Does Anybody Truly Genuinely Believe That We Are Able To Have Health Reform Without Reigning Within The Insurance Providers?

[ruelle]

In Oregon, they're attempting to function as the design for well being-care reform. They've now managed to get feasible to assure 000 more youngsters, 80 and 35,000 more individuals. How...You ask? Difficult the insurance coverage providers making use of a 1% duty. Appears a tiny price tag in order for them to pay, however it wasn't paid by them. Instantaneously This tax have been passed by them onto the covered. I'm ready to invest 1% for assisting others, even so it was meant to function as the insurance providers' obligation. I actually do not see until they're compelled to do this by competing against a public decision insurance providers competing to supply price-powerful protection. Agree? Differ?

[cumhea]

That is virtually what'll occur nationally until some thing is performed to market much more competitors. The large providers never have any motivation to place up the line on premiums generally, which explains why they truly are prone to drop their objections to the alter bill if it gets out-of committee with out at the extremely least a trigger supply for a neighborhood choice.Some Op-Ed I study these days - and I've been studying an excessive quantity of it - indicates that the concomitant increases in premiums that will be added on by challenging insurance providers will sooner or later lower costs, given that organizations will be necessary to obtain less coverage or boost employee positive aspects. That looks nuts to me.

[Duron]

While the Federal Government recognized the getaway system AND the 40-hour workweek by providing each of these to workers which suggestions have been subsequently applied by every single single other firm, therefore the Federal Government engaging in healthcare may possibly lead to modify in the private-sector merely by virtue to be the largest 1 carrying it out, creating the typical "Why can not we. . .?" They do not require definitely to force one particular to do one thing. It really is going to occur. danielpauldavis 51 weeks previously Please register to provide a supplement. Please confirm your account to provide a supplement. Please register to provide a note. Please confirm your account to deliver a message.

[Fane]

[han]

[Cahal]

Disagree TOTALLY! The government option is not about competition.  If you had followed this debate for any amount of time you would realize those who now try to promote the "government option" using the words "choice" and "competition, just a short time ago, and some still now, were talking SINGLE PAYER.  SINGLE PAYER is their goal, single payer means MONOPOLY, single payer means NO CHOICE, NO COMPETION, one option which is the GOVERNMENT!  They only use the words "choice" and "competition" because they have taken polls and know these words are popular, they use these words like bait for fish(us) which they wish to FRY!   No it(single payer) won?t happen immediately, it may take 5, 10 or 15 years but the government option will eventually become the ONLY option as they do not need to MAKE a profit, they can just TAKE their profit, in the form of taxes.   Also, they will make the RULES which other companies must abide by, so there will not be any real OPTION!    Notice, Democrats including Obama saying just what I said, listen carefully, please -   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk   If Government has total control they can save money, HOW?  By denying care, putting people to sleep like dogs!  Making people stand in line, not allowing even cash payments.  They would have total control over our lives, that is what the government option is about - Totalitarian RULE - a nations of slaves and few elite government RULERS!    The best way to encourage CHOICE and COMPETITION is to lift government regulation and let the thousands of insurance companies that exist in the United States compete across state lines.  Right now, that is not allowed and this restriction greatly hinders competition as each state allows only certain insurance companies access to the people, why, because Government wants CONTROL!   Christian 51 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Carmel]

You are right imho - affordable health care reform cannot happen without some of the profits of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies being cut. Like you, though, I believe they would pass the added fees or taxes right back to the consumers. Competition does seem like a viable way to get these companies to lower prices and profits.

[banys]

We all know it will take some compromise. What many forget it that this is the negotiating phase. This is when we decide how much each group will pay and everyone wants the "upper hand." So there is something to fight for and we are fighting for it. Lots of money to be made.Good old USA politics.

[Derryl]

anniemdaffodils said: 2 You are right imho - affordable health care reform cannot happen without some of the profits of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies being cut. Like you, though, I believe they would pass the added fees or taxes right back to the consumers. Competition does seem like a viable way to get these companies to lower prices and profits. 51 months ago

[Brannt]

IchtheosaurusRex said: 3 That's pretty much what will happen nationally unless something is done to foster more competition. The big insurers have no incentive to hold the line on premiums otherwise, which is why they're likely to drop their objections to the reform bill if it gets out of committee without at least a trigger provision for a public option.Some Op-Ed I read this morning - and I've been reading too much of it - suggests that the concomitant increases in premiums that will be brought on by taxing insurance companies will ultimately drive down costs, because employers will be compelled to buy less coverage or raise employee contributions. That seems nuts to me. 51 months ago