# Republican insurance plan



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

First off Obama didn't want to help the poor he wanted to transfer taxpayer money to insurance companies. Maybe he got some kind of payoff. Now the republicans have a plan to eliminate Obamacare, but nothing really changes. Rather than the feds subsidizing insurance the republicans want to give block grants to states and let them handle it. The same dog with a different name. Use taxpayers hard earned money and give it to insurance companies again. There is less than a nickel difference in Obama and Lindsay Graham.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

politicians should have zero hand in developing an insurance plan.

Information should be drawn from the insurance companies starting with the agents on up. Information should be drawn from the medical industry starting with the girls at the front desk on up. from the drug industry, the same , the employers and the users. Don't let the users be hand picked draw them from the federal jury pool so you get a mix. put them all together so ALL aspects of a program can be discussed. Yea its gonna take a little while, but at least people who actually apply and use it will have input.


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

obama care, republican care and all the other government ploys are strictly to get the money away from the peasants. i really believe that when the government created ira's, 401k's, etc they never dreamed that the peasants would have such large savings accounts in one form or another. now the government is in a mode to take it all away. no money in your pocket and control of your health care they will have most everyone by the short hairs.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here is what I don't get my so many Dem's are against this.....

Remember when the ACA was getting debated and what not. The Dem's said that the Federal government would give up control of this to the states.... Which we find out it really didn't. This bill is doing that! So that shows you how the Dem's feel about state goverments. :bop:

But back to the bill..... I am not 100% for or against this one yet. I need to find out more about it.

But yes on the surface right now there is not much difference. Still spending large $$$ all it does is change the name on who is writing the check....ie: Feds to State. I don't know how they think it will lower insurance premiums?? I mean it give power to the state to divide the block grant. Which most states will give it to the people who earn less income. So like plainsman said... it is 6 of one and a half dozen of another of what is going on right now.

The big thing it does is gets rid of the mandate..... which is good IMHO. But need to see if there are cost restrictions, tort reform, etc.

I mean if they want to lower cost of insurance.... you need to lower COST OF DOING MEDICINE!!! I mean insurance pays the bills sent to them by Hospitals.

Example using Car insurance... same principle.

People keep asking me why car insurance keeps going up when newer cars have more safety features. Well because if you get into an accident with a newer car it crumples and costs more to fix. I mean think about it... if you sneeze on a car now it will crumple. But that is the design of it. So the impact doesn't get to the drivers. But that makes things cost more to get fixed. 10 years ago an average Deer/Auto claim was $1500... now $4000! So insurance companies compute how many car/deer claims happen a year.... the costs of those claims.... the frequency of claims.... the area the claims happen.... etc. To help come up with a premium. So you see the bills keep going up so will premiums.

Now lets move that to humans. If the price of a procedure keeps going up... So will premiums. Also not to sound morbid... but as the average life span keeps rising so will medical costs.... so insurance companies are adjusting for that as well. So by humans living longer insurance premiums will keep going up. It is just the facts of life. So when bills go up per person in the form of more doctor visits, procedures done, check ups, medicines people take, therapy, drug counseling, drug addiction treatments, rehabs, etc.... So will the costs of insurance premiums.

The big thing that needs to be done first is have a cost lists... ie: tests costs $, MRI costs $$, Heart surgery costs $$$..... They need to do this. Because like I have stated over and over.... call around and ask hospitals what a MRI will cost.... I beat you don't get a straight answer. First they will ask what insurance company are you with or if you are paying cash..... then call another hospital and ask the same question... you will get a different answer.... then call a Chiropractor..... again... all doing the exact same thing.... taking a picture... costs are all over the board. I did this... I got prices from $5000 to $800! Again... what do the insurance companies have to figure for.... the $5000!!! So what do we as a consumer of health insurance pay for... $5000. I hope you get the idea.

This is just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.... then we can talk tort reform, medical records sharing (which I think the ACA did help with a little...but not in the tort reform area), making insurance companies open up the books on how the money is spent with most going to clients and not CEO's (which the ACA did), etc.

But again with some of the stuff I mentioned wont get done because about 80% of Washington are lawyers.... and they would never want lawyer to not be able to sue! I have heard many lawyers use this phrases.... When in doubt sue it out! That is one of the biggest issues I have with lawyers. Sorry to offend anyone but it is what gives that industry a bad name.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Chuck, don't them need to pass it, so you can read what's in it? :rollin: oke:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

BL.... exactly..... why wait for actually read something... HAHA


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I love how Hollywood types are just against anything and everything....

Now I used to like Jimmy Kimmel.... but after the rant he gave I don't think I can like him much more. He doesn't get it like most of the Hollywood type. I understand the stuff he went thru with his child... but this new bill wont change a thing with anyone with pre-existing conditions!!

He thinks that the new purposed bill will give insurance companies a chance to cut care for pre-exisiting conditions and what not.... Watch the video below and see how many times sen Cassidy says it wont!!!






BTW... this vid also shows how dumb CNN is getting.... the hosts don't listen to what is being told to them. They have one point to argue and that is all they do....


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Why can't health insurance be like vehicle insurance? You have multiple options from a lot of different companies. You can always shop around and get quotes and get it exactly what you want. That is what the Republicans should be pushing for, if they are truly for the people.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

Do people get free car insurance? I think it would sink because a significant number would not take insurance and still show up to medical facilities expecting treatment and getting it----because, well you know the answer to that. Those that do shop around and pay would be like the person who gets rear ended at the stoplight by someone who doesn't have car insurance. Your insurance company would pay and we would be back where we are.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

There is no free car insurance. There is no free health insurance either, you pay for it via taxes. Get rid of Medicare and Medicade and let the free market work like its suppose to.

If you do not carry car insurance, you can still get a citation for not having it, but you can also have the option to pay out of pocket for the repairs. Hell, I have been in an accident and I paid for everything out of pocket, because it was cheap, since I negotiated with the body shop.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here is the problem.... with car insurance you have a choice in what you want covered... ie: Liability only, comp, collision...

With Health insurance the GOVERMENT tells you what you need covered.

If the government would let you "piece" together a plan it would be cheaper. Why should a male have to pay for birth control, OBGYN coverages, birth, etc. If you don't think that a male does you are 100% wrong. It is listed in their policies. Yes I have coverage in my health insurance policy if I get someone pregnant.... there is some coverage for that. Not all of it... but some. Look it up in your own policies. The reason why it is in there is because the GOVERMENT tells the insurance company they have to cover that.

If I only want a policy that covers: cancers, heart failure/diseases, mass injuries.... I cant buy that policy. Reason... government says you cant.

Do I think a piece together policy is the answer.... Yes/No. Because if you didn't list the condition exactly 100% perfect... the insurance company would not pay. Lets say.... you said heart disease/failure.... well was that caused by untreated diabetes or was it because your heart failed? The insurance company fight saying that it was diabetes and that wasn't listed on the policy. You get my point??? But it would lower costs. The other down side is that people wouldn't pay for something to be listed... go to a hospital... get treated and the hospital would get payment thru insurance by billing more for other procedures...ie: same example as above but would charge raise rates on all the other procedures to help cover that costs.

that is why we need a straight line COST SHEET... the costs of everything that the hospital bills be the same between all hospitals.

I mean they charge for each and every q-tip they uses or piece of gauze. And they charge a pretty penny for them right now. :bop:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Now this is Ben Shapiro talking about the health care bill that is purposed....

It is slanted for Republicans... but he does a good job IMHO explain stuff. You just got to listen and not just tune out because of who is relaying the message. Listen to the points and think if you agree or disagree with them.


----------

