Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 23 Sep 2009 16:15 In article <4aba6901$0$23758$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > news:clark-1563F9.11265423092009(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <4aba2934$0$23766$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > > "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > > >> "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> news:Naeum.49208$JG1.39006(a)newsfe24.iad... > >> > > >> > > >> >>> To cut to the chase ... I think it is wishful > >> >>> thinking to believe that the current insurance > >> >>> companies are going to treat you fairly. > >> >>> If they wanted to be up front about what > >> >>> they do and do not cover there would be > >> >>> a list. > >> >> > >> >> Coverage is defined and exceptions listed in every insurance policy. > >> > > >> > How come there are lawsuits, won by individuals, who claim > >> > that they should have been covered and weren't? ... broad terms > >> > like "experimental" are used to deny common sense procedures ... > >> > procrastinating payment until the policyholder is dead ... > >> > Do insurance companies insist that the details of their lost > >> > cases not be revealed? Is there a list of what cases have been > >> > filed and the verdicts and the outcomes for the families? > >> > >> Do you have any examples? Specifics? > >> > >> What about those ads on television from lawyers looking for clients to > >> sue > >> for health claims? Don't you think we could reduce insurance costs if we > >> had some tort reform to limit how these shysters make money recruiting > >> "victims?" > > > > Do you know what percentage of health care spending goes on these > > lawsuits? It is about 1-1.5%. In other words, while it is red meat to > > the wingnuts, it is almost inconsequential in cutting health care costs. > > Really? Does that 1%-1.5% represent actual judgments or does it also > include additional cost of insuring against a such a judgment? Does it > include defending against those judgments? One and one half percent of > health care is still nearly four Billion Dollars. Chump change to a > Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can count. That it may be, but it is still an infinitesimal amount when it comes to fixing the bloated health care expenses of the US. The are a hundred other places that yu should be looking first. That is, if you really want to reduce the cost of healthcare, as opposed to making silly politcal points.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 23 Sep 2009 16:28 On Sep 23, 1:29 pm, "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > news:clark-1563F9.11265423092009(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > > In article <4aba2934$0$23766$bbae4...(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > > "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > >> "gray asphalt" <dontwr...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >>news:Naeum.49208$JG1.39006(a)newsfe24.iad... > > >> >>> To cut to the chase ... I think it is wishful > >> >>> thinking to believe that the current insurance > >> >>> companies are going to treat you fairly. > >> >>> If they wanted to be up front about what > >> >>> they do and do not cover there would be > >> >>> a list. > > >> >> Coverage is defined and exceptions listed in every insurance policy. > > >> > How come there are lawsuits, won by individuals, who claim > >> > that they should have been covered and weren't? ... broad terms > >> > like "experimental" are used to deny common sense procedures ... > >> > procrastinating payment until the policyholder is dead ... > >> > Do insurance companies insist that the details of their lost > >> > cases not be revealed? Is there a list of what cases have been > >> > filed and the verdicts and the outcomes for the families? > > >> Do you have any examples? Specifics? > > >> What about those ads on television from lawyers looking for clients to > >> sue > >> for health claims? Don't you think we could reduce insurance costs if we > >> had some tort reform to limit how these shysters make money recruiting > >> "victims?" > > > Do you know what percentage of health care spending goes on these > > lawsuits? It is about 1-1.5%. In other words, while it is red meat to > > the wingnuts, it is almost inconsequential in cutting health care costs.. > > Really? Does that 1%-1.5% represent actual judgments or does it also > include additional cost of insuring against a such a judgment? Does it > include defending against those judgments? One and one half percent of > health care is still nearly four Billion Dollars. Chump change to a > Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can count. 1 - 1.5% of US GDP...at least.
From: Carbon on 23 Sep 2009 18:15 On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:29:07 -0500, The moderator wrote: > Chump change to a Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can > count. Back here on planet Earth, who ran a leaner government over their two terms, Clinton or Bush? It kind of seems like this brainless slur of yours is totally off base, huh?
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 23 Sep 2009 18:52 On Sep 23, 5:15 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:29:07 -0500, The moderator wrote: > > Chump change to a Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can > > count. > > Back here on planet Earth, who ran a leaner government over their two > terms, Clinton or Bush? It kind of seems like this brainless slur of > yours is totally off base, huh? I'll never understand why Americans lay this on Presidents. Congress controls spending. The president can suggest and administer. The president cannot allocate funds. Only Congress does that. So the GOP Congress under Clinton spent less than the GOP Congress and the Dem congress under Bush. The Newt effect, no doubt!
From: Jack Hollis on 23 Sep 2009 19:33
On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:57:04 -0500, "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: >> How come there are lawsuits, won by individuals, who claim >> that they should have been covered and weren't? ... broad terms >> like "experimental" are used to deny common sense procedures ... >> procrastinating payment until the policyholder is dead ... >> Do insurance companies insist that the details of their lost >> cases not be revealed? Is there a list of what cases have been >> filed and the verdicts and the outcomes for the families? > >Do you have any examples? Specifics? I remember hearing that the number of health insurance policies that are cancelled is around one half of one percent. Even so, considering that there are hundreds of millions of policies that still a huge number. Insurance companies read an application and as long as there are no problem, they issue the insurance. However, if there are large claims made on the policy soon after it's issued, they will investigate. If they find that the policy holder committed fraud they will cancel the policy. Most states have a fixed period of one or two years after which the insurance company can't cancel the policy even if there was fraud in the application. Other disputes come about when there is a disagreement over what is, or is not covered. In this case the policy is still in force but the claim is denied. The insurance business is no different from any other business in that there are some dishonest people who try to get away with as much as they can. However, every state has an insurance board that will mediate disputes. For the most part, these boards are consumer friendly. |