MPI Health Plan - Premiums for Dependents!

[Mirror]

How can the Waltons can make billions from Wal-Mart? Because, in part, of a superior interstate highway system and a safe (i.e. regulated) rail transport system.

I'd like to add my voice in support of the explanation Jim makes in this post.

It seems self-evident to me that everyone benefits from efficient roads and other infrastructure. But businesses that move tons of merchandise derive greater benefit than most individuals. And, investors in those businesses share in that benefit.

.......

David

People that ship their goods using the highway in heavy trucks, such as semi's, pay extra to do so. There is a 12% FEDERAL excise tax on the truck, then the HVUT or Heavy Vehicle Use Tax, then certain states have a HUT or Highway Use Tax for heavy trucks, This is all money that is paid above what you and I pay to use the roads. And then, of course, there is the tax that is paid on the diesel which is along the lines of the tax that regular drivers pay when we buy gas. So you see, the wealthy pay more to use the roads.

[cmgoodin]

Getting away from Politics and back to the cost of Health care. I think we all can see from the Bills and "Explanation of Benefits" that we receive from our insurance plans that there is a lot of "Imaginary Money" listed on those documents. That Imaginary Money is the totally fabricated "Cost of Medical treatment" that hospitals and Doctors offices bill to the insurance companies. Because we have a Health Care "Industry" driven by profit and totally controlled by the big Insurance Companies and Big Pharmaceutical companies they will always conspire to artificially force the price of medical care up. This allows the Insurance companies to convince you that there is no way you could afford your medical bills without those ever rising insurance premiums.

I found this great series of videos by a Doctor working within the system that explains the myth of increasing health care costs. And no, they are not due to Malpractice insurance costs.

[dfisk]

Interesting video. I've heard arguments for going to cash only based payment for health care, and completely forgoing insurance. I've never really investigated it in that much detail, but it seems like this guy is kind of leaning in that direction with the information he gives, even if he doesn't come out and say it.

That still doesn't mean that docs aren't paying more for malpractice insurance than what they make each year. This doctor barely scratches the surface of medical billing, and in such a short video, he really can't get into the guts of it, but it's really complicated. There was a great episode of This American Life that talked about this several months ago.

But what isn't clear here is what do things actually cost? This guy is showing what the hospital is billing vs. what it is paid, but he doesn't show what something really costs.

[Mirror]

Only to weak, weak mind.

Because the US has, in general, excellent publicly funded fire departments the price that businesses have to pay for insurance is lower than it would be if they didn't exist.

To a considerable degree. As the dollar is the world's reserve currency businesses here have a huge advantage over those in other countries, not to mention being able to borrow money at reduced rates of interest.

They pay for money transfers, and currency conversions, at a much lower rate than in other countries.

They don't "provide jobs". They invest in companies that need employees to operate. If and when they can avoid employing people they do, hence the rise of robots in manufacturing.

Your "Fair Tax" plan is anything but. It's presented by Americans For Fair Taxation, a group funded by conservative Texas businessmen who have hired a group of conservative economists (thing Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation) to pimp their regressive sales tax ideas that would, surprise, benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, the working class and the middle class.

Your post is quite confusing as now you are comparing America to other counties.

To a considerable degree. As the dollar is the world's reserve currency businesses here have a huge advantage over those in other countries, not to mention being able to borrow money at reduced rates of interest.

They pay for money transfers, and currency conversions, at a much lower rate than in other countries.

--------------------------------

In this statement you fail to say that you and every other citizen in the U.S. benefits in the same way - through lower fire insurance.

Because the US has, in general, excellent publicly funded fire departments the price that businesses have to pay for insurance is lower than it would be if they didn't exist.

Your statements do not show how the wealthy use MORE of the services that are paid by taxes than ordinary citizens. Only that they benefit from the same things that ordinary citizens also enjoy.

--------------------------

This statement is also confusing as I have never worked for a poor man.

They don't "provide jobs". They invest in companies that need employees to operate. If and when they can avoid employing people they do, hence the rise of robots in manufacturing.

-------------------------

Your "Fair Tax" plan is anything but. It's presented by Americans For Fair Taxation, a group funded by conservative Texas businessmen who have hired a group of conservative economists (thing Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation) to pimp their regressive sales tax ideas that would, surprise, benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, the working class and the middle class.

You throw out the idea of the Fair Tax because it is funded by conservative businessmen. This shows that you will only listen to idea's if they come from a liberal group. Quite close-minded if you ask me. What I like about the Fair Tax is that you tax yourself buy what you buy. There is no gun to your head saying "Give me your money or you're going to jail". You will say that it puts undo pressure on the poor. I don't think that food items ought to be taxed but everything else should. EVERYONE should pay taxes. They enjoy the privileges of citizenship too. It's B.S. that 1/2 the country is not paying taxes. Not only that but some are getting refunds that are more then the taxes they paid. Talk about unfair.

[cmgoodin]

Interesting video. I've heard arguments for going to cash only based payment for health care, and completely forgoing insurance. I've never really investigated it in that much detail, but it seems like this guy is kind of leaning in that direction with the information he gives, even if he doesn't come out and say it.

That still doesn't mean that docs aren't paying more for malpractice insurance than what they make each year. This doctor barely scratches the surface of medical billing, and in such a short video, he really can't get into the guts of it, but it's really complicated. There was a great episode of This American Life that talked about this several months ago.

But what isn't clear here is what do things actually cost? This guy is showing what the hospital is billing vs. what it is paid, but he doesn't show what something really costs.

If you go to the website and watch all 4 videos (The one I posted is a brief compilation of high points of the other four) you see that the cost of health care is less than what they will accept as payment from the insurance companies. Since My doctor seems to be driving his Mercedes to his home in Beverly Hills I don't think his practice is on the verge of bankruptcy even with the "deep discounts" given to insurance companies. If you watch the whole video He states that his malpractice insurance is $3000 per year. That is less than one quarter of what the average family spends a year on health insurance.

Also the Hospitals and Doctor Billing agencies are playing accounting games with the numbers. When an Uninsured or indigent person must be treated in the emergency room and that person can't pay the hyper-inflated bill. the Medical facilities count that as a LOSS of the full billed amount. They don't count it as a loss of the actual cost of providing the treatment. This is a little bit of legalized fraud that is perpetrated on their share holders and us taxpayers as they can easily use these trumped up loss numbers to pay no taxes and little dividends to stockholders.

Here is a link to the website where you can watch all 4 videos or download the PDF of the 60 something page text which includes detailed breakdowns of billing and actual costs.

http://truecostofhea...eo_presentation

[johnpaul215]

The idea of a flat tax on income is designed to pander to the wealthy among us. I prefer a progressive income tax in which the wealthy, who benefit the most from what this country provides in terms of legal systems, financial regulations, etc., pay somewhat more than their poorer brethren.

There are different attempts at a flat tax. Like somebody pointed out elsewhere, the really wealthy often make their big bucks off investments and no salary or paychecks. In general it seems like they follow a "all the $ you made this year, pay 13%" or whatever. That's paychecks, bonuses, dividends, interest, return on investments, sale of stocks (that made you money). In that sense, I'm not sure the super wealthy really pay a whole lot more/less than they do today. The seemingly agreed Mitt Romney number was about 14% if I remember right, and that's under the current system. I think he's probably a valid example of a very wealthy 1% type. That's about what flat tax advocates have called for, so for him it's not a big change.

[Jeff Wexler]

That still doesn't mean that docs aren't paying more for malpractice insurance than what they make each year.

But what isn't clear here is what do things actually cost? This guy is showing what the hospital is billing vs. what it is paid, but he doesn't show what something really costs.

Another factor I was going to write something about is regarding the cost of medical devices, the machines, the supplies used, etc. All of these things have a malpractice-liability-litigation cost built in. Simple example: an x-ray machine that is to be used in a manufacturing plant as part of the production of a product will have one cost, and an x-ray machine used in a hospital in a medical setting will have a much higher cost --- and the two machines may be almost identical in their technology utilized, cost to manufacture, etc.

[dfisk]

You really see extremely high malpractice insurance with surgeons, not GPs. The main surgeons in my dad's cardiology group have extremely high malpractice insurance, even if they have never been sued. The higher the risk, the higher the malpractice insurance. His group is one of the very few in the state of Illinois that will do heart surgery on newborns. My father has been involved in numerous frivolous lawsuits over the years where he has had to testify. The amount of time a surgeon has to spend in court is a loss to the hospital and productivity, as well as a loss in income for the surgeon. Of all of the medical malpractice suits my father's group has been involved with, none of them ever found my father's group at fault. Granted, this is a small portion of the overall cost of medical care, but is a good example of wasted money. The information Courtney linked to is actually pretty intriguing. I am going to have to investigate it further. It may make me re-evaluate some positions.

[Henchman]

Yes, it's clear. Those who are covered say "fuck the poor. They can die like dogs".

Even though they work their asses off for what little they do have.

No. The entire medical field, both providers and insurers, needs to be heavily regulated and controlled by the government, when it comes to charging, and getting paid.

No more variable rates.

[OmahaAudio]

I've heard arguments for going to cash only based payment for health care, and completely forgoing insurance.

Go for it. Good luck if that "cancer" thing ever shows up or if you or a loved one is involved in a traffic accident. If you're crazy enough to take that chance and risk everything you now own or might make or own in the future....

[OmahaAudio]

Your post is quite confusing as now you are comparing America to other counties.

It's only really confusing to someone that hasn't been paying attention.

This statement is also confusing as I have never worked for a poor man.

How do you know?

You throw out the idea of the Fair Tax because it is funded by conservative businessmen.

I dismiss the idea because it's a bad one. The fact that the propaganda in favor of the so-called (and inaccurately named) "Fair Tax" is funded by wealthy conservatives is just further proof that it is, in truth, a large stinking pile of BS.

[OmahaAudio]

You really see extremely high malpractice insurance with surgeons, not GPs.

The biggest reason for high malpractice insurance premiums in the medical field is that said medical field refuses to self-police and rid itself of those few practitioners that (statistically speaking) fuck up.

[dfisk]

Go for it. Good luck if that "cancer" thing ever shows up or if you or a loved one is involved in a traffic accident. If you're crazy enough to take that chance and risk everything you now own or might make or own in the future....

That's very true. The very idea of insurance is to cover catastrophic stuff, like the things you describe. Regular check ups and visits to your GP were not originally supposed to be paid for by insurance. When you look at the info Courtney linked to, the claim is that doctors are billing large amounts for stuff and they don't know what they are really getting paid. If your GP was on a cash only basis, they'd know exactly what they are getting paid, and I can tell you that if it were on a cash only basis, I'd be paying a lot less per year than what I am paying in insurance premiums right now. You also have to take into account that the quality of your insurance coverage is going to vary wildly from state to state. In Nevada I had a great PPO that was less than the HMO I have here in California. My premium is the highest it's ever been and the co-pays are very high. I'm pretty much paying double what I did in Vegas for worse coverage. If we had a single payer system, this would all be a non-issue, but the question is, how can the US realistically do that? Just taxing the rich won't do it. Stopping wars won't cover it, since that money is borrowed money right now. We have to figure out how to cut spending and raise revenue fairly for everyone, while at the same time not have a giant government system that is inefficient as everything else the government does.

[Henchman]

Dfisk, the question isn't how America can do a single payer system.

The question is, how can we not?

[Henchman]

Every person I see who talks about how good a far tax system is, is clearly displaying their ignorance, and lack of proper information on th subject.

Oh, and with the disappearance of tax write offs for property tax and mortgage interest, you can say hello to another realty crisis. As your ill see a lot if people losing their homes.

[Henchman]

Stopping wars and shrinking the military budget is a very good start.

[dfisk]

Stopping wars and shrinking the military budget is a very good start.

I definitely agree with this sentiment, but it's not the be all end all, but it is a HUGE piece of the puzzle to getting to the goal of a single payer system. It's the one thing the US does more than most countries, and is a big reason I stated earlier of the hurdle of the US getting to a single payer system.

I like the fair tax idea, but I'm not saying I couldn't be persuaded from that. If we got rid of all tax write offs, we'd have to figure out a way to keep mortgage interest rates low. I don't get to write off credit card interest. What's the difference? It's interest on borrowed money. Of course, I have always been a renter, and in this current economy, I've never seen the advantage to buying a home, but that's just me, and I'm sure someone could eloquently argue the case for buying a home. I just like the idea of not being tied to a house for a long time with having to worry about re-sale value, and I like the fact that if something goes wrong with the house I'm in, I'm not on the hook to fix it. The owner is. It's a lot less stress for me. But that's just my personal opinion on the matter and doesn't make someone else's opinion to buy a home any less valid. I guess I've gotten so used to moving so much I've never felt comfortable with the idea of buying a house and being stuck with it.

You mentioned your recent experience with the health care in Holland. Do you have more details on how all that works? I'm not familiar with the system over there (only been to Amsterdam twice, and that was for IBC, so I never got to see any of the country outside of the city). What can we learn from that system here in the US that we could apply here? I'm guessing it's not just a money thing but a cultural thing as well? I could be wrong? I feel we need should be open to ideas from other countries and try to adopt works well..but not just adopt what works well but understand why it works well, and see if we can make that work here. We need to understand how and why things work before we can implement those things here, otherwise our government will screw it up. That's the thing with the US government that most people from other countries don't understand. The US federal government is really great at screwing things up, no matter how well intentioned.

[OmahaAudio]

The very idea of insurance is to cover catastrophic stuff

The idea of insurance is that a group of people, the larger the better, contribute relatively small amounts of money so that statistically unlikely problems (in individual terms) can be solved without the individuals taking part risking destitution, bankruptcy or death. Anything can be insured against, catastrophic or not, as long as participants in the "pool" agree.

Some of the biggest problems with America's health care system is that it isn't really a system. It's a hodge-podge of of conflicting systems and interests that result in a poorly run and inefficient collection of people and organizations that try to make more money because that's what they have been taught is success.

Instead of making medical students go into hock for hundreds of thousands of dollars why not offer qualified applicants a free medical education so long as they agree to work within a real health care system designed for the benefit of patients? They could a decent living and be debt free.

[OmahaAudio]

If we had a single payer system, this would all be a non-issue, but the question is, how can the US realistically do that?

The Clinton Administration came up with an excellent plan for a single payer system back in the 1990s. There have been other plans presented as far back as the Truman Administration.

[Mirror]

It's only really confusing to someone that hasn't been paying attention.

How do you know?

I dismiss the idea because it's a bad one. The fact that the propaganda in favor of the so-called (and inaccurately named) "Fair Tax" is funded by wealthy conservatives is just further proof that it is, in truth, a large stinking pile of BS.

These can't really be your answers. How about actually answering the question. I'll restate it:

Please explain how the wealthy use more of what taxes pay for.

[dfisk]

Instead of making medical students go into hock for hundreds of thousands of dollars why not offer qualified applicants a free medical education so long as they agree to work within a real health care system designed for the benefit of patients? They could a decent living and be debt free.

I like this idea, but education costs money. Educators aren't going to work for free unless it would be taxpayer subsidized, which is something I would actually support.

[Henchman]

These can't really be your answers. How about actually answering the question. I'll restate it:

That's fucking rich, coming from a guy who avoids answering questions he doesn't like.

[Henchman]

I like this idea, but education costs money. Educators aren't going to work for free unless it would be taxpayer subsidized, which is something I would actually support.

Again. They are able to do this in other countries.

People there do not come out of school,tens of thousands or hundred of thousand of dollars in debt.

Why is that?

[Jeff Wexler]

You mentioned your recent experience with the health care in Holland. Do you have more details on how all that works? I'm not familiar with the system over there (only been to Amsterdam twice, and that was for IBC, so I never got to see any of the country outside of the city). What can we learn from that system here in the US that we could apply here? I'm guessing it's not just a money thing but a cultural thing as well? I could be wrong? I feel we need should be open to ideas from other countries and try to adopt works well..but not just adopt what works well but understand why it works well, and see if we can make that work here.

I will recommend, again, "Sick Around The World" documentary shown on PBS in 2008. For me, this has been THE definitive source for understanding what is done in other countries, what works, what doesn't, and WHY. For anyone truly interested in this issue, it is a must see.

[johnpaul215]

Stopping wars and shrinking the military budget is a very good start.

I saw some article about "if we go over the fiscal cliff, it could cost our state XXXX jobs. If you dug down, a lot of it was due to defense contractors not getting to go ahead with new orders. Military spend has long been one of the worse pork situations. There are a lot of things bought for the military that the military doesn't even want, but the people in congress are "creating jobs" in their home state.

This is from October: http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/army-to-congress-thanks-but-no-tanks/

To be exact, 173 House members - Democrats and Republicans - sent a letter April 20 to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, urging him to continue supporting their decision to produce more tanks.