[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

See Jerry this is the result when you selectively read my responses.

1. I never argued the states shouldn't do it, I have argued against th estates cause they are doing it badly- they have a constitutional right to do so.

Hawaii does it just fine.

2. The Postal Service is provided for by th econstitution:

I stand corrected.

Teh feds have the constitutional power under the ICC to allow insurers to cross state lines.

Which part of the constitution allows the fed to remove state regulation of insurance within their own borders.

My position is very consistent- it is your unwillingness to understand my position that causes you to think the way you do.

You have no problem with your co-workers being forced into paying your bills by a group policy: but oppose reform that would save everyone money as well as save lives and improve living because.

Actually: I cannot come up with a sane reason for your opposition.

[tlj009]

Hawaii does it just fine.

This is the second time that I have seen this. I would like to know more about Hawaii's system. During the debates about it, I kept hearing about Mass., which was a failure. My first thought would be that Hawaii would have some advantages being a tourist attraction. But I don't know much about Hawaii, so I will have to study up on it.

Just so we can put some numbers on this debate:

I work for a company with a total of 8 employees. I think that constitutes a small business. I am 29 and haven't been sick, but I am also the youngest one here. The rest are 40-62. We all have insurance. This is a HMO. But the non-HMO plans are priced similarly, about $20 more with a $500 deductible.

Employee only $310, Employee children $585, Employee spouse $650, and Family $895.

Since the passage of the health care bill, our insurance has gone up 6% across the board. I also bought a separate cancer policy for about $30 per month.

How do these prices compare?

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by tlj009

I work for a company with a total of 8 employees. I think that constitutes a small business. I am 29 and haven't been sick, but I am also the youngest one here. The rest are 40-62. We all have insurance. This is a HMO. But the non-HMO plans are priced similarly, about $20 more with a $500 deductible.

Employee only $310, Employee children $585, Employee spouse $650, and Family $895.

How much does the company pay in? What's your max out? What's your max coverage?

Since the passage of the health care bill, our insurance has gone up 6% across the board.

Since no provisions of the bill are in effect yet: that should tell you something about the industry.

I also bought a separate cancer policy for about $30 per month.

Why? Cancer isn't covered under your policy?

How do these prices compare?

Can't tell without a great deal more information. It would also help to know what actually happens when someone in your group has a major illness.

Right now my coworker, having been denied the MRI suggested by the doctor that the insurance company sent him to, is also unable to get his anti-inflammitories (perscribed by same doctor) because the insurance is refusing to cover it.

[nolidad]

Hawaii does it just fine.

a 2% success rate is n ot an encouraging prospect.

Which part of the constitution allows the fed to remove state regulation of insurance within their own borders.

None Many states would welcome companies crossing borders- many also don't unless the insurer establish a corp. in the state. But teh fed can allow insurers (like Blue Cross) Have one entity and still service all the states it does- that is ocvered undered ICC>

You have no problem with your co-workers being forced into paying your bills by a group policy: but oppose reform that would save everyone money as well as save lives and improve living because.

Well teh newly enacted health law will not do what you say-- but time will prove that out. And I never said I am oppossed to reform that would improve health insurance. That is you thrusting your opinion and seeking to make it mine.

[Napoleon17]

Originally Posted by nolidad

I did not start my policy with the USPS with Severe arthritis in the knees, hip and spine, nor a heart condition, nor hypertension, nor restrictred airways, nor mild lupus. These all developed after I became covered under the terms of this coverage. If hte terms were different I may be paying higher premiums than others.

This is incorrect, with group insurance the entire group is either accepted or rejected based on the experience rating of the group. No one can be denied coverage in group insurance. For example, lets say prudential underwrites Lowe's. If the people at Lowe's as a whole get into tons of forklift accidents and get asbestos poisoning and tend to go blind from all the fluorescent lights, their experience rating as a group might cause prudential to drop Lowe's as a group. But if a cashier has cancer and makes a bunch of claims, this is not going to make prudential raise rates or drop Lowe's as a whole. Now, that being said, the reason group insurance works is because everyone pays in: there are those who never use it and those who use it a lot... when we make an entire group up of sick people... that doesn't really work and will have to be heavily subsidized by the government. haha, it reminds me of my insurance training class. The instructor was talking about the different types of group insurance and this really dumb guy asked: "what about group insurance for a group of sick people?" and the instructor just looked at him like "is that a serious question?"

Originally Posted by Gustin

Noli, your analogy isn't comparable though. If I get into a number of at fault accidents or get ticketed for moving violations, then it is on me. It is my fault. If the accidents are not my fault, my premiums don't go up. I'm still a safe driver.

Hate to interject, but even if the accident is not your fault, your insurance premiums will still go up, most likely, and most likely it will be a substantial increase.

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Why? Cancer isn't covered under your policy?

It is probably a cancer supplement plan. Medical insurance will only pay out 80% of the costs in most cases, so most likely anyone who gets cancer will reach their max out of pocket (most of the time around 5 to 10 grand). The cancer supplement plans pay cash to help supplement the major medical insurance, and to help pay for missed work, etc. Some plans pay $75.00 for a woman getting a pap smear, etc.



Also, speaking of the Post Office, it is interesting that the Post Office is constitutionally required to fund itself (i.e. make enough money to cover its own costs). Costs have been going up for the PO, so they're thinking about shutting down Saturday service. I think that's pretty cool. Wish this darn government-run health care had those same requirements.

[tlj009]

How much does the company pay in? What's your max out? What's your max coverage?

The company pays all of it. The whole $310 in my case. Max out of pocket is nothing for the HMO plans. Just the copay. Lifetime maximum is $5 million.

Since no provisions of the bill are in effect yet: that should tell you something about the industry.

It tells me plenty. But I already knew that they would act at the earliest possible moment. In this case, when the plan was renewed. I really didn't expect anything different. Especially when they are bound until the next renewal period.

Why? Cancer isn't covered under your policy?

Absolutely it is. As Napoleon pointed out, it is a supplement plan. I actually had it when my primary insurance was under a different company who wouldn't pay 100%. But the reason that I still have it is because of the $5 million lifetime maximum. The supplement will kick in after I reach that limit.

Can't tell without a great deal more information. It would also help to know what actually happens when someone in your group has a major illness.

I wouldn't know because no one around here has had anything really major. But I do suspect that we are probably an average small business. Maybe a little smaller than most. So I am wondering how we compare. We also have a lady who has told me that she called multiple businesses and received good reports from them. Assuming that she did her research before the company chose this insurance, I suspect that it is as good as any out there. But I doubt that I will ever have anyway of satisfying you skepticism here.

Right now my coworker, having been denied the MRI suggested by the doctor that the insurance company sent him to, is also unable to get his anti-inflammitories (perscribed by same doctor) because the insurance is refusing to cover it.

My insurance was founded and owned by doctors. Many of those same doctors or their businesses are the ones listed as someone we can see. I know my doctor has some connections with them. So I don't think that would be a problem in my case.

[nolidad]

This is incorrect, with group insurance the entire group is either accepted or rejected based on the experience rating of the group. No one can be denied coverage in group insurance. For example, lets say prudential underwrites Lowe's. If the people at Lowe's as a whole get into tons of forklift accidents and get asbestos poisoning and tend to go blind from all the fluorescent lights, their experience rating as a group might cause prudential to drop Lowe's as a group. But if a cashier has cancer and makes a bunch of claims, this is not going to make prudential raise rates or drop Lowe's as a whole. Now, that being said, the reason group insurance works is because everyone pays in: there are those who never use it and those who use it a lot... when we make an entire group up of sick people... that doesn't really work and will have to be heavily subsidized by the government. haha, it reminds me of my insurance training class. The instructor was talking about the different types of group insurance and this really dumb guy asked: "what about group insurance for a group of sick people?" and the instructor just looked at him like "is that a serious question?"

Maybe- I used to work for the pru. But I was refferring to these conditions existing when I was starting at the USPS. Sorry I wasn't clear. But there are plans under the FEHBP that will exclude preexisitng conditions or have limited coverages for those pre existing conditions.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

But there are plans under the FEHBP that will exclude preexisitng conditions or have limited coverages for those pre existing conditions.

Link to the section of the law in question please.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Link to the section of the law in question please.

When you first link to the evidence that proves Vanderboegh is an "ardent" tea partier.

Then I will be glad to link showing new entriesd in to the FEHBP system (new hires) under some policies can be excluded for preexisting conditions (if the combned benefits book is still on line that lists all the plans and their coverages)

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

When you first link to the evidence that proves Vanderboegh is an "ardent" tea partier.

Then I will be glad to link showing new entriesd in to the FEHBP system (new hires) under some policies can be excluded for preexisting conditions (if the combned benefits book is still on line that lists all the plans and their coverages)

Something that has nothing to do with this thread? I see you are still trying the "distract" tactic when caught lying.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Something that has nothing to do with this thread? I see you are still trying the "distract" tactic when caught lying.

No just trying ot get you to prove you r slanderous claims.

So prove you are not slandering a whole class of citenzry or I will not prove my claims you have asked for. It is a door that swings both ways Jerry. You are not exempt from having to prove assertions no matter ho wmuch you may think you are.

[adamwagg]

If we are going to have rubbish like 'you prove it', 'no you prove it' I'm closing the thread.

Please discuss in good faith - providing citations supports your argument and improves your statements, it doesn't relate to what other people have done or not done.