moreluck
golden ticket member
To Democrats: We're gonna win!
Yeah, like Charlie Sheen!!
Newt Gingrich Announces His Candidacy
- Thread starter MrFedEx
- Start date
Yeah, like Charlie Sheen!!
How so? Why are the costs going up everywhere else without said regulation? I'm not even reluctant about it. Costs go up. Doing nothing fails to keep costs from going up as well. Where is the direct relationship if the cost goes up with or without the regulation?
brett636
Well-Known Member
When you tell an insurance company they HAVE to insure a person for certain items it increases the costs for that insurer to insure each person for those increased number of circumstances. Those cost increases are generally pushed onto the consumers of health insurance increasing costs. You are right that costs have been going up, but the rate of increase has gone up since the legislation has been put into place.
packageguy
Well-Known Member
The gang who could not shoot staight
AV8,
The claims I made, are not my claims, but the claims of the current govenor of Mass. Here, in a story on the subject, hear the current gov's own words.
Patrick says Romney plays both sides on health care
By Robert Weisman
Globe Staff / May 14, 2011
WALTHAM — Governor Deval Patrick, calling for tougher measures to control health care costs in Massachusetts, says Mitt Romney was playing politics in a Thursday speech in which the former governor stood by his role in crafting the state’s 2006 health care overhaul law while deriding President Obama’s national effort to expand health care coverage.
In an interview after his address yesterday before the annual meeting of the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, a business trade group, Patrick suggested Romney’s presidential ambitions were coloring his opinion of the law championed by Obama.
“It’s difficult to see how an acknowledged success in Massachusetts can become a presumptive failure nationally,’’ Patrick said. “But you know, this is more about politics than policy.’’
Romney’s campaign staff didn’t have a response to Patrick’s comments yesterday.
The two men have traded barbs in recent months as Romney has prepared for his anticipated presidential campaign and Patrick has taken a higher profile as a major spokesman for Obama’s reelection campaign.
Patrick has sought to embarrass Romney among conservative Republicans by praising his key role in the Massachusetts heath care overhaul. Romney, for his part, has criticized Patrick for policies that Romney contends have pushed up health care costs.
Yesterday, Patrick told about 600 business leaders at the Waltham Westin Hotel that the state’s five-year-old health care law has been a success, bringing medical insurance coverage to 98 percent of Massachusetts residents. The next step, he said, is to give doctors, hospitals, and insurers “tools’’ to cut costs.
“For five years now, universal coverage has been working in Massachusetts,’’ he said. “And I am proud that we are the model for the affordable care act that the president signed into law last year. But health care premiums continue to increase at an unsustainable rate. It’s not a challenge unique to Massachusetts and it has nothing to do with our health care reform.’’
Patrick said a bill he introduced in February aims to ease the cost of insurance premiums for businesses so they can add more jobs to their payrolls.
“If they don’t start hiring, we don’t get a recovery,’’ he said. “It’s as simple as that.’’
Hearings on Patrick’s bill on premiums are scheduled to begin Monday on Beacon Hill. The bill would give the governor the authority to review contracts between health insurers and health care providers, such as hospitals or doctors’ groups, to determine whether the fees paid to providers are appropriate before approving insurance rates.
It would also formalize plans to shift 1.7 million state workers, Medicaid recipients, and other residents with state-subsidized health insurance to a new “global payment’’ system in which providers would be given an annual budget to handle each patient’s care. This would replace the current fee-for-service system that is blamed for driving up costs.Continued...
The claims I made, are not my claims, but the claims of the current govenor of Mass. Here, in a story on the subject, hear the current gov's own words.
Patrick says Romney plays both sides on health care
By Robert Weisman
Globe Staff / May 14, 2011
WALTHAM — Governor Deval Patrick, calling for tougher measures to control health care costs in Massachusetts, says Mitt Romney was playing politics in a Thursday speech in which the former governor stood by his role in crafting the state’s 2006 health care overhaul law while deriding President Obama’s national effort to expand health care coverage.
In an interview after his address yesterday before the annual meeting of the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, a business trade group, Patrick suggested Romney’s presidential ambitions were coloring his opinion of the law championed by Obama.
“It’s difficult to see how an acknowledged success in Massachusetts can become a presumptive failure nationally,’’ Patrick said. “But you know, this is more about politics than policy.’’
Romney’s campaign staff didn’t have a response to Patrick’s comments yesterday.
The two men have traded barbs in recent months as Romney has prepared for his anticipated presidential campaign and Patrick has taken a higher profile as a major spokesman for Obama’s reelection campaign.
Patrick has sought to embarrass Romney among conservative Republicans by praising his key role in the Massachusetts heath care overhaul. Romney, for his part, has criticized Patrick for policies that Romney contends have pushed up health care costs.
Yesterday, Patrick told about 600 business leaders at the Waltham Westin Hotel that the state’s five-year-old health care law has been a success, bringing medical insurance coverage to 98 percent of Massachusetts residents. The next step, he said, is to give doctors, hospitals, and insurers “tools’’ to cut costs.
“For five years now, universal coverage has been working in Massachusetts,’’ he said. “And I am proud that we are the model for the affordable care act that the president signed into law last year. But health care premiums continue to increase at an unsustainable rate. It’s not a challenge unique to Massachusetts and it has nothing to do with our health care reform.’’
Patrick said a bill he introduced in February aims to ease the cost of insurance premiums for businesses so they can add more jobs to their payrolls.
“If they don’t start hiring, we don’t get a recovery,’’ he said. “It’s as simple as that.’’
Hearings on Patrick’s bill on premiums are scheduled to begin Monday on Beacon Hill. The bill would give the governor the authority to review contracts between health insurers and health care providers, such as hospitals or doctors’ groups, to determine whether the fees paid to providers are appropriate before approving insurance rates.
It would also formalize plans to shift 1.7 million state workers, Medicaid recipients, and other residents with state-subsidized health insurance to a new “global payment’’ system in which providers would be given an annual budget to handle each patient’s care. This would replace the current fee-for-service system that is blamed for driving up costs.Continued...
The cost of health insurance has skyrockets for 20 years my friend. Legislation has nothing to do with it. HIGHER PROFITS is the only motivator. Did you miss the senate hearings on the subject?
Under bush, health premiums increased by the largest percentage of any other time in history. Thats 8 solid years of increases. What do you think contributed to that? There was no obamacare then..so explain it?
Peace.
Again moreluck, health premiums has risen for 20 straight years, YOU EXPLAIN IT.
Peace
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
Dude you just proved yourself incorrect.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
We've had more and more government regulation and more and more government spending. The problems keep getting worse yet you call for more spending and more regulation. There is another view and it just reminded me of this video. I get a kick out of it.
I wont ever accuse you of comprehension, but what he is talking about is PREMIUMS and not the cost of health care. There is a difference between the cost of a service and a cost of a health plan. What he said was the cost of services is down, however, and its a BIG however, the cost of PREMIUMS contunues to rise despite the lower costs of service.
They have classes in your local JR college in case you need a refresher course.
Peace.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...roves-200-more-new-healthcare-reform-waivers-
The Obama administration approved 204 new waivers to Democrats' healthcare reform law over the past month, bringing the total to 1,372.
Hmm, the cost of premuims is rising because so many plans with all their millions of subscribers are dropping out, thus less money flows in making the few left pay more than their fair share.
I would strongly suggest if so many need to have waviers then the whole law must be flawed.
The Obama administration approved 204 new waivers to Democrats' healthcare reform law over the past month, bringing the total to 1,372.
Hmm, the cost of premuims is rising because so many plans with all their millions of subscribers are dropping out, thus less money flows in making the few left pay more than their fair share.
I would strongly suggest if so many need to have waviers then the whole law must be flawed.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Your reasoning is flawed. When are you going to learn that Tea-Baggers are useful pawns for the insurance industry to do with as they please?
But the rate of increase also has gone up in other places as well, 30% and more so the corelation with the legislation simply does not exist. What if I were to say that the stock market went up because of the stimulus? While it may be partially true and we could look at the numbers and it would show an increase from 2008 until now, I think we can agree that it is more complicated than that. I think we have the same situation with health care legislation and the costs associated with them. While legislation may play a role, the extent of that role is highly debatable and not easily quantified.
trplnkl
555
Why not point out the actual "flaws' in his reasoning with facts instead of blaming a group of people who have no control over the laws or the insurance industry? This just points out the fact that you have nothing, nothing but hate for anything or anyone on the right. Argue the issue with facts and not the left wing agenda to demean the other side.
I did in the post prior to yours and yet you answer him instead. Explain, please.
island1fox
Well-Known Member
To Democrats: We're gonna win!
Hows that win working for you ??? Sounds a little bit like Charlie S. ---Winning ???
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
So sorry, but the insurance companies are just like the oil companies. They both make windfall profits off consumers who must pay or else. Your (and others) support for these industries goes hand in hand with the Republican agenda, which is that business comes first, not the consumer. Your GOP friends would love to force you into having an insurance voucher, which wouldn't cover your costs, but would help the insurance industry tremendously. Your GOP friends want to continue subsidizing the oil industry, which is making record profits by gouging you at the pump. Protection for industry is what the Republicans are all about, and you are useful idiots because the Right is completely behind that philosophy. Got it?
