitution Industry.

1. They contribute nothing but obstacle and bureacracy while claiming the lion's share of profits for themselves, to invest and make even MORE money.
2. In any contest where "Health" and "Profit" are at odds, as long as Insurance companies are the ones deciding, Profit will always win over Health. This is an industry making MEDICAL DECISIONS AFFECTING AMERICAN LIVES, yet they are not doctors nor are they bound by ethical medical practices, never having taken the Hyppocratic Oath.
3. And God Forbid you DO have that operation another answerer referred to, if you have too large a "loss history", your insurance can drop you. You can appeal, but it's sorta like appealing a Yahoo Answers Violation Notice; you're not ever sure if anyone ever even read the appeal. At least now, if your insurance co. is planning on dropping you, they have to give you notice so you can shop other health insurance companies (but of course, they aren't willing to take you either, because of that pesky habit you have of geting sick all the time). So then, it's time to go find a cardboard box to crawl into an die, I suppose.

Make the Healthcare Industry as self sustaining (and as non-profit) as the Post Office in the US. Remove "FOR PROFIT" insurance companies (and their salaries and profits and dividends) and you cut the cost of Healthcare in this country by at LEAST 45%.
Then you provide a blanket healthcare package which doesn't rely on For Profit Insurance Companies, where operations or tests are decided on by the DOCTOR, not the adjuster, where you are prescribed drugs because they are the correct treatment for your condition, not because pharmecutical companies are pushing this one this month, another one next month, and you get at least another 20-30% savings, as the system is not being clogged up with all those unnecessary tests and procedures insurance companies insist on, because their non-medical personnel are afraid of "malpractice" litigation.

After doing all that (amid HOWLS from rightwingers who scream SOCIALISM! and COMMUNISM! and several other ever WORSE "isms"), mandate to all pharmecutical companies doing business in the US, they can no longer receive US patents on drugs which only treat symptoms, while not addressing the underlying condition or disease CAUSING the symptoms. Only CURES for diseases may be patented from now on.

2007-11-06 23:43:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Medical insurance used to be like other insurance, it was protection in case something catastrophic happened to you. Now it's used to cover every single medical related expense which has driven up the cost. The worst thing is you never know what they do or don't cover until you get a claim rejected and you're stuck owing hundreds or thousands of dollars (which you don't have people you paid it to your insurance company every month).

2007-11-06 23:20:32 · answer #2 · answered by twincrier 4 · 4 0

Most well being coverage vendors negotiate the fees of healthcare that the they pay for. Example: For a $10,000 sanatorium invoice, the coverage organization can have a prenegotiated price of every itemized facet of the invoice, with a complete fee of $7,500 or much less on that complete invoice. It's bigger to pay the rates on a well being coverage than to be weighted down with hundreds of thousands of greenbacks that could need to be paid by means of the sufferer. My private oncology costs run over $22,000 monthly. If I did not have coverage, there could be no manner I might pay for that. My complete sales is far an excessive amount of to qualify for medicaid. But medicaid could now not, considering it's executive run, enable me to get the remedies I am presently getting. If a Canadian / European-form, obligatory, country wide well being plan is installed position on this nation, there might be plenty of individuals who would possibly not be competent to get the care they want. Especially older individuals. The usual lifespan for a feminine is now approximately seventy six yrs., and a male is approximately seventy four. If the aforementioned plan is installed position within the US, the ones usual lifespans will cut back.

2016-09-05 12:46:18 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I am a retired claims adjuster. In my lifetime, I have been sick, injured on the job and injured in a car accident. I have handled claims and have had claims. I have benefited greatly...on both sides...from health insurance.

It is intended to be protection against catastrophic loss. Also, it introduces competition, which serves to control rates and costs.

Insurance companies measure their on-going performance with "loss ratio." It is payments divided by revenues. It is possible for an insurance company to have a loss ration greater than one and still be profitable. They invest premiums as reserves. If government health insurance operated at a loss, you would have to pay to cover the loss.

The federal government cannot run insurance programs. The worst case examples are: Veterans Administration health care, Medicare, Medicaid, National Flood Insurance, Federal Crime Insurance. I handled claims for some of these organizations. My clients were totally incompetent when it came to handling claims fairly.

2007-11-07 00:03:16 · answer #4 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0 3

i agree a single payer system would cut out the middleman control costs and make us more competive because right now companies are struggling to pay the premiums. Unlike the drug companies which actually do research and help us the insurance companies just line their own pockets. Only good they do is employ some people

2007-11-06 23:24:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Prior to watching Sick-o & the debacle following hurricane Katrina - I never took into consideration the plight of those being SCREWED OVER by their insurance providers.(healthcare, home owners, automobile, etc...) All I've ever heard or thought about were the un & underinsured. Not the fully insured w/ unscrupulous insurance providers looking to screw them out of coverage..

Until you've lived it, you can NEVER fully appreciate or understand how frustrating it can be. It's a shame our elected officials aren't doing more to regulate this industry. And to make matters worse, we can't live with'em & we definitely can't live without'em..(IE. you drive a car - mandatory automobile insurance, finance your home via a lender - mandatory homeowners insurance...)

UGH!!!

2007-11-07 02:41:01 · answer #6 · answered by LADY beautiful mind (is sexy) 5 · 3 0

You're so right...
They just take the money, and once you're sick, they'd find a way of not covering you!!
And they take hell a lot of money...
I hate how we're forced to have it, it's really not fair. I'd rather just pay for my medical stuff as they come... I don't go to the doctor often, and even if I did, I'm sure I'd be paying less than what I'm paying the insurance company!

2007-11-06 23:16:29 · answer #7 · answered by Grace 4 · 3 2

Well, they pay my medical bills. If that isn't valuable I don't know what is.

You make it sound as tho everyone needing medical care is denied it when, in fact, that is rare.

It is the lack of medical insurance which causes problems resulting in inadequate health care.

2007-11-06 23:45:06 · answer #8 · answered by Judith 6 · 1 2

Because if you have an operation without insurance, you will owe the hospital $25,000.

Can you afford that? If you can, then you don't need insurance.

I can't, so I need insurance.

Very simple.

2007-11-06 23:16:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers