Health Insurance

[LafayetteBear]

I’m not looking for anything to be free, as I stated in my next post.

I look at something like Chattanooga wrt broadband services. The greater Chattanooga area (not city proper, but surrounding areas that are much more rural), about 15-18 years ago, was a broadband desert. Comcast and other providers refused to install the infrastructure to provide the locals out there with broadband services because they deemed it wasn’t worth the capex. City of Chattanooga decided to fund their own broadband infrastructure in those rural areas, provide high quality broadband to their citizens (paid for by their taxes), and it ended up being a massive success.

THAT is what I’m talking about when I look at a govt providing what I think is a basic right because private industry doesn’t think it’s worth it.

Chattanooga’s Municipal Fiber Network Has Delivered $5.3 Billion in Community Benefits, New Study Finds | Welcome to Community Networks

Since 2011, a new study finds that Chattanooga's city-owned fiber network has generated $5.3 billion in net community benefits for Hamilton County. Conducted by researchers at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the study finds that the municipal fiber network has dramatically reshaped...

communitynetworks.org

Paw Pride: That's a great story! Good for Chattanooga.

 

[fatpiggy]

I’m not looking for anything to be free, as I stated in my next post.

I look at something like Chattanooga wrt broadband services. The greater Chattanooga area (not city proper, but surrounding areas that are much more rural), about 15-18 years ago, was a broadband desert. Comcast and other providers refused to install the infrastructure to provide the locals out there with broadband services because they deemed it wasn’t worth the capex. City of Chattanooga decided to fund their own broadband infrastructure in those rural areas, provide high quality broadband to their citizens (paid for by their taxes), and it ended up being a massive success.

THAT is what I’m talking about when I look at a govt providing what I think is a basic right because private industry doesn’t think it’s worth it.

Chattanooga’s Municipal Fiber Network Has Delivered $5.3 Billion in Community Benefits, New Study Finds | Welcome to Community Networks

Since 2011, a new study finds that Chattanooga's city-owned fiber network has generated $5.3 billion in net community benefits for Hamilton County. Conducted by researchers at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the study finds that the municipal fiber network has dramatically reshaped...

communitynetworks.org

there was a story...remember there were $billions appropriated for broadband specifically for this purpose..it was in one of the Biden bills, very worthwhile for the reason you cited. When Biden left office, there were few , if any, people connected.

Supposedly, I know, not very factual, but starlink offered to do the service, and could have provided the service within a month. But the administration insisted on fiber optic cable which brings a high infrastructure cost. seems like another instance where the government had a good idea, but the implementation maybe wasn't the best.

"The road to hell was paved with good intentions" is a saying that comes to mind reading your conversation.

While government means to do well and the politicians want to help, in reality, when they intervene and distort markets everyone usually ends up worse off.

 

[fatpiggy]

My health insurance was $1750 a month when Obamacare started. It’s now $4200 a month.


Over 125% inflation since it was passed, much higher than general inflation. Obamacare was a failure.

 

[baltimorened]

My health insurance was $1750 a month when Obamacare started. It’s now $4200 a month.


Over 125% inflation since it was passed, much higher than general inflation. Obamacare was a failure.

It always amazes the short memory people have...Obamacare was sold on "not one penny from the federal budget"

 

[scotchtiger]

...Who ensures that the tap water is clean enough to drink? How are POTWs and WTPs funded and maintained?

Um, through our water bills? There are some federal grants and loans and state subsidies, but we largely pay for this out of pocket in the form of our monthly water bills.

Which makes sense by the way. Usage related fees and taxes are much more logical than income based revenue streams.

 

[PawPride]

Um, through our water bills? There are some federal grants and loans and state subsidies, but we largely pay for this out of pocket in the form of our monthly water bills.

Yes, they are government owned non-profit public utilities. They're supplemented by bonds/grants/funding (mainly for big capex projects), but it's a government owned and ran utility. It's the same as any other public utility - overseen by the gov't, funded by the individuals who pay into it.

 

[fatpiggy]

 

[scotchtiger]

What's the point being made here?

If you include all of that, premiums just go up. Someone has to pay regardless. I'd rather pay $3K for orthodontia once per child than pay higher premiums for my entire life.

Nobody in my family of 4 wears glasses either. We opt out of vision insurance. Why should I be forced to subsidize others by lumping vision risk into my health insurance premiums?

 

[fatpiggy]

What's the point being made here?

If you include all of that, premiums just go up. Someone has to pay regardless. I'd rather pay $3K for orthodontia once per child than pay higher premiums for my entire life.

Nobody in my family of 4 wears glasses either. We opt out of vision insurance. Why should I be forced to subsidize others by lumping vision risk into my health insurance premiums?

I think the point is that your teeth and eyes are a part of your health. I hear you though, the cost goes somewhere.

Maybe there is a market opportunity there. 1 comprehensive package. Like a bundled discount.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

In all my 62 years I have never found a policy that includes both those things

 

[scotchtiger]

I think the point is that your teeth and eyes are a part of your health. I hear you though, the cost goes somewhere.

Maybe there is a market opportunity there. 1 comprehensive package. Like a bundled discount.

That's what Medicare Advantage does for medicare recipients.

Good with bundled options, but I shouldn't be required to participate in them. And risk premiums for cosmetic things like orthodontia shouldn't be forced on anyone.

While we're thinking about new market opportunities, they should offer health insurance that requires a physical to participate. The only folks allowed in the risk pool are fit and take care of themselves. There's an opportunity for high quality coverage with very low premiums and good margin for the insurer.

 

[Gibbs6]

I think the point is that your teeth and eyes are a part of your health. I hear you though, the cost goes somewhere.

Maybe there is a market opportunity there. 1 comprehensive package. Like a bundled discount.

I’m pretty sure eye health/coverage is the biggest scam ever. It covers a baseline exam and pretty much nothing else. As someone that needs glasses/contacts, eye insurance is a joke. Here’s your pair of glasses with frames and lens, that will be $350+ dollars after your insurance. WTF did insurance take off?

 

[baltimorened]

My suggestion would be to vote for whoever supports single payer healthcare in the future

here's something to consider in this era of "affordability issues" and the call for wage growth etc. Our healthcare system is made up of facilities, equipment - both for infrastructure and medical purposes - people - doctors, nurses, admin, maintenance etc.

Each year the costs for all of these things goes up. and a lot of us are on the side of higher wages, better medical testing etc. And at the same time we complain that medical/healthcare costs are increasing. In our environment, wouldn't you expect healthcare costs to increase?

 

[baltimorened]

What makes me think the elimination of for profit insurance companies will lower cost of health insurance premiums?

Even the President seems advocating for socialized healthcare.

so you are against the capitalist economic system? Companies make a profit for the services they provide...

 

[baltimorened]

I’ve always suggested we pay for it by phasing out social security and reallocating some of the military budget. Will that cover all of it? Probably not, but any tax increase would likely be less than the premiums people pay today plus the elimination of most out of pocket costs.

This would be a net positive, even if taxes increased.

you weren't by chance one of the posters complaining about inventories of our military munitions? I always get a kick out of those who complain about military spending and then complain that the military doesn't do the things that cost money...

 

[baltimorened]

There’s also no incentive to increase costs. There’s no incentive to find any little reason to deny claims.

We’re the wealthiest country in the history of the known universe, our citizens shouldn’t have to use gofundme to pay their medical bills.

you're right they shouldn't...isn;' that the reason we have the ACA, or maybe the government should unretrict the use of catastrophic health insurance. We don't need to burn down what we have in order to solve the issues you present.

 

[baltimorened]

Obamacare was supposed to take of this. How come when govt gets involved in anything, prices go up.
Because they are not for solutions, only causes and victims to raise money on and also to get elected( and Re-elected).
There will never be any solution to this without TORT reform, which will never pass because of all the lawyers making laws and the law lobby. Every one of these lawsuits that are brought forward, WE pay for, ALL of us.
Until our system is loser pays in civil court, we create more lawyers and then more lawsuits, which drive up costs for everything

just look at the increases in healthcare since passage of the ACA. One of the supposed benefits was that we would all save money...anyone on here paying less now than before passage of ACA?

How many on here supported the Democrat effort to pass that bill? How many of those same people are now complaining about higher costs. But, hey, lets let the government run our healthcare. How does that make any sense?

 

[scotchtiger]

just look at the increases in healthcare since passage of the ACA. One of the supposed benefits was that we would all save money...anyone on here paying less now than before passage of ACA?

How many on here supported the Democrat effort to pass that bill? How many of those same people are now complaining about higher costs. But, hey, lets let the government run our healthcare. How does that make any sense?

It’s always about redistribution for these guys.

It redistributed insurance costs: people who were older, sicker, had pre-existing conditions, or needed comprehensive coverage generally benefited, while some younger, healthier people and healthier small groups paid more than they would have under the pre-ACA system.

People who took care of themselves were penalized. Younger people - who had less money than older people - were penalized.

They need to limit the preexisting condition clause to things completely outside of your control. And rate people on controllable health factors. This is the party of paying your fair share after all, right?

 

[scotchtiger]

Following up on my post above, health insurance premiums should reflect this. If you are obese with type 2 diabetes, your premiums should be at least 4 times higher than someone with a healthy weight and no diabetes. This is a logical, fair way to lower costs for tens and tens of millions of responsible Americans.

50-year-old profile	Expected annual medical spending
Healthy weight, no chronic conditions	~$4,000–$6,000
Obesity, no diabetes	~$6,000–$8,000
Type 2 diabetes, not obese	~$12,000–$16,000
Obesity + type 2 diabetes	~$15,000–$22,000
Diabetes + obesity + complications	$25,000–$50,000+