Were free enterprise the real question about health care, doctors would have their own billing departments (which they generally do anyway) and all price and cost controls would be irrellevent. Today the cost controls such as limitations on coverage and exclusions would disappear and the doctors could charge whatever they deemed fair for service.

Insurance is not neccessary really. It was set up by doctors to be sure they got paid and the job of collection of money was left to the insurance companies. Of course insurance companies want to be profitable so they limit benefits, inflate costs to the consumer, and generally make it hard to get much done without a lot of pre-legal protection moves, etc.

The other industrialized nations dont rely on insurance companies at all. They do exist but do so as an option to provide coverage and benefit over and above what the state provides at no charge to the consumer. With this arrangement, DOCTORS make decisions and not accountants.

Both McCain and Hillary are not going to take on big insurance. They both want to leave the middleman in the picture and insure the cost of healthcare remains high (and the profits too!)

Actually this is just plain false.

Several countries spring to mind that use insurance companies for national healthcare - Swizerland for one.

I was thinking of England and Canada, but insurance companies there are not controlling the medical care-they do here.

At least admit the truth that these companies are creating an artificial layer to business between the customer (patient) and the doctor. The doctor would normally treat you with the best solution, but if there is a cheaper way that is what the insurance company will insist on.

The fact is that the high cost of health care is caused by insurance companies. I have even talked with doctors who claim they have to charge a lot more money for things because they expect to be paid less than they charge (charging $100 in order to get $50 basically). Insurance companies blame the doctors and the drug companies for the high cost, but their cost controls drive prices up and in the end the one who suffers the most is the consumer-paying prices for healt care comparable to mortgages. A Blue Cross Blue Shield HMO family plan is over 1000 dollars per month whether you use it or not. Fact.

Are you saying the insurance companies are intentionally damaging their own business? By driving up the cost of health care, they're driving up the cost of health insurance, meaning fewer customer, meaning less profits. I've heard them being accused of being evil, but not of being stupid.

Hey I'm English and as pro UHC as it gets (in fact I had a free doctor's visit just last week), but you don't do the cause any favours when you don't acknowledge being called out on factual errors, it makes you look naive and partisan.

If you were "thinking of England and Canada", why did you talk about /all/ other rich countries? Just admit you were wrong and we can move on.

Just ask John Edwards. Doctors buy insurance specifically for this reason. If you don't think so, you're naive.

Congress will never confront this problem. Sure, the insurance companies have a huge lobby in the Congress, but, trial lawyers are going to bend the ears the of Congress to keep the status quo.

I have posted this before, you want to lower health cost care, make our civil law a loser pays system similar to Britain and half of this crap would stop before it even reached the courtroom!

I have yet to see an average Englishman of woman with straight teeth!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

HAHAHAHA your English sucks.

England and Canada (our closest cultural neighbors) both have UHC and insurance companies to suppliment what you get for free. So you dont mind paying a little more to not wait in a line-fine-pay for the privledge. You want a private room vs sharing it with someone else-again pay for that privledge.

And yes, insurance companies DO drive costs up and with those higher costs come bigger profits (actually oil companies are a good comparison-they make more when their product costs them more). Also keep in mind that insurance companies are competing for business so they need to make a profit without relying on getting everyone on their plan-thus even Blue Cross has "crappy"plans that dont pay much but are also cheaper to buy. I had a version of it once that only paid a maximum yearly per person benefit of $1,500 unless you were hospitalized-and then it paid 80% minus a deductable--and that plan cost me over $500 a month.

Worst of all, when you are already down and out (like a job loss or a disabling injury) you must pay the premiums of lose your coverage--many people are left chosing between paying their mortgage and keeping their insurance (at $1000 a month if you pay if yourself you can understand this).

As someone who knows the insurance industry well, collecting benefits can be a real pain in the neck (couldnt resist) but if you dont pay your premiums they can really pretend you dont exist and the bills without the insurance are astronomical. The top two reasons people go bankrupt are job loss and medical expenses. Suprised?

I agree RML, it's a messed-up system that doesn't favor the consumer. And it stinks even worse when it tarnishes what should be a moral endeavor, trying to help sick people. Pryoslice isn't thinking straight when he says you're accusations would amount to Insurance companies hampering their own business, and what kind of business would do that? This isn't the same kind of market, because it isn't possible to really uproot a giant health insurance corp. They have lobbyists and politicians trending toward legislation them into a monopoly. They are missing (but not completely) a significant business expense that every other business deals with (that is paying for your business' insurance- they do have insurers, but it amounts to them claiming risks and paying out to their dad and passing that cost along within the risks and costs they package for normal consumers). They are further entrenched into a system of loaning, providing a secondary level of asset allocation. You know that huge skyscraper downtown? Yeah, it must cost several billion to build. That wealthier-than-god commercial contracting firm can't fund that all themselves, so they go to the biggest bank in the US for a loan. The biggest bank in the US also doesn't have enough, so the bank goes to....Insurance companies to underwrite that astronomical integer preceded by a "$".

So, Insurance companies are not too worried about quality products being delivered to consumers in order to maintain a customer base. Getting sick isn't going out of style, it can't. And while rates factor in a nationwide catastrophe, Insurance companies have already calculated that cost, we've paid more than half of it for them, and it probably won't happen. In the meantime, they get to play the banker in our real-life game of monopoly. If something does happen that tempts the limits of the risks they've claimed and priced for, they'll fight ever last dime they promised anyways, and even then if it stretches them thin, they'll have a decimated list of employers who can't pay back those project and contracting loans, they'll collect from THEM, and they'll simply become the largest real estate player. They have an untouchable position in our economy, and it's silly to think that they give two shits about market influences.

evensteven:

Just ask John Edwards. Doctors buy insurance specifically for this reason. If you don't think so, you're naive.

Congress will never confront this problem. Sure, the insurance companies have a huge lobby in the Congress, but, trial lawyers are going to bend the ears the of Congress to keep the status quo.

I have posted this before, you want to lower health cost care, make our civil law a loser pays system similar to Britain and half of this crap would stop before it even reached the courtroom!

Are you talking about med malpractice insurance? Cause that's not exactly the same thing as health insurance, although it does affect the cost of healthcare.

Many civil suits do end up being "loser pays" because in most jurisdictions the judge has the power to get the loser to pay the winner's attorney fees. And most of this crap does stop before it reaches the courtroom becuase most cases settle before trial.

Trial lawyers cant do a thing about regular good health care-only about mistakes. Many people (most in fact) dont spend their time trying to get money out of the doctors-they are just desperately trying to afford their basic services.

While I agree that malpractice needs more controls and limits (other than gross incompetence or intentional harm), I dont believe the real problems are caused by legal issues. Post HIPPA, doctors offices and hospitals are quite safe from general nuisance lawsuits-to the point that their adherence to HIPPA generally causes more complications and confusions to add to other frustrations.

The "problem" is as simple as insurance costs too much and has too any loopholes to keep people from being covered. Affordable insurance may be "insurance" but it also tends to leave a lot of gaps and unfortunately sometimes having insurance actually raises the costs of the services (cash customers often get charged less).

Those that dont complain about health care have it through an employer or a spouses employer and almost never know how much it costs. If people had to actually pay for their own insurance (the good plans that is) they would need to choose between the mortgage and their health plan.

They should never even make it to a settlement in the first place!!

A elderly woman spills hot coffee on herself and gets 2.86 million?

Doctors and Hospitals are faced with this type of crap daily.

Loser pays would eliminate the scheister ambulance chasers from even filing this type of crap!

"The doctor would normally treat you with the best solution, but if there is a cheaper way that is what the insurance company will insist on."

This seems to be true and consistent with my experience in HMO's. Cost was all important, real results less so. Older, less reliable, more painfull, but much cheaper diagnostic tests and treatments were the order of the day.

I now have a personal physican, pay him directly, he works for me, not a insurence company. My health has vastly improved. Suddenly conditions that I had to learn to live with were cureable, Undiagnosible problems diagnosed and cured. Unrepairable damadge now repaired after skilled surgery. I do my own insurence billing, and eat the difference.

Frankly, life is much less painfull now.

Exactly. Insurance companies look to control costs and maintain their own profits-they are NOT in the business of making you healthier or happier.

They represent a middle man between you and your doctor and one with a whole different agenda.