Why are the health insurance companies so opposed to the "government" option?

[techs]

Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Isn't Medicare underwater? Health insurance corporations don't mind if government competes. They just want a fair playing field. No company can get away with being so under water for so long. When your a government entity, these things tend to happen. How are companies suppose to compete with the government if the government gets all the "breaks" and preferential treatment?

 

[CycloWizard]

Because the government is outside the realm of private competition - they can offer any package they want because they have bottomless pockets. Free healthcare for everyone is something the government can offer that no private company can ever compete with.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Because the government is outside the realm of private competition - they can offer any package they want because they have bottomless pockets. Free healthcare for everyone is something the government can offer that no private company can ever compete with.

Sounds good to me.

 

[DukeN]

Because it will provide some competition and disrupt the existing oglipoly, which means they will have to make concessions to compete, which in turn would mean profits in the hundreds of millions than the billions which means the bigwigs don't get their ridiculous bonuses.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up?
-snip-

I think it would depend on how the gov plan is set up.

One time I read that the gov plan would charge everybody the same rate - whether young or old, pre-existing condition or healthy. If so, I'm also not sure why they oppose it, seems all the old/sick people would migrate to gov plan.

OTOH, what happens when the gov screws up? We, the taxpayers pay for it, not them. That alone should be enough to scare health insurers against wanting government competition. No matter how well run your private HI company operates they can never compete against a gov alternative that faces no consequences to their (gov plan) screw ups.

Fern

 

[sandorski]

The Corporations are motivated purely by Altruistic reasons. Do you really want to deny the Average American's privilege to help Corporations Maximize Profits?

 

[sunzt]

USPS anyone? HEEEEELLLOOOOO!!!! They're just pissin about losing profits due to better government pricing. I mean the USPS offers lower prices, delivers to every US address nearly everyday and is a pretty efficient organization. Does that mean private delivery companies are out of business? FexEx and UPS haven't been forced out of business due to the USPS.

 

[JSt0rm]

whats the point of getting the government involved if costs aren't controlled? These insurance companies shouldn't exist because they are not responsible providers. I heard one insurance rep saying they want to keep the money out of the hands of the doctors (I was like wtf?)

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: Fern
One time I read that the gov plan would charge everybody the same rate - whether young or old, pre-existing condition or healthy. If so, I'm also not sure why they oppose it, seems all the old/sick people would migrate to gov plan.
Fern

In order for the gov to charge one rate, and have it be a viable plan, they'd have to charge everyone. If only there was some system that allowed the government to take money from citizens to pay for large-scale expenditures for the common good...

Oh yeah, taxes.

So, to charge a reasonable flat rate for everyone it would have to be an across-the-board tax. I'm pretty sure that the majority of people who don't need or want a government plan would use it anyway if they were being taxed for it. There's no way the average worker would pay some number, say $3000 per year, for government care and then pay on top of that for private or employer-provided care and let the government coverage go unused.

You're thinking that the old/infirm would move to the government plan is a type of "reverse adverse selection", but a flat rate would make EVERYONE go to the gov plan.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I for one look forward to our new health care overlords.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Why don't you just admit you know absolutely nothing about the insurance business other than "someone" told you they were making too much profits :roll:

The government will in all likelihood screw it up, and instead of fixing the problems, they'll instead brainstorm creative new ways to tax us. They're already planning to tax private health care to pay for public health care. Does that make any sense? Do you seriously believe this constitutes fair competition? Do none of you have the capacity to think beyond the "big evil profit driven corporations screwing you" line? You guys are a lost cause.

Are the government plans more about helping people, or gathering votes? Politicians will promise you anything and everything.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Because the government is outside the realm of private competition - they can offer any package they want because they have bottomless pockets.

The government does NOT have "bottomless pockets," or we wouldn't have deficits and a national debt. The insurance companies have raped the public while paying themselves zillion dollar salaries and bonuses and supporting a serious cadre of lobbiests in their quest to keep it that way.

Free healthcare for everyone is something the government can offer that no private company can ever compete with.

What fiction have you been reading, or what have you been smoking? Personally, I'd love to see a single payer health care system if it could be well managed, but that's not even on the table. What is proposed is a publicly financed OPTION, similar to Medicare, that would provide an alternative to private health insurance, not a replacement.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: Harvey
The insurance companies have raped the public while paying themselves zillion dollar salaries and bonuses and supporting a serious cadre of lobbiests in their quest to keep it that way.

Link please

Originally posted by: Harvey
I'd love to see a single payer health care system if it could be well managed

What, you really think the rest of us don't want better, cheaper health care too? :roll:

 

[StageLeft]

Stupid argument when Obama said it and stupid when you copy it for the very reasons illuminated by Cyclowizard.

The government does NOT have "bottomless pockets," or we wouldn't have deficits and a national debt.

It basically has bottomless pockets. Unlike a real business that ultimately has to make a profit at some point in its life government never does. You know this. It operates on a different fiscal process than private industry. When revenues become less it doesn't have to become lean, it can simply force more revenues out of tax payers. In the private world it's much like the heavy-handed and illegal practices implemented by monopolies.

 

[StageLeft]

In fact, can anybody here name any area in which government directly competes with private and private exists? USPS doesn't count, as it's run under gov mandate but like a private business. Education...hmm...here we have where government came in and now the vast majority of people are in public schools because if you're paying your taxes anyway (i.e. if you're paying for public health care anyway...) you might as well use it; now it's "free"; very few people use private schools because they have to pay for public anyway. Of course, when they do use private, it's very frequently cheaper-per-head than the inferiorly-executed public system.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Harvey

I'd love to see a single payer health care system if it could be well managed

What, you really think the rest of us don't want better, cheaper health care too? :roll:

I can't speak for you, but the rationale for the public OPTION is to provide a competitive alternative to private insurance, not to replace it.

Personally, I think there are significant overall benefits to our society of making competent health care available to everyone. Keeping people healthy keeps them productive in the workplace, and regular preventive care, including checkups and appropriate tests, is far less expensive and medically successful than trying to cure major illnesses brought on by neglect because patients can't afford them and the drain on our emergency facilities by non-paying poor people who wait until the last minute because they simply can't afford to do anything before they reach that point.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Are the government plans more about helping people, or gathering votes? Politicians will promise you anything and everything.

But this time we might actually get something good. UHC.

You think we're scared of businesses making a profit? You could just as easily be accused of being "scared" of a good, universal, no-cost health care system.

I personally won't stop writing letters and voicing my support until our health care is free to every U.S. citizen (and if it were up to me ONLY U.S. citizens).

 

[theeedude]

Because they want health insurance to be a luxury they can charge top dollar for, not a right.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Why don't you just admit you know absolutely nothing about the insurance business other than "someone" told you they were making too much profits :roll:

The government will in all likelihood screw it up, and instead of fixing the problems, they'll instead brainstorm creative new ways to tax us. They're already planning to tax private health care to pay for public health care. Does that make any sense? Do you seriously believe this constitutes fair competition? Do none of you have the capacity to think beyond the "big evil profit driven corporations screwing you" line? You guys are a lost cause.

Are the government plans more about helping people, or gathering votes? Politicians will promise you anything and everything.

Uh, I am almost certainly the only person in this forum who has actually been management at a number of health insurance companies, both for profit and non profit.
I have also run a self insured union plan.

 

[her209]

Competition is good, but it inherently has a lot of redundancy.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Stupid argument when Obama said it and stupid when you copy it for the very reasons illuminated by Cyclowizard.

The government does NOT have "bottomless pockets," or we wouldn't have deficits and a national debt.

It basically has bottomless pockets. Unlike a real business that ultimately has to make a profit at some point in its life government never does. You know this. It operates on a different fiscal process than private industry. When revenues become less it doesn't have to become lean, it can simply force more revenues out of tax payers. In the private world it's much like the heavy-handed and illegal practices implemented by monopolies.

Uh, the government option has to support itself on the premiums, just like private health insurance. And anyone can choose to use their premium at whatever company they like.
As someone who worked in management of health insurance companies for many years, I know for a fact that, at least of the ones I worked at, far, far, far more of my premium would go to buying me services at the the government option.
Better value for my dollar.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Harvey

I'd love to see a single payer health care system if it could be well managed

What, you really think the rest of us don't want better, cheaper health care too? :roll:

I can't speak for you, but the rationale for the public OPTION is to provide a competitive alternative to private insurance, not to replace it.

Personally, I think there are significant overall benefits to our society of making competent health care available to everyone. Keeping people healthy keeps them productive in the workplace, and regular preventive care, including checkups and appropriate tests, is far less expensive and medically successful than trying to cure major illnesses brought on by neglect because patients can't afford them and the drain on our emergency facilities by non-paying poor people who wait until the last minute because they simply can't afford to do anything before they reach that point.

Here is the thing, at this point, I do not believe this government can achieve such a balance in the health care industry. And when the argument for the government plan is along the lines of "the only other option is to continue letting evil profiting corporations continue to suck billions out of poor people" I don't buy it.

And the way this government operates, tacking on pages upon pages upon pages of amendments onto a bill at 3am, and not even providing enough copies for congressmen to have, let alone read before the vote the next day?

Here's the benchmark, will government health care be cheaper and better years down the road? I'm not convinced. And it's not a D vs. R argument, nor a rich vs. poor argument as most of the resident liberals here want to make it out to be.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Medicare doesn't even provide ENOUGH coverage. Why do you think people go out and buy supplemental insurance? Show me COMPARABLE competitive coverage first.

It's just like USPS vs FedEx/UPS. One is clearly unsustainable on it's own and receives billions in taxpayer money to keep afloat and bitches about having to raise rates and/or cut service. Oh and the post office is one of the worst places to go to... come on. If USPS and Medicare can offer me the same wonders as a private solution, then I would consider it. If they can offer far superior solutions, then we'd all believe that a public plan is the way to go.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: techs
Doesn't make sense if you're a right wing, corporations are great sympathizer.
After all, shouldn't the government just screw it up? Shouldn't the health insurance companies be more effecient and provide coverage at a lower price and give bettter service?

Or if you're like me do you think that the health insurance companies are using way too much of premium money for things like overhead and profit?


hmmm.
If Medicare can provide health insurance for a couple of percentage points of overhead, why do the private health insurance companies take about 25 percent?

Medicare doesn't even provide ENOUGH coverage. Why do you think people go out and buy supplemental insurance? Show me COMPARABLE competitive coverage first.

It's just like USPS vs FedEx/UPS. One is clearly unsustainable on it's own and receives billions in taxpayer money to keep afloat and bitches about having to raise rates and/or cut service. Oh and the post office is one of the worst places to go to... come on. If USPS and Medicare can offer me the same wonders as a private solution, then I would consider it. If they can offer far superior solutions, then we'd all believe that a public plan is the way to go.

I like the post office...it's affordable and reliable. 0.o