Our Chinese Water Torture

[Supsalemgr]

BTW, Super-S - you are/were in insurance, right? According to a (slightly dated) 2009 study, the average profit of medical malpractice insurance companies is higher than 99 percent of all Fortune 500 companies and 35 times higher than the Fortune 500 average for the same time period; and malpractice insurers have seen their profit margins range from 5.9 percent to 74.8 percent, with an average of 31.2 percent.

What's your problem with the cost of litigation?

It all goes into the pricing of the product.

[O Really]

BTW, Super-S - you are/were in insurance, right? According to a (slightly dated) 2009 study, the average profit of medical malpractice insurance companies is higher than 99 percent of all Fortune 500 companies and 35 times higher than the Fortune 500 average for the same time period; and malpractice insurers have seen their profit margins range from 5.9 percent to 74.8 percent, with an average of 31.2 percent.

What's your problem with the cost of litigation?

It all goes into the pricing of the product.

It does indeed. But the insurance company (theoretically your employer) makes a very healthy profit on its business and gets to pay its people (theoretically you) nice salaries, commissions, and bonuses.

[rstrong]

It all goes into the pricing of the product.

It does indeed. But the insurance company (theoretically your employer) makes a very healthy profit on its business and gets to pay its people (theoretically you) nice salaries, commissions, and bonuses.

Don't forget shareholders.

Most American insurance and medical companies are *investment* companies. The usual customer/company relationship that ensures good service is still there. But the patient is not the main customer. The shareholder is.

[k9nanny]

What universe are some of y'all living in? My husband's Blue Cross went up 71% when he turned fifty. He will be 55 on 1/1/13, the date BC considers, and his rate is going up 74%. It's the same old crap they wrote in the 2008 notice (for being 50 on 1/1/09).

Your age on Jan 1.
Your gender (!)
The claims experience where you live over the course of a year.
The "individual claims experience" has no impact on the increase.

When I went to check it out, the next best plan drastically reduces benefits and has a $5000 deductible. We can't keep his current plan and simply raise the deductible to $5000.

Here's what pisses me off. It's Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NC, not BCBS of Henderson County (their web site refers to counties, not areas). And it's not just here- I found a case of a woman in another state whose premium went up 25% when she moved ten miles away. She didn't change health care providers/facilities, just her zip code.

So the risk is minimally spread. My husband gets punished for living in a high claims area. My self-employed nephew in Raleigh is buying a (fixable) special needs baby, and his Blue Cross will cover surgery for a Chinese import. Point is, the risk should be evenly divided. A single payer system might pay out a lot on one person, and his neighbor might not ever need a major expense covered.

In discussing the future, BC says they think one will be able to buy insurance on sites that resemble Orbitz and Expedia. Their tone is one of of We suggest you stick with us, and even if you change your plan with us in 2014, we're going to screw you over.

Blood-sucking vultures.

[O Really]

Blood-sucking vultures.

[billy.pilgrim]

remember united healthcare's 2006 retirement package for ceo mcguire - it was 1.6 billion

but shirley that didn't have nutin to do with the cost of health care


1.6 billion dollars

[Guest]

Your age on Jan 1.
Your gender (!)
The claims experience where you live over the course of a year.
The "individual claims experience" has no impact on the increase.

When I went to check it out, the next best plan drastically reduces benefits and has a $5000 deductible. We can't keep his current plan and simply raise the deductible to $5000.

I got that same bullsh*t letter. I'm 67, got the $5M deductible plan, barely used it last year, (have limited VA benefits),
and my BCBS is going up next year due to "where I live".

Life sucks, don't it.

[rstrong]

remember united healthcare's 2006 retirement package for ceo mcguire - it was 1.6 billion

but shirley that didn't have nutin to do with the cost of health care


1.6 billion dollars

And not for a job well done, but for resigning in disgrace.

[Wneglia]

As does the 25-30% insurance company overhead, compared to 5-10% for Medicare/Medicaid/VA/IHS.

Not if you compare apples to apples

[Wneglia]

Doesn't look like Medicare is the way to cut health care spending.

[rstrong]

Doesn't look like Medicare is the way to cut health care spending.

That chart reflects an aging population, an increasing number of people who can't afford private insurance, and in increasing number of McJobs that don't come with insurance.

ObamaCare at least partially addresses this, unlike the Republican option of the last couple years of pretending the problem doesn't exist.

[Wneglia]

Doesn't look like Medicare is the way to cut health care spending.

That chart reflects an aging population, an increasing number of people who can't afford private insurance, and in increasing number of McJobs that don't come with insurance.

ObamaCare at least partially addresses this, unlike the Republican option of the last couple years of pretending the problem doesn't exist.

While there has been modest growth in the number of Medicare recipients over the years, it doesn't explain the explosive growth in Medicare spending. I don't understand your reasoning about increasing number of people who can't afford private insurance, McJobs, etc. as that has nothing to do with Medicare in this country. Perhaps you are thinking of Medicare in Canada where it applies to everyone.



Obviously the elderly are more expensive to care for, but that has been the case for decades. And yes, life expectancy is increasing, increasing the duration of risk, but those people living into their nineties tend to be more healthy, often with fewer expenses.

[billy.pilgrim]

...got the $5M deductible plan...

That's a high deductible. What's your premium, $1 per year?

bcbs
5000 per person deductible for medical/hospital
1500 per person separate deductible for medacations
jump through hoops to stay with docs and meds and hospitals and services "in plan"
be sure not to get sick while out of state

married w/ 1 kid on plan

$16,656 per year

[k9nanny]

I also found on the BCBS of NC site that the top three claims are for heart disease, hip replacements, and knee replacements.
Maybe some are a little quick to go under the knife when physical therapy would do? My sister did PT, but then complained about the $30 co-pay each visit.
Or, hell, maybe we're just so wussy we think we're supposed to be pain free all the time.

[Wneglia]

By choice I'm an "as needed" employee. Over 5 years, though, I've worked full time or 2/3 full time hours. I am unable, entirely at my own cost, to buy into the group plan. And I work for a community-oriented, nonprofit hospital!!! That's how f'ed up our healthcare system is. My boss is fine with risking that a valued employee will get substandard care.

So, I'm paying for individual coverage though it's only a bit more than $3K per year with a $5K deductible.

But, Guest's "$5M" deductible . . .

NonProfit???

[Wneglia]

It's a legal and regulatory term and I understand the contradictions. We all remember the United Way scandals.

I honestly couldn't tell you how my employer compares to the ones cited in the article. I have no interest in the business end of things, just as I check my politics (but not my values) at the door. I just want to show up and take care of people.

No matter, take the word "nonprofit" out of my post and the point remains the same.

I agree. You are getting a shitty deal. Even my daughter who works part time at the Evil Walmart has health insurance.

[Wneglia]

Thanks.

Just to avoid confusion there is a difference between "part time" and "as needed", even if I might work more hours than her. Yes, it's my choice to be "as needed" and yes, I could be part or full time if I wanted to. But, it's still inexcusable given that I would happily pay the full cost of the premiums. Why wouldn't my bosses want to help me get the best care possible if it won't cost them a thing?

Could the eligibility for coverage possibly be up to the insurance carrier and not the hospital?

One innovative thing that we have done to control costs for health insurance in our group (we cover about 180 employees) is to have a high deductable Blue Cross policy ($6K), but pay the employee's expenses between $2K and $6K, so that the policy costs a lot less, and the employees still don't get dinged. Even though we have had to pay for some in this scenario, we have saved about $150K per year over what we would have done with $2K deductible policies.

[Sometime Lefty]

What are the advantages of an "as needed" employee vs. full-time?

[Crock Hunter]

But, Guest's "$5M" deductible . . .

[Reality]

"As needed" employees sure do have a lot of time available throughout the work day to participate in on line forums.