Health Care Debate - New Lenox, IL

[rich]

put more burdon on the tax payer and too you be wateing months to year to see a DR no obma

[PreferToSupportE conomy]

health insurance is not a right. health care should be priced at an affordable rate that anyone can afford. insurance of any kind should only be used to help with unexpected costs and reduce overall risk.

Since when is it a good idea to eliminate an industry and replace with government control??

[Kevin]

Cannot trust a politician

[Huh]

It's more than a Health Bill my friends... It is really a government take over. None of the issues they say will cost less will do anything but cost you & I more "and" we will be forced to submit to the government rules.

This is tyrany.... Please be ready to vote these Democratic leaders out in 2010. Yes, I say Democratic leaders (not because Democrats are bad, but Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Frank & Obama are the leaders).

[Single Payer]

Since when is it a good idea to eliminate an industry and replace with government control??

We don't have private police, fire, military, air traffic controllers, health departments, etc. You get the idea. There are some areas where the profit motive is not beneficial (blasphemy, I know.) Health Insurance should not be influenced by profit. Private Health Insurance trains no Doctors, develops no new medicine, etc. All private insurance does is hold the money. We don't need it. We are the last industrialized nation to allow it. Even Switzerland, which has no government health care system regulates all private insurers like a utility. The whole business plan of private insurance is to collect premiums and then when you get sick and/or old throw you out or deny you coverage. Your only choice then is to (hopefully) qualify for medicare or die. If I had no soul or conscience I would love to be a private health insurer. I get to collect premiums from younger, healthier, workers (subsidized by their employers) until they are no longer employed, get too sick to work, or get too old. Then they become the government healthcare system's problem. It's a great deal for United Health Care, Aetna, etc. Former UHC CEO Bill Maguire got a compensation package worth around 1.6 billion dollars just five short years ago. The current UHC CEO is getting ready to step down with a compensation package worth around 756 million dollars. Where do you think that money came from?

[Single Payer]

Huh wrote:

It's more than a Health Bill my friends... It is really a government take over. None of the issues they say will cost less will do anything but cost you & I more "and" we will be forced to submit to the government rules.
This is tyrany.... Please be ready to vote these Democratic leaders out in 2010. Yes, I say Democratic leaders (not because Democrats are bad, but Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Frank & Obama are the leaders).

I do think it's bad when one party gets too much power (Cook County Democratic machine is a great example.) We all submit to government rules every day of our lives. I don't understand why you are so afraid of Democrats and not Republicans. You realize you will eventually be on Medicare if you're not on it already.

[keep capitalism strong]

Single Payer wrote:

<quoted text>
I do think it's bad when one party gets too much power (Cook County Democratic machine is a great example.) We all submit to government rules every day of our lives. I don't understand why you are so afraid of Democrats and not Republicans. You realize you will eventually be on Medicare if you're not on it already.

I think most people do not trust politicians in general and specifically do not like the Dems attempting revamping the entire health care system.

What are you afraid of?

[keep capitalism strong]

Here's an idea, Single Payer. Those politicians who are demonizing private insurance carriers (their insurance companies) should voluntarily go on their "public option" or we, as their employers, should choose not to pay for their "cadillac" health insurance plans.

If they feel the public option is the way to go, why are they exempting themselves? Why are they not automatically setting themselves up to lose their private insurance when they are not re-elected?

[No Denyin]

Single Payer wrote:

Since when is it a good idea to eliminate an industry and replace with government control??
We don't have private police, fire, military, air traffic controllers, health departments, etc. You get the idea. There are some areas where the profit motive is not beneficial (blasphemy, I know.) Health Insurance should not be influenced by profit. Private Health Insurance trains no Doctors, develops no new medicine, etc. All private insurance does is hold the money. We don't need it. We are the last industrialized nation to allow it. Even Switzerland, which has no government health care system regulates all private insurers like a utility. The whole business plan of private insurance is to collect premiums and then when you get sick and/or old throw you out or deny you coverage. Your only choice then is to (hopefully) qualify for medicare or die. If I had no soul or conscience I would love to be a private health insurer. I get to collect premiums from younger, healthier, workers (subsidized by their employers) until they are no longer employed, get too sick to work, or get too old. Then they become the government healthcare system's problem. It's a great deal for United Health Care, Aetna, etc. Former UHC CEO Bill Maguire got a compensation package worth around 1.6 billion dollars just five short years ago. The current UHC CEO is getting ready to step down with a compensation package worth around 756 million dollars. Where do you think that money came from?

Wow, you’re the only one on here that makes a well thought out statement and you get the dim bulb and peanut. The rest of you sound like the typical right wing, paranoid whack jobs. You’re already paying for the uninsured through your taxes, plus you’re paying exorbitant insurance premiums. Why can’t you see that if, and I reiterate IF this program is run properly, YOUR money will be used by you and others like you, not to give billions in bonuses to insurance company executives while denying you benefits. As the poster said, there are some business’ that should not be for profit, especially when deciding how YOUR money is spent. Now I understand that there’s not a whole lot of trust in the government but do you really think the private insurance industry has you’re best interest at heart when they’re looking to turn huge profits? I’m glad my wife and I are done having children because BC/BS told us we would have to pay any extra cost for having a C-Section and my wife already had three of them. In my mind, that’s OUR money and should be used at OUR discretion, not that of someone who’s probably in India answering the phone for the insurance company.

[Question]

It's not a health care bill, it is a socialist government growth bill.

[Question]

No Denyin wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, you’re the only one on here that makes a well thought out statement and you get the dim bulb and peanut. The rest of you sound like the typical right wing, paranoid whack jobs. You’re already paying for the uninsured through your taxes, plus you’re paying exorbitant insurance premiums. Why can’t you see that if, and I reiterate IF this program is run properly, YOUR money will be used by you and others like you, not to give billions in bonuses to insurance company executives while denying you benefits. As the poster said, there are some business’ that should not be for profit, especially when deciding how YOUR money is spent. Now I understand that there’s not a whole lot of trust in the government but do you really think the private insurance industry has you’re best interest at heart when they’re looking to turn huge profits? I’m glad my wife and I are done having children because BC/BS told us we would have to pay any extra cost for having a C-Section and my wife already had three of them. In my mind, that’s OUR money and should be used at OUR discretion, not that of someone who’s probably in India answering the phone for the insurance company.

I hear your frustration. However, this country was built on capitalism (good or bad) and a constitution defining our government. In reality I do not see any chance of rates going down and I see no option but rationing (see Canada). We all see evidence of this approach not working in other countrys and we want to believe Pelosi & Reids approach (socialism) is good for us. Yet, logic not hope should be guiding us.

Our taxs will go up, health costs will go up to cover a million government jobs involved with this and frankly our health care freedoms will dwindle. It's not a pretty picture.

If this really was a health care reform focus, then we would see tort reform considered, insurance companies allowed to compete across state boarders, etc. on the table. We would not see one political party doing closed door meetings with hidden agendas. We would see "pure" government at work on this. Here, we see campaign style politics at work instead.

You see, the Democrat leaders on this (Pelosi, Reid, Obama) have a "political" agenda and not a health care reform agenda.

Yes health care costs are high. It's like 100,000,000 people pay premiums and the insurance hopfully covers the 10,000 who get sick. Add 30,000,000 people and 1,000,000 government jobs to the pot and of course the 100,000,000 payers will have to pay even more to cover this. It's not rocket science to understand this.

As for executive salaries, I hate that too. But then again, I hate paying a licensed electrician $70/hr too.

More frustrating to me, is how insulting it is to hear the Democrat leaders insulting you and my neighbors by discounting our opinions and protests.

This is a bad deal all the way around and reflects "change" I never intended to happen when I voted for the savy political speaker Obama. Fool me once....

[think first]

No Denyin wrote:

<quoted text> I’m glad my wife and I are done having children because BC/BS told us we would have to pay any extra cost for having a C-Section and my wife already had three of them. In my mind, that’s OUR money and should be used at OUR discretion, not that of someone who’s probably in India answering the phone for the insurance company.

The cost of an elective major surgery is borne by your fellow insureds as well, not just by you. You are upset that you cannot get what you want at others' expense. Interesting.

[Middle ground]

Yes, we need to change SOME of the system.

1) if you are proactive, get a colonoscopy, have polyps removed, should your insurance go up and up for taking care of yourself?? No, but it does.

2) if you own a small business, good luck finding an insurance company that won't rape you in fees with crap for minimal coverage.

3) should we pay for obese people who don't take care of themselves?

4) should we allow the John Edwards's of the world to sue sue sue and make millions?

5) should illegals be allowed to suck our system dry?

Insurance companies DO need to clean up their act. Illegals SHOULD be denied unless they can pay for service at time of delivery. Torte reform MUST be included. Insurance companies MUST quit sucking the basic consumer dry for barely covering them.

Having said all this, I in no way want a government run health care system. Changes, yes. Total reform, never.

[Resident]

Middle ground wrote:

Yes, we need to change SOME of the system.
1) if you are proactive, get a colonoscopy, have polyps removed, should your insurance go up and up for taking care of yourself?? No, but it does.
2) if you own a small business, good luck finding an insurance company that won't rape you in fees with crap for minimal coverage.
3) should we pay for obese people who don't take care of themselves?
4) should we allow the John Edwards's of the world to sue sue sue and make millions?
5) should illegals be allowed to suck our system dry?
Insurance companies DO need to clean up their act. Illegals SHOULD be denied unless they can pay for service at time of delivery. Torte reform MUST be included. Insurance companies MUST quit sucking the basic consumer dry for barely covering them.
Having said all this, I in no way want a government run health care system. Changes, yes. Total reform, never.

You raise sound points.

Realize though, your points are not what Pelosi & Reid are pursuing at all. They have a control/socialist agenda.

[Something]

Single Payer wrote:

Health Insurance should not be influenced by profit. All private insurance does is hold the money. Former UHC CEO Bill Maguire got a compensation package worth around 1.6 billion dollars just five short years ago. The current UHC CEO is getting ready to step down with a compensation package worth around 756 million dollars. Where do you think that money came from?

If something isn't influenced by personal gain or profit, what motive is there to operate an enterprise?

Would you hope altruism would prevail? I think not.

Do you depend on the good will of your fellow man?

Is government the bearer of all that is good?

How would you determine how much compensation to which an employee is entitled?

Nothing happens for no reason or motivation in this life. To hope that a bungling, tax-grubbing, wasteful government that couldn't even administer the "Cash For Clunkers" program is to believe that the Flubs won the World Series last year.

[Resident]

Single Payer does not undersatand...

Insurance companies "are" investment companies. They do not sit on your premiums! They are Wall Street experts who invest billions each day in various companies, stocks, bonds, etc.. This is how they "make most of their money". When investments make a fortune so go the high executive bonuses. It's all based upon investment success not premiums received. Remember too, it's their investments that create a lot of jobs in the comapy they buy stock in.(You may have one of those jobs & are getting more than you think from your premium?)

Your premiums are their investment dollars. Many large companys become self insured and invest their own dollars to do so.

[Joliet Lawyer]

Resident wrote:

Single Payer does not undersatand...
Insurance companies "are" investment companies. They do not sit on your premiums! They are Wall Street experts who invest billions each day in various companies, stocks, bonds, etc.. This is how they "make most of their money". When investments make a fortune so go the high executive bonuses. It's all based upon investment success not premiums received. Remember too, it's their investments that create a lot of jobs in the comapy they buy stock in.(You may have one of those jobs & are getting more than you think from your premium?)
Your premiums are their investment dollars. Many large companys become self insured and invest their own dollars to do so.

Possibly one of the dumbest posts I have ever read on this board. You're argument supports "Single Payers" statement that private health insurance is not needed. People pay for health insurance to get HEALTH CARE! There are plenty of other "investment companies" out there. Premiums matter BIG TIME! Do you work for an insurance company?

[just a thought]

Joliet Lawyer wrote:

<quoted text>
Possibly one of the dumbest posts I have ever read on this board. You're argument supports "Single Payers" statement that private health insurance is not needed. People pay for health insurance to get HEALTH CARE! There are plenty of other "investment companies" out there. Premiums matter BIG TIME! Do you work for an insurance company?

Health insurance should cover major and pre-existing illnesses. IMO if people want every little visit covered (and many do - runny nose, scratchy throat, lowgrade fever), their premiums should be higher or their deductibles higher.

Some insurance companies can be downright evil, but not all. I expect to pay for their service, but I do not agree that many should have a 30% profit margin and multi-million dollars salaries paid to the CEOs.

People also need to take more responsibility for their own health, such as weight control, tobacco use, alcohol consumption, exercise, etc.

[PreferToSupportE conomy]

how about a procedure costs the same with or without insurance? Everyone runs to medical insurance because procedures/visits cost way too much.

[No Denyin]

think first wrote:

<quoted text>
The cost of an elective major surgery is borne by your fellow insureds as well, not just by you. You are upset that you cannot get what you want at others' expense. Interesting.

I don't know when a C-section became "elective" surgery. After being two weeks late, being induced, laboring for 16 hours and almost losing the baby, the doctor ordered a C-section. Back then, once you had a section, you weren't allowed to ever deliver naturally again. It's not really a concern since we haven't had a child in 18 years and couldn't even if we wanted to since the doctor told my wife that she couldn't take another delivery after three C-sections so I'm not "upset that I can't get what I want at others' expense". My point was that it was always covered in the past but no longer is. Meanwhile, premiums continue to rise and benefits continue to fall all while billions in bonuses are paid out. As far as costs being borne by my fellow insured, thats pretty much how insurance works isn't it? Everyone is crying socialism but that's exactly what this is. If your $ 300,000.00 house burns down, who do you think is paying to replace it?--- that's right, your fellow socialist insured. The only people reaping the benifits of capitalism are the insurance executives.