Movement on HI Premiums

[Carmen813]

From Yahoo:
For the first time, the health insurance industry is offering to curb its controversial practice of charging higher premiums to sick people.

The offer, in a letter the industry to key senators Tuesday, is a potentially significant shift in the debate over reforming the nation's health care system to curb costs and cover an estimated 48 million uninsured people.

In the letter, America's Health Insurance Plans and the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association say they are willing to "phase out the practice of varying premiums based on health status in the individual market" if all Americans are required to get coverage.

Insurers are trying to head off creation of a government insurance plan that would compete with them.

This is an interesting idea, though they want mandated health insurance in order to make the change.

 

[winnar111]

Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

 

[dphantom]

Of course they would need to mandate health insurance for everyone. It is the only way to spread the costs out over enough people. Right now, people with preexisitng conditions are charged more. Under this proposal, everyone would pay for those with a preexisting condition, but the increase in premiums would be smaller than if only those with the condition were charged.

 

[Darthvoy]

Interesting business move, but I doubt it will fix the underlying problem. The insurance companies stand to reap incredible profits if everyone is mandated to be insured. Seems kind of like a weasily move to me because if it has competition from the government then it would really have to make changes. So they are willing to make lesser concessions in order to keep that from happening.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

I hope you're still around the day you get knocked off your pedestal.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

I hope you're still around the day you get knocked off your pedestal.

It may be an assy thing to say, but in the world of insurance, premiums, and actuarial data it IS true.

 

[JSt0rm]

they are afraid.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

I hope you're still around the day you get knocked off your pedestal.

It may be an assy thing to say, but in the world of insurance, premiums, and actuarial data it IS true.

You missed the point entirely.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: Descartes
You missed the point entirely.

I took it as winnar being an ass again and Robor wishing him his comeuppance. What did I miss?

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: Descartes
You missed the point entirely.

I took it as winnar being an ass again and Robor wishing him his comeuppance. What did I miss?

Haha, well I guess that part is true.

Perhaps I missed the point.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: Descartes
You missed the point entirely.

I took it as winnar being an ass again and Robor wishing him his comeuppance. What did I miss?

My reply was in reference to the 'productive people' part of winnar's statement. Seems he thinks most are beneath him.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

Insurance is insurance, it is not healthcare.

Insurance companies LOSE money on people with pre-existing conditions, thus they CHARGE them more.

Why should they have to let someone have insurance for $2400/year when said person IS going to cost them $24,000 yearly because of their pre-existing condition.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick.

We know that healthy people get sick. That's why they get insurance before they get sick.

I really don't understand the point in arguing against charging more for pre-existing conditions. If it costs me the same to get insurance now as it does after I get sick... why would I bother paying premiums for the next 10 years when I can just buy a policy after I get sick? Does that make sense?

I agree that there needs to be some sort of regulation with regard to dropped policies, change in policies, etc., which protects people who do have pre-existing conditions from being pushed out, but beyond that I am in full support of varying coverage costs based on personal health.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

Life's not fair.

 

[halik]

Heh I it looks like they are scared that they'll have to compete with the gov't. I don't see why I should be subsidizing someone else's smoking or why other people should subsidize my motorcycle riding.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

Insurance is insurance, it is not healthcare.

Insurance companies LOSE money on people with pre-existing conditions, thus they CHARGE them more.

Why should they have to let someone have insurance for $2400/year when said person IS going to cost them $24,000 yearly because of their pre-existing condition.

EXACTLY the reason why having private sector health insurance is not optimal. In a truly free market system people with pre-existing conditions won't be able to get insured by for-profit organizations.

I truly believe that health insurance business should be mandated as non-profit only. There is no value added of efficiency gained by having this be a private business, it's only extracts customer surplus.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

Insurance is insurance, it is not healthcare.

Insurance companies LOSE money on people with pre-existing conditions, thus they CHARGE them more.

Why should they have to let someone have insurance for $2400/year when said person IS going to cost them $24,000 yearly because of their pre-existing condition.

EXACTLY the reason why having private health insurance is not optimal. In a truly free market system people with pre-existing conditions won't be able to get insured.

Single Payer Government funded insurance is a worse option as the US cannot afford it.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, right, you need to force healthy people to buy unneeded gold plated insurance to cover the sick people.

It's a nice way of punishing productive people who eat healthy and hit the gym.

Amazingly enough, people who eat healthy and hit the gym still get sick. Take me for example. I've never smoked, have never done drugs, rarely drink, eat healthy, and had scored "outstanding" on my last Air Force ROTC fitness test prior to being diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma. My family also has no history of cancer.

So, try again will you? Productive people get sick all the time, it has nothing to do with wanting freebies, and everything to do with wanting fairness.

Insurance is insurance, it is not healthcare.

Insurance companies LOSE money on people with pre-existing conditions, thus they CHARGE them more.

Why should they have to let someone have insurance for $2400/year when said person IS going to cost them $24,000 yearly because of their pre-existing condition.

EXACTLY the reason why having private health insurance is not optimal. In a truly free market system people with pre-existing conditions won't be able to get insured.

Single Payer Government funded insurance is a worse option as the US cannot afford it.

Non-profit independent health insurance is the better solution - I simply can't see what efficiency is gained by having this as a for-profit venture. This would eliminate the whole issue of selectivity, as you'd have no motivation to weed out your loss leaders.