That is an interesting insight that had not occurred to me.

I think the main reason is the health insurance industry. Money that goes to employees and stock holders in the health insurance industry is money that does not go to health insurance professionals.

 

The Republican attitude about health care follows this comment.

This is the way Republicans want things to be:

If living were a thing that money could buy
Then the rich would live and the poor would die
All my trials, Lord, soon be over


[youtube]xi_zzDrZu6c[/youtube]

 

That is one of the many key factors in our flawed system. I wish we had a medical biller and coder up in here cause coders can tell you allot of shit about some of the misconceptions you have. are basically international billers (in a sense).

 

Stock holders would be demanding cost reductions and internal efficiency to improve profitability.

If anything, patients are as much to blame as anyone. How often do patients insist on seeing and correcting bills before being submitted to the insurance companies?

 

If a person has insurance they do not care what the cost of health care is. Insurance will pay for services that are never performed. As long as the people are not actually having to pay the bill they could care less what the insurance has to pay. They do pay for it in the long run but their attention span is about as long as my dick.

 

Really? It was hard to tell because your sarcasm is clouded by your angst. Perhaps it is YOU who needs to take a 'chill break', then just maybe you'll be more relaxed and your humour could shine through your muddled anger. :roll:

 

And now for something completely off topic.

 

Give it up. You may think you're being witty, but you're not. So in essence, no SHALAMARS for you! :-s

 

One simple question. Could anyone who supports Obama care answer.

Do you think it is right for the people who make the rules for Obama care to exempt themselves from it? And if you do could you explain why?

 

You just don't get it,, that's going to cost you 25 shitlamars

 

Tie a chicken leg to a football and obama will probably play

 

Sure, as soon as you explain why it's a good idea to prevent millions of people from getting health insurance.

 

Get what? The fact that your humour is as underdeveloped as your anger is overdeveloped? Referring to the oft coveted SHALAMARS in such a sophomoric way is a perfect example.

 

You're full of shit, and your shamalar thing is about as praised as a fresh pile of dogshit

 

OK, so lets once again get rid of the "Millions of people can't get health insurance" myth.

The reality is, those "Millions" who "can't" get health insurance can. Any insurance company will sell a policy to individuals. Most will restrict for previous conditions, but they will still sell just about anyone a policy.

The issue is being able to afford the policy. You know, cause a group policy is basically group selling and in most cases the employer picks up a piece of the premium as a benefit to employees.

Most people can't afford an individual policy.

So, how does Obamacare change this?

It doesn't. It prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions, which raises the cost for everyone, and government in effect makes the subsidy that the employer otherwise would, but in the end, the process is unchanged.

Oh, except now the Government has their hand in there, and you know, to administer all this they'll need a few bucks to cover costs, and of course there's the whole new thousands of pages of regulations thing that everyone has to deal with.

Nope, as HHS has been saying, "It's business as usual".

And say, has anyone asked why, during the government shut down, Obamacare is considered "essential" but paying military death benefits isn't?

 

Obamacare is not affordable?

Sadly, no healthcare involving insurance coverage is affordable. For a family of 4 with a decent $40 deductible, I pay $1,200 a month through my employer -- my employer pays a matching amount.

What is good about Obamacare is that I can continue to provide coverage for my son, who is an adult, and my wife's pre-existing condition does not prevent us from getting insurance for her -- that has been a huge issue, in the past. We have been turned away by insurance companies all the time.

The thing is the people who control the MONEY -- i.e., financial services including insurance -- are thieves who would stab their grandmothers for a buck. Obamacare, like medicare, at least gives us a little bit of a chance to get back some of our own money after the bankers and insurers have ass-reamed us so badly that we need wear butt-plugs all the time to prevent our own innards from hanging out of our undershorts.

I am sick of the corporate-welfare state. I am sick of the rich telling us we all have to suck it up while they take our money and our futures.

 

Now explain how that will help a person with cancer get insurance for the one thing he needs it for.

 

While what you note about our penchant for lawsuits is 'conventional wisdom' I have since learned that starting in the 1990s aggressive tort reform in the USA, on a state by state level, has practically eliminated the benefits of suing left and right every time you get a hang nail.

The lobbying groups have aggressively limited damages -- you have to now prove there was a criminal intention to hurt you in most instances -- and even if you could, damages are severely limited. Gone are the days of $30 million damage awards. If victims can prove through printed letters and memos and by emails that a conversation was had by doctors and pharmacists that they knew something they were going to do was going to hurt you, but they kept that a secret from you and did it anyway -- then you can sue for big bucks.

Otherwise, if they make a mistake and you are hurt, you can sue and in most cases not get anything back because a strong movement started 20 years ago to change damage award and other tort practices has been very successful -- protecting doctors and large corporations.

So, we do have too many lawyers -- but they are not making as much money as they used to in the tort/damage world. They make more money working FOR corporations and as LOBBYISTS than they do suing people, now.

 

No one is preventing anyone from getting health insurance.
If you can't answer my question don't bother answering.
I would like intelligent people to answer.