PDA

View Full Version : How Obamacare Is Ruining Health Insurance



Ares
29th March 2015, 04:20 PM
The health insurance market is changing. And the changes are not good. Even before there was Obamacare, most insurers most of the time had perverse incentives to attract the healthy and avoid the sick. But now that the Affordable Care Act has completely changed the nature of the market, the perverse incentives are worse than ever.

Writing in Sunday’s New York Times Elizabeth Rosenthal gives these examples:

When Karen Pineman of Manhattan sought treatment for a broken ankle, her insurer told her that the nearest in-network doctor was in Stamford, Connecticut – in another state.
Alison Chavez, a California breast cancer patient, was almost on the operating table when her surgery had to be cancelled because several of her doctors were leaving the insurer’s network.
When the son of Alexis Gersten, a dentist in East Quogue New York, needed an ear, nose and throat specialist, the insurer told her the nearest one was in Albany – five hours away.
When Andrea Greenberg, a New York lawyer, called an insurance company hotline with questions she found herself speaking to someone reading off a script in the Philippines.
Aviva Starkman Williams, a California computer engineer, tried to determine whether the pediatrician doing her son’s 2-year-old checkup was in-network, the practice’s office manager “said he didn’t know because doctors came in and out of network all the time, likening the situation to players’ switching teams in the National Basketball Association.”

But aren’t these insurers worried that if they mistreat their customers, their enrollees will move to some other plan? Here’s the rarely told secret about health insurance in the Obamacare exchanges: insurers don’t care if heavy users of medical care go to some other plan. Getting rid of high-cost enrollees is actually good for the bottom line.

To appreciate how different health insurance has become, let’s compare it to the kind of casualty insurance people buy for their home or their cars.

Dennis Haysbert is the actor I remember best for playing the president of the United States in the Jack Bauer series, 24. You probably know him better as the spokesman for Allstate. In one commercial he is standing in front of a town that looks like it has been demolished by a tornado. “It took only two minutes for this town to be destroyed,” he says. And he ends by asking “Are you in good hands?”

The point of the commercial is self-evident. Casualty insurers know you don’t care about insurance until something bad happens. And the way they are pitching their products is: Once the bad thing happens, we are going to take care of you.

Virtually all casualty insurance advertisements carry this message, explicitly or implicitly. Nationwide used to run a commercial in which all kinds of catastrophes were caused by a Dennis-the-Menace type kid. In a State Farm ad, a baseball comes crashing through a living room window. Nationwide’s “Life comes at you fast” series features all kinds of misadventures. And of course, the Aflac commercials are all about unexpected mishaps.

Don’t be fooled. The new health law has disrupted coverage for millions, and driven up costs for millions more.

My favorite casualty insurer print ad is sponsored by Chubb. It features a man fishing in a small boat with his back turned to a catastrophe. He is about to go over what looks like Niagara Falls. Here’s the cutline: “Who insures you doesn’t matter. Until it does.”

Now let’s compare those messages to what we see in the health insurance exchange. Federal employees have been obtaining insurance in an exchange, similar to the Obamacare exchanges, for several decades. Every fall, during “open enrollment,” they select from among a dozen or so competing heath plans. In Washington, DC where the market is huge, insurers try to attract customers by running commercials on TV, in print and in other venues.

If the health insurers followed the lead of the casualty insurers, their ads would focus on what could go wrong and how good they are at treating the problems. After all, why do you need health insurance? Because you might get cancer, heart disease, or some other expensive-to-treat condition. And when that happens, you would like to be in a plan that give you access to the best doctors and the best facilities for your condition.

But in fact, this is what you never see in a health insurance commercial in Washington, DC. There is never a mention of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, AIDS or any other serious health condition. Instead, what you see are pictures of young healthy families. The implicit message is: if you look like the people in these photos, we want you.

What explains the difference between the health insurance and casualty insurance markets? In the latter people pay real prices that reflect real risks. In the former, no one is paying a premium that reflects the expected cost of his care. The healthy are being overcharged so that the sick can be undercharged. So insurers try to attract the healthy and avoid the sick.

But the perverse incentives don’t end after enrollment. The incentive then is to under-provide to the sick (to encourage their exodus and avoid attracting more of them) and over-provide to the healthy (to keep the ones they have and attract even more).

Rosenthal explains what this means for people who need care:

“For some, like Ms. Pineman, narrow networks can necessitate footing bills privately. For others, the constant changes in policy guidelines — annual shifts in what’s covered and what’s not, monthly shifts in which doctors are in and out of network — can produce surprise bills for services they assumed would be covered. For still others, the new fees are so confusing and unsupportable that they just avoid seeing doctors.”

So what’s the answer? In a previous Forbes post I argued that we can denationalize and deregulate the exchanges. And by instituting “health status insurance” we can have a market with real prices that gives real protection to people with pre-existing conditions.

There is no reason why the health insurance marketplace cannot work just as well as the market for homeowners insurance and auto liability insurance.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2015/02/11/how-obamacare-is-ruining-health-insurance/

Shami-Amourae
29th March 2015, 04:32 PM
Insurance is a scam period. It just means you're too dumb to save and manage your own wealth for a rainy day. You're adding a middle man who is doing it to make a profit at your expense.

palani
29th March 2015, 04:46 PM
Insurance is a scam period.

Congress involved themselves in insurance in the 1840s. Insurance is not common law where you assume responsibility for yourself and your actions. Insurance instead is maritime law. And there is still provisions that point that out ... scilicet, inland marine coverage.

Shami-Amourae
29th March 2015, 05:03 PM
Congress involved themselves in insurance in the 1840s. Insurance is not common law where you assume responsibility for yourself and your actions. Insurance instead is maritime law. And there is still provisions that point that out ... scilicet, inland marine coverage.

None of that means anything.

palani
29th March 2015, 05:09 PM
None of that means anything.
All of that means everything.

Shami-Amourae
29th March 2015, 05:18 PM
All of that means everything.

Where and to who? How is it practical in the real world?

palani
29th March 2015, 05:49 PM
Where and to who?
Here and to me.



How is it practical in the real world?
I avoid maritime law even harder than I avoid political planes. How can you avoid it if you don't know about it? Like wandering a swamp without knowing where the quicksand starts.

BrewTech
29th March 2015, 09:04 PM
All of that means everything.Honestly, it really doesn't mean everything. I mean, it might to you, but that ain't everything to anyone else.

midnight rambler
30th March 2015, 03:15 AM
Honestly, it really doesn't mean everything. I mean, it might to you, but that ain't everything to anyone else.

And that's the problem.

Glass
30th March 2015, 03:43 AM
I think you guys got the wrong end of the meaning everything. palani is not talking about how people feel about the subject or whether they comprehend it.

Insurance is for the cargo that is carried by vessels. In case of loss or damage to the cargo, insurance covers the "backer" of that particular enterprise. The enterprise being the "trafficking" of that cargo from one venue (location) to another venue. A captain is many times not the backer of the enterprise. Someone else often puts up the cash.

This originates from maritime activities of commerce. Commerce comes from, only ever came from trading across the high seas. Today you are in commerce using your person vessel (of dead souls). You are no different to any other vessel that traversed the high seas, trafficking wares. Trading under the flag of a "nation". In this world commerce is everything and the only thing. Also...you are in it. Like or not. Comprehend or not.

If someone else is putting up the cash to back you, they would get insurance. The best kind of insurance is the one that gets paid by the "cargo" and not by the backer. Even better if the insurance doesn't pay out and the backer owns the insurance enterprise as well. Win, Win.

The level of "cover" being provided for the money is a clear indication of the value of the cargo. Avoidance of providing the services is the same as denying but not so blunt. People can't quite realize the insurance company is just saying no in a round about way.

If it is more profitable for the backer or the insurer to let the cargo spoil, so be it. I think this is where the US is now. They are getting a clear indication of their value in the world of commerce. It's more profitable to let them spoil.

Insurance-acide.

palani
30th March 2015, 04:12 AM
Honestly, it really doesn't mean everything. I mean, it might to you, but that ain't everything to anyone else.
Glass does a better job leading people through the darkness than I do. I realize you guys get lost easily so I really do try to keep my waymarkers short.

monty
30th March 2015, 07:16 AM
http://thoughts-and-stuff-zwright.blogspot.com/2011/08/all-crime-is-commercial-say-what-thats.html

All Crimes Are Commercial.





http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HF2yHyv3gHk/Tlz9oq6M7WI/AAAAAAAAAgY/JCgpJpxFviY/s320/iStock_000003390628XSmall.jpg (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HF2yHyv3gHk/Tlz9oq6M7WI/AAAAAAAAAgY/JCgpJpxFviY/s1600/iStock_000003390628XSmall.jpg)


UCC - Law of Revealed and UN-Revealed Contracts


Just one more reason you should all get up to speed on the Law of the Land, "Uniform Commercial Code"

Code of Federal Regulations
27 C.F.R. § 72.11 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/)

Commercial crimes. Any of the following types of crimes (Federal or State): Offenses against the revenue laws; burglary; counterfeiting; forgery; kidnapping; larceny; robbery; illegal sale or possession of deadly weapons; prostitution (including soliciting, procuring, pandering, white slaving, keeping house of ill fame, and like offenses); extortion; swindling and confidence games; and attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or compounding any of the foregoing crimes. Addiction to narcotic drugs and use of marihuana will be treated as if such were commercial crime.

As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires, terms shall have the meanings ascribed in this section. Words in the plural form shall include the singular, and vice versa, and words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine. The terms “includes” and “including” do not exclude things not enumerated which are in the same general class. [Which of course means anything not specifically excluded from those enumerated such as Murder]

Since the Federal Corporation is just that, a corporation. It has no jurisdiction except with those that contract with it. Also see Congressional act of 1871 and USC Title 28, Part VI, chapter 176, sub chapter 176, subsection A, 3002 (15) “United States” means—(A) a Federal corporation;

The states illegally contracted with the federal corporation by passing the Uniform Commercial Code making themselves as well as the unsuspecting people subject to the Federal corporation and also to the states in their new commercial capacities. Therefore all of the laws (color of law) are contractual commercial laws and the remedy is UCC 1-308. The Uniform Commercial Code makes all crimes commercial only by contract as per 27 CFR 72.11.



http://www.ftjcfx.com/image-5391156-10413875 (http://www.kqzyfj.com/click-5391156-10413875)

monty
30th March 2015, 07:34 AM
If my memory serves me correctly it was in the early 1960's the U.S. Congress was attempting to gain control of state laws. They used the excuse traffic laws among the several states were not consistent. All motor vehicles were not consistent. Some had turn signals, others did not. Pickups only had stop lights on the left side. British motor bikes had the shifter and the brake opposite of US models. Congress used this argument to bullshit the states into adopting the UCC. By 1966 all the states were onboard. The Congress passed the Public Safety Act of 1966 (National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act). It has been all downhill since then.

Twisted Titan
30th March 2015, 11:42 AM
I told people again and again and again if you want to find out how good health care is going to be in this country when the government takes over ask a veteran how good their experiences when they go to the VA hospital