HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

High Deductible Healthcare

Support Forums
>
Ulcerative Colitis
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
1 2
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 11/5/2010 1:10 AM (GMT 0)
My husband used to work for anthem and let me tell you the bonuses they receive are sickening. My husband wasn't even that high up (a director) and one year we went out and bought a +30,000 car...cash. They are still making a ton of money and using health care reform as an excuse. Health care reform should be good for them because all the healthy people who don't have insurance will have to purchase it. I hate health insurance companies, but am thankful I have it. I will be spending a lot of their money next year when I get my two surgeries. Hopefully then I won't be going to the doctor several times a month.
Posted 11/5/2010 5:18 AM (GMT 0)

Old Hat said...
UPDATE: An article on Yahoo today states that some employers (including Boeing, AARP) ARE starting to shift health insurance costs to their employees thru higher deductibles and/or co-pays to lower the value of their health care plans ahead of the 2018 tax increase on so-called "high-cost plans", which will be 40%-- as stipulated in the Affordable Health Care Act. The threshhold for "high-cost plans" has been set at $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for family plans. The stated purpose behind the law was to discourage purchasing of such plans, mainly favored by upper income consumers and corporations providing CEO coverage. / Old Hat (30 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
'

I have read similar articles and I have to ask why they would need to jump the gun by 8 years?

Basically because health insurance benefits are tax free they are a big perk to high paid employees. I wonder if they cut your pay 8 years ahead of time because a high salary excise tax was going into effect what you would have to say about it?

You would laugh at them.

Pretty much employers and insurance companies are using a law that doesn't do that much and isn't doing anything for years as an excuse to cut salaries and raise rates.

If a republican, a democrat or the press tells you anything about this law, check first because they are probably wrong or lying outright. Nothing in that plan should be causing your employer to change your coverage or your insurance company to jack up rates until 2014.

Personally I think generous plans allow the drug company to play this game where they charge $600/month for asacol then force those that don't have the cadillac plans to beg for discount cards. Never mind the drug is only worth the $100 they sell it for in other countries.
Posted 11/5/2010 3:03 PM (GMT 0)
I used to be able to find the positive in a negative, but lately I'm having a hard time with all the craziness happening in this world. Something has to take a turn for the better very soon, correct? I've lost my sense of security, I suppose because it seems in the last five years things have changed so dramatically...or am I just thinking that? At any rate, I'll get back to my peace and harmony frame of mind and maybe that will help! Maybe it will help the UC at least, and I won't need meds or doctors.

Posted 11/6/2010 12:39 AM (GMT 0)
Agree that the health insurance companies try to con us one way or another-- because they are out to make a profit no matter! Single-payer universal coverage is what we need, but it seems we'll never get it due to people who love to scream "Socialism!" like a bunch of trained parrots. / Old Hat (30 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
Posted 11/6/2010 1:36 AM (GMT 0)
I am with you on this Old Hat. Well said!
Posted 11/6/2010 3:13 PM (GMT 0)
Agreed Old Hat.
Posted 11/6/2010 8:39 PM (GMT 0)
There are too many people fighting against Universal health care for us to ever see it here. Doctors, Hospitals, Insurance Companies, GOP, businesses (due to increased taxes), etc. Look at what happened with Obama's plans? They pushed for some type of government option, but the best they got was 'Obamacare', which was really just a handout to insurance companies.
Posted 11/6/2010 9:11 PM (GMT 0)
I get so fed up when I hear that doctors and employers and GREEDY insurance companies blaming all their changes on health reform. Health care costs have been rising for years for a whole variety of reasons, and employers have simply grown weary of paying more and more for health insurance for employees. Think about it, why should an employer be responsible for your health care?? They aren't responsible for your housing costs...unless you're a migrant worker, maybe. They offer health care benefits to compete for employees. If they don't have to compete, they don't have be as generous with benefits like health care.

Health reform was an attempt to change a few things and a lot of it doesn't even kick in for another three years. It's certainly not perfect, but the media doesn't report about the boring stuff: reforms in the way doctors and hospitals are paid under Medicare (they won't get paid the costs for treating an infection they caused, for example, as an incentive to reduce such infections), and incentives for doctors and hospitals to work better together to coordinate care (less duplication of tests, electronic health records, etc). There's a lot of potentially good stuff in there.

So, should the government force employers to provide health insurance? There exists true philisophical differences in viewpoints about how much government should be involved in the whole health care/health insurance business (other than providing Medicare insurance, that ship has sailed). No perfect answer.
Posted 11/6/2010 11:27 PM (GMT 0)

Peety said...
I get so fed up when I hear that doctors and employers and GREEDY insurance companies blaming all their changes on health reform. Health care costs have been rising for years for a whole variety of reasons, and employers have simply grown weary of paying more and more for health insurance for employees. Think about it, why should an employer be responsible for your health care?? They aren't responsible for your housing costs...unless you're a migrant worker, maybe. They offer health care benefits to compete for employees. If they don't have to compete, they don't have be as generous with benefits like health care.

I have read that post several times. Still not sure what your point is. If the companies don't provide group plans they will have to compete using cash compensation etc. I don't see how they can get around competing for employees in some way or another. I use my paycheck to pay for my housing just as I use it to pay for my medical insurance - it is taken out weekly. I really do not think it is an ethical/moral decision on whether they are responsible for my health care. It is the state of the worker/employer landscape right now. The government should make sure everyone has a shot, if that means a high risk pool in each state for those unable to get on a group plan or having insurance companies offer individual plans to those with pre-existing conditions at a high premium per the actuaries then so be it but people should not be left out in the cold without options. Personally I have no problem with the government cutting out the layers of profit oriented middle-men companies between myself and the doctor/hospital. I think that is where the fat can be cut.

The pork is in the way everything is setup. In order to straighten things out I have to call the company writing my paychecks the company managing the Cobra when the deal ends and the company providing the actual insurance. Nowhere in there did I mention the hospital, the labs and the doctors. All the middle-men companies in between me and the doctors are layers adding cost and they are motivated to profit not provide care. They want customers who never need their services which is why I cannot get an individual health care plan until 2014.

Pay the doctors so we attract the best and the brightest to the field, but fix the rest of the stack.
Posted 11/8/2010 2:47 AM (GMT 0)
I was trying to not be too biased politically so it wouldn't get scrubbed!

Everything else I can think of to say would be too political. Well, I'll try this: forcing all health insurance companies to be nonprofit is a good idea. (Part of health reform already will limit their profits -- via "medical loss ratios"). Some view that as un-American (entrepreneurs have the right to make as much money as they can, it's the American way). But it would take a lot of the fat out health care costs. Besides those other things I mention.

My health insurer loses big bucks on me. If they could charge someone like me, on Remicade, a premium that made actuarial sense, it would be absolutely unaffordable! So I need that middle man and I hope I never lose my insurance.
Posted 11/8/2010 2:56 AM (GMT 0)
I don't buy the entrepreneurship malarkey; there are plenty of things for insurers to work with besides health insurance-- so they should not be imposing on us. / Old Hat (30 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
Posted 11/8/2010 4:29 PM (GMT 0)
Non-profit is not necessarily a solution either. My former insurer BCBS-Michigan has been indicted for rigging inflated reimbursements in it's PPO network which gave them a competitive advantage but resulted in higher premiums for their policy holders.

I have BCBS Arizona now and they use a contracted claims department that is paid based on the number of claims they deny. I got the treatment from them. Most companies for-profit or not are run for benefit of upper management which receives incentives based on performance. Performance in insurance means highest premiums possible and lowest claims possible.
Posted 11/8/2010 4:37 PM (GMT 0)
When I started with this company, the package offered to me included salary plus health benefits. Now it looks as though all of us have a nice cut in pay coming because we will be paying for the benefits that were first offered. Surely you don't think they will give all of us a good raise to counter the deficit of paying for healthcare? Hmmm, nope.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
12