Empty promises on health care will haunt Obama

TexasBlue wrote:You about covered it (and better than I would have).

Cutting out the middle man (insurance) would (or should) bring down the cost of medical care. It removes the person having to do all the office work in submitting papers to the insurance companies. Of course, they would still exist for the same purpose but not overwhelmed as they are now.

Best part? The govt and insurance are out of the picture.

dblboggie wrote:

BubbleBliss wrote:
Yes, the government needs to pull out of the insurance sector in some areas, but it still needs to maintain a strong presence in it for the reasons I've stated before.
What needs to stop is the lawsuits against doctors and hospitals. Sure, if you get seriously injured because of careless acts or just because the hospital/doctor wants to save money on health standards, then you should be entitled to compensation.

Excellent. Now we're talking. I have no objection to valid government oversight of the insurance industry, but what we have today is not oversight but rather a series of regulatory dictates that hamper the industry's ability to offer products that consumers want, products that would be cheaper to purchase as they would not be mandated to cover all manner of things that many consumers don't need or want. We also have state laws that severely limit competition by prohibiting insurers from selling their policies across state lines. This gives big companies in states near monopoly status, and that is never good for the consumer.

I completely agree with you on the law suits! Some specialties have been especially hard hit by frivolous law suits, such as OBGYN specialists. There are some states where it got so bad that there were barely any doctors left that would deliver children. We need tort reform in a serious way as these suits have been driving up malpractice insurance premiums to insanely high levels and have forced doctors to practice "defensive medicine" (a new term that frivolous lawsuits gave birth to), meaning that they order every test under the sun for every patient, just to be safe. These things are part of the reason for our skyrocketing health care and health insurance costs.

At the very least, we need "loser pays" made the law of the land - and setting reasonable caps on settlement amounts.

BubbleBliss wrote:

dblboggie wrote:

BubbleBliss wrote:
Yes, the government needs to pull out of the insurance sector in some areas, but it still needs to maintain a strong presence in it for the reasons I've stated before.
What needs to stop is the lawsuits against doctors and hospitals. Sure, if you get seriously injured because of careless acts or just because the hospital/doctor wants to save money on health standards, then you should be entitled to compensation.

Excellent. Now we're talking. I have no objection to valid government oversight of the insurance industry, but what we have today is not oversight but rather a series of regulatory dictates that hamper the industry's ability to offer products that consumers want, products that would be cheaper to purchase as they would not be mandated to cover all manner of things that many consumers don't need or want. We also have state laws that severely limit competition by prohibiting insurers from selling their policies across state lines. This gives big companies in states near monopoly status, and that is never good for the consumer.

I completely agree with you on the law suits! Some specialties have been especially hard hit by frivolous law suits, such as OBGYN specialists. There are some states where it got so bad that there were barely any doctors left that would deliver children. We need tort reform in a serious way as these suits have been driving up malpractice insurance premiums to insanely high levels and have forced doctors to practice "defensive medicine" (a new term that frivolous lawsuits gave birth to), meaning that they order every test under the sun for every patient, just to be safe. These things are part of the reason for our skyrocketing health care and health insurance costs.

At the very least, we need "loser pays" made the law of the land - and setting reasonable caps on settlement amounts.

I guess we agree on this then.

BubbleBliss wrote:
I think I just saw a pig fly by....

BubbleBliss wrote:
I think I just saw a pig fly by....

BubbleBliss wrote:
Man, that article actually kinda turned me off. I don't wanna see a Rock Opera, I wanna see a damn rock concert. Guess I'll just wait for the next David Gilmour tour....