Insure us

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
having govt contracts that are keeping current employees busy is NOT the topic at hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Govt. spending is at the heart of the health care debate. This sentence implies that you might be collecting some Obama bucks. See, it isn't all black and white.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes Govt spendiong is at the heart of the debate, we arent talking healthcare right now we are talking about a bill that was passed, that was supposed to CREATE new jobs, it hasnt done what it was intended to do.

Govt spending in healthcare is different and will be discussed once a revised bill is passed back through Congress. As of now the old bill that the House approved is dead in the water thanks to Senator Brown.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We do some government contracts,and we were doing them before the current recession.I don't see how this has anything to do with the topic.Are you implying that everyone should work for the government?

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely not, and for the record, I get no govt. money whatsoever and have health insurance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad to hear that you don't take money from the government,and that your not a financial drain on our healthcare system.
 
The original intent of the thread was to highlight the raping of American's health care coverage by industry before Bull so ingraciously took it off topic.

The just of the spew posted by the opposition to any H/C reform is to Reaganize again, industries that have shown consistant and criminal neglect in maintaining policies that profit their bottom line ahead of the public trust that makes their business possible.

There are overtones of regulating business again in Washington, and thus the reason for factless and insane rhetoric about "socialism".



Insurers Post Record Profits
By Emily P. Walker, Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today
Published: February 12, 2010




WASHINGTON -- In the midst of a deep economic recession, America's health insurance companies increased their profits by 56% in 2009, a year that saw 2.7 million people lose their private coverage.

The nation's five largest for-profit insurers closed 2009 with a combined profit of $12.2 billion, according to a report by the advocacy group Health Care for American Now (HCAN).

"The outsize earnings are a vivid reminder that without comprehensive national health care reform, the gatekeepers of our broken health insurance system always will put the short-term interests of Wall Street before the needs of millions of patients and a national economy plagued by joblessness," the report said.

A spokesman for the nation's health insurers said their profits are reasonable and represent only a small part overall increase in health insurance costs.

The HCAN report attributed this year's profits largely to insurers' dropping coverage of 2.7 million people, who then moved onto public insurance plans such as Medicaid.

Under questioning from reporters, Richard Kirsch, national campaign manager for HCAN, conceded that insurance companies don't bear all the blame for eliminating people from their rolls. He said the recession induced many employers to cut back on benefits, including health plans. Also, many who were laid off lost their insurance coverage and were forced to enroll in Medicaid.

Even so, insurance companies have also offloaded their most expensive patients by canceling their policies and raising premiums drastically, Kirsch asserted in a Thursday press call.

Among the report's findings on specific insurance companies:

Wellpoint increased profits 91% from 2008 while it chopped 3.9% of its total enrollment.
United Health's profit increased 28% from 2008, while enrollment dropped by 3.4%
Cigna's profit increased 346% and enrollment dropped 5.5%
Humana's profit increased by 61% while enrollment decreased by 1.7%.
Aetna was the only company with a drop in profit and a gain in enrollment. The company's profit declined by 8% from 2008, and enrollment grew by 7%.

Lawmakers and critics who took part in the HCAN call said they were disgusted by the notion of insurance companies profiting while unemployment rates soar and more than 40 million people lack health insurance.

"How did they accomplish this feat in the midst of a sharp economic downturn that reduced wealth across the board?" asked Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.). "Easy. They delayed payments to doctors, hospitals, patients. They raised premiums, increased co-pays and deductibles."

California's largest insurer, Blue Cross, announced last week that it will raise premiums 30% to 39% for many of its 800,000 customers.

"Without reform, we're going to continue to see double-digit rate increases," Kirsch said. "Without requiring that everyone's covered, without regulating insurance companies, and without subsidies for people to make it more affordable, the data this year will continue unabated," Kirsch said.

The healthcare bills being considered in Congress would impose regulations on insurance companies, prohibiting them from denying insurance or canceling policies based on a pre-existing health condition. Both bills would also require insurance companies to spend money from premiums on healthcare, not on administrative costs.
 
In short, by dropping tens of thousands of paying clients, increasing the rates of current ones (and limiting coverage), the industry has dumped en masse, huge numbers of people onto the already-burdoned public health system.

It's welfare (and unprecedented profits) for the corporations at our expense, and a system that obviously has the undying support of the right-wing.

So the smoke and mirrors is that by resisting radical changes to the current corrupt system, the opposition to any health package being presented by the majority in Congress is actually still in the business of bankrupting America, after everything they just did to sink us.
 
Oak

Not one person here thinks we DONT need reform.

do you believe the old bill was perfect and should have been passed? how about the new bill that Obama has drafted? that one has the word tx in it 35 times!

what is your problem with business in the USA? you always go off on the longest posts in TB about how much you despise businesses......?!
 
[ QUOTE ]
no, I have never gotten unemployment benefits. So you only count as unemployed if you get benefits for it. I see.

[/ QUOTE ]

not saying that at all. the bill was created to make NEW jobs, it hasnt.

are you a business owner? how many employees if so? being unemployed for a short time because of having a slow winter is different from being laid off or fired, IMO.
 
[ QUOTE ]
old, we were filling positions of people who have moved on.

any more questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. I just thought the whole "continuing to grow" part was a bit odd considering the context of the conversation.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Like i have stated before, I do not own the company therefore I am npt at Liberty to discuss any of the private matters within this co.

Why drag my employer into this? What does that prove

[/ QUOTE ]

The only reason I linked to that post about you guy's looking for employees was to illustrate what appeared, to me, to be some inconsistencies in your comments. What I found interesting about the job post was this......
"continues to grow & has immediate positions available."

Which, to me, implies expansion and hiring more numbers of people. I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything. I just saw something that you posted that didn't jive with what you're saying in this thread. Can you at least admit that when you look at the jobs post it does seem odd(at least the wording of it) in the context of what you say about the stimulus bill.
I'm just saying its not all black and white.
 
We didn't fall headfirst into an economic depression. For a while it seemed we would witness a total collapse, thanks to the big traders and lenders and bought regulators and trusts holding other people's money. Memories fade, rhetoric repeats itself, and carefully reading what the Tea Party and "no to everything" minority in the Congress are saying, it's pretty much they lost power and want it back, at any costs.

The Republican elected from Mass. (Brown) said he'd follow the needs of his constituency and those he represents as opposed to the Party's demands. That's refreshing and honorable. It doesn't mean the leadership we have now is failing, it means - as shown by his support of the Jobs Bill - that things need to be done and the partisenship/fillibuster mentality of the current polarized House and Senate minorities is getting nothing done and threatening the nation as a whole.

Big monopolies need to restructure and enforement of the anti-trust laws that saved America before need to happen - health care needs to be primarily overseen by medical people and a consortium of people affected by and owning individual policies - not lawyers answering to investors.

Leaving Nursing homes alone in Texas (our current policy under a GOP governor) has led to massive abuse and what boils down to murder in many cases. Fraud runs rampant when a company is allowed to police itself - it's a fundamental flaw in the free enterprise system - the notion of "competition" is a fantasy when large companies consolidate and absorb and take-over smaller ones - WalMArt proving my case in point.

Tort reform meant to keep people from hitting a corrupt corporation where it hurt and they felt it - had nothing to do with hot coffee at McDonalds. It's an industry issue, not a public service for the good of the people.

Like I asked before - who is it that can oversee and regulate the companies who balance profit against the needs of the people who pay money to insure themselves against catastrophic events? We're looking at slim choices, and we're up against the insurance lobby and interests, yet all the major medical associations agree that things need to change and as it stands now - Wall Street is the determining factor, not illness or homes lost or loved ones dying. The government is all we have - it's suppossed to be of us to be for us, not the industry which showed clearly they only protect themselves.
 
Oak,
yes a government for us by us.Absolutely right!Many polls have shown that the majority does not want the current bill,it's that simple.nobody says we don't need to change the system.Your very first post in this thread you called the republicans obstructionists,and now you say that the republicans are mad and just want power back at any cost.Your totally wrong about that.The republican's and the democrats are fundamentally different on a social issue like health care.It has nothing to do with "big business"it's the fundamentals of the bill!You want to talk about lobbyists!What about all the special interests included in the current 100% democrat drafted bill?What about what this bill will cost?The democrats idea of bipartisan is for the republican's to give in to <u>ALL</u> democrat demands,but the democrats don't even want to hear what the republicans have to say,much less give in to any of there demands!This is all just politics as usual,anyone who voted for obama because they believed in his BS hope and change lies,is blind to the big picture.And if you think scott browns win is somehow because the democrats are on the right track...then you truly dont see the forest for the trees.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom