health care
in [Golf]
|
From: Kommienezuspadt on 14 Feb 2010 11:29 "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message news:MPG.25e1d7be9e81c0d6989bbc(a)news.giganews.com... > In article <4b77fd60$0$20323$882e0bbb(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, > NoSpam(a)NoThanks.net says... >> >> "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message >> news:MPG.25e1bb208fcb340d989bb8(a)news.giganews.com... >> > In article <4b773369$0$22816$882e0bbb(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, >> > NoSpam(a)NoThanks.net says... >> >> > >> >> > What's the average per physician cost of malpractice insurance at >> >> > your >> >> > facility? What's the average per medical personnel cost of >> >> > malpractice >> >> > insurance at your facility? >> >> >> >> I don't have those numbers in a form that is easy to gather -- but I >> >> can >> >> tell you this -- our total insurance costs --- including buildings, >> >> liability, malpractice -- you name it -- is under 1% of total Gross >> >> Revenues -- and -- taking the contractual deductions into the >> >> equation -- >> >> it >> >> is still 1.34% of Net Revenues. >> >> >> >> This includes family practice docs -- ortho surgeons - general >> >> surgeons -- >> >> pediatricians --- cardio-pulmonary -- rehabs --- >> >> >> >> We don't do major heart surgery or other surgeries of that type -- we >> >> send >> >> them out to the specialists. >> > >> >> But then -- you didn't address the Texas question -- instead -- you >> >> snipped >> >> it out --- why should anyone take you seriously? >> > >> > I was not interested in what Texas has done. >> > >> >> I am interested in Texas & how well its tort reform has worked. > > Has it worked? > > Look it up. __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4865 (20100214) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
From: Jack Hollis on 14 Feb 2010 14:32 On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:59:26 -0600, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: >> >>Bobby, individual policies are a very small percentage of the market. > >So? These raises will certainly make some difference. I don't know what's driving the move to increase individual policy rates. Perhaps they want to get out of the business entirely. I imagine that if they make it impossible for insurance companies to refuse people with preexisting conditions, not offering individual policies would remove most of those people from consideration.
From: gray asphalt on 14 Feb 2010 14:38 I'm wondering whether health insurance copanies and other insurance companies can take their ill-gotten liquidity and use it to make the same kinds of gambling 'investments' as the big banks. Is there any reason that they should be able to do that, if they are?
From: dene on 14 Feb 2010 15:18 "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:jkjgn5l70m2abg3cl51f08oeatp80i372e(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:59:26 -0600, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > > >> > >>Bobby, individual policies are a very small percentage of the market. > > > >So? These raises will certainly make some difference. > > I don't know what's driving the move to increase individual policy > rates. Perhaps they want to get out of the business entirely. I > imagine that if they make it impossible for insurance companies to > refuse people with preexisting conditions, not offering individual > policies would remove most of those people from consideration. I believe that's the case. Rate and plan changes are planned well in advance. There is a timely procedure insurers must go through to enact them. It's likely they were convinced the Senate bill was going to pass. If Anthem is like Oregon's Blue Cross, then they took steps to insure their plans and rates weren't the shiniest apple. If people wait until they are sick, then buy guaranteed health insurance, then naturally they will buy the "best bang for the buck." The chosen insurance company will receive a few hundred and end up paying thousands. This business concept means nothing to liberals. They have no issues with spending other people's money. -Greg
From: Jack Hollis on 14 Feb 2010 15:33
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:18:00 -0800, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: >"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:jkjgn5l70m2abg3cl51f08oeatp80i372e(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:59:26 -0600, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: >> >> >> >> >>Bobby, individual policies are a very small percentage of the market. >> > >> >So? These raises will certainly make some difference. >> >> I don't know what's driving the move to increase individual policy >> rates. Perhaps they want to get out of the business entirely. I >> imagine that if they make it impossible for insurance companies to >> refuse people with preexisting conditions, not offering individual >> policies would remove most of those people from consideration. > >I believe that's the case. Rate and plan changes are planned well in >advance. There is a timely procedure insurers must go through to enact >them. It's likely they were convinced the Senate bill was going to pass. >If Anthem is like Oregon's Blue Cross, then they took steps to insure their >plans and rates weren't the shiniest apple. If people wait until they are >sick, then buy guaranteed health insurance, then naturally they will buy the >"best bang for the buck." The chosen insurance company will receive a few >hundred and end up paying thousands. > >This business concept means nothing to liberals. They have no issues with >spending other people's money. > >-Greg Businessmen always adjust. I was watching "Norma Rae" the other day. I had to laugh when Reuben, the union organizer, talks about years ago when his grandfather organized the textile workers in NY. Of course, he didn't mention that this was the reason that the textile business left the Northeast and moved to the South giving all the people he was talking to their jobs. Of course, all those textile jobs in the South, union or not, are long gone. It gives you a new perspective when you watch "Norma Rae" again after all these years. The unions fought hard to organize the textile workers in the South and had some success, but alas, it was all for nothing. The unions didn't kill the textile business in this country but they did hasten its demise. |