By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - OBAMA approval PLUMMETS to a dreadful 40%

Mr Khan said:
So will his numbers rise now that we've got an agreement?

Asian markets reacted positively, and our markets likely will on the morrow


Asian markets have been down since they opened over an hour ago, how is that reacting positively?

It could be argued that the Asian markets are having a delayed reaction to the manufacturing numbers, but they certainly are not showing a significant boost from the agreement.



Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:
Mr Khan said:
So will his numbers rise now that we've got an agreement?

Asian markets reacted positively, and our markets likely will on the morrow


Asian markets have been down since they opened over an hour ago, how is that reacting positively?

It could be argued that the Asian markets are having a delayed reaction to the manufacturing numbers, but they certainly are not showing a significant boost from the agreement.

I read somewhere that they had rallied

hmm...



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

thx1139 said:
Viper1 said:
THX, that is still anecdotal. An anecdote just means a personal story.

See, you have BCBS and pay $1,666 per month for your family's health insurance. But did you get to shop around for that insurance? Did you get to check competitors? Or were you forced to be stuck with that insurance?

When businesses like insurance are given monopolistic opportunities that are backed by the government combined with cost ballooning measures also because of government intervention, you get high costs.

Those 50 million without insurance can usually get government funded insurance with the same access to the same health care professionals and treatments (mostly) as your overly expensive corporate package.

Get it all out of the way and let the market find a balance. Like I've noted before. Look at Lasik surgery. It's getting cheaper and much more accurate. Same with ALL elective cosmetic surgeries and procedures. How do they manage to reduce costs and increase quality? Government isn't involved...nor are most insurance carriers.

The $20K is the combined employer, employee, and deductible all added up for the year.  As I mentioned before Insurance Companies do not like competition so they charge a premium if you want to offer plans from multiple companies. When I first started working in the 80's I worked at Amoco and they offered plans from like 10 companies. Now they offer like 2. 

You fooling yourself if you think that the 50 million can easily get government funded insurance.

Also hear is a study of marketshare of health insurance in the US. 21 of 50 states have 1 company controlling over 50% of the market.  Also note that state after state is dominated by 1 of just a few companies.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/health_competitiveness.pdf

well most people claim 46 million, not 50 million. but still that number is very misleading.

about 10-15 million of those are illegal immigrants or noncitizens.

that takes it down to 35 million. and about 18 million of those have house hold incomes of over $50,000, over half of those have incomes over $75,000. it certainly seems like its their choice to not have insurance, they could certainly afford it if they needed to, but they choose not to..

as for the bolded, that proves that we dont have a free market system, we cant buy over state lines



Viper1 said:
thx1139 said:

Also hear is a study of marketshare of health insurance in the US. 21 of 50 states have 1 company controlling over 50% of the market.  Also note that state after state is dominated by 1 of just a few companies.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/health_competitiveness.pdf


That's because it is federally mandated that you cannot buy insurance across state lines so it makes very little business sense to establish your insurance carrier in a new state if it's already locked up by someone else.   Would you want to have to create an entire replication of your business in each state just to serve a small portion of the potential customer base?

I told you, the government involvement has crushed the entire concept of free competition.

Well, apparently there is an interest in having health insurance done on the state level, rather than having it done federally.  Because of this, how exactly do you implement buying across state lines and lack of monopolies?



richardhutnik said:
Viper1 said:
thx1139 said:

Also hear is a study of marketshare of health insurance in the US. 21 of 50 states have 1 company controlling over 50% of the market.  Also note that state after state is dominated by 1 of just a few companies.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/health_competitiveness.pdf


That's because it is federally mandated that you cannot buy insurance across state lines so it makes very little business sense to establish your insurance carrier in a new state if it's already locked up by someone else.   Would you want to have to create an entire replication of your business in each state just to serve a small portion of the potential customer base?

I told you, the government involvement has crushed the entire concept of free competition.

Well, apparently there is an interest in having health insurance done on the state level, rather than having it done federally.  Because of this, how exactly do you implement buying across state lines and lack of monopolies?


You simply legislate that the federal government ensures that all insurance companies for health care are handled at the federal level in stead of states. They did the same thing ~15 years ago for banks.

Bills have been in congress before to allow people to buy insurances across state lines. Its just a matter of passing it.

Here's the bill that has been co-sponsored by 5 Republicans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Care_Choice_Act



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Around the Network
Viper1 said:
THX, that is still anecdotal. An anecdote just means a personal story.

See, you have BCBS and pay $1,666 per month for your family's health insurance. But did you get to shop around for that insurance? Did you get to check competitors? Or were you forced to be stuck with that insurance?

When businesses like insurance are given monopolistic opportunities that are backed by the government combined with cost ballooning measures also because of government intervention, you get high costs.

Those 50 million without insurance can usually get government funded insurance with the same access to the same health care professionals and treatments (mostly) as your overly expensive corporate package.

Get it all out of the way and let the market find a balance. Like I've noted before. Look at Lasik surgery. It's getting cheaper and much more accurate. Same with ALL elective cosmetic surgeries and procedures. How do they manage to reduce costs and increase quality? Government isn't involved...nor are most insurance carriers.

In which world do you live ?

Next you're going to tell us that people without a job would have a one in a free market economy and that everyone would be swimming in money ?

Here's another annecdot for you.

My wife have severe arthritis and Psoriasis .

Before we met she was not able to get insurance because of those and the only treatment available to her was a test trial of a new med at a local university.

Now she has insurance through me and the company plan where I work and this is the only reason she has access to the only treatment that really works for her. That treatment is Enbrel.

Without insurance , a refill of Enbrel for a month is 2500$. Yes, I said two thousands and five hundreds dollars for 10 shots...

That's 30k a year.

Add the specialists visit every month and you easilly get a total of over 50k a year of health related spendings. More some years as Enbrel negates her immune system so she catches every nasty virus around.

Now lets say we switch to a full free market system.

Which lucky company out there is going to stuck their neck out for people like her knowing that they will have to cover that amount of health spending every year ????

 

You tell me.......

 

Car insurance isn't regulated much, and the worse your history the more your insurance costs (but you actually had a say in your history).

Make health insurance the same and you will end up with the same result. Except in this case people don't have much responsability in their history and those with serious health issues will just be left out on the curb to die.......





PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Viper1 said:
thx1139 said:

Also hear is a study of marketshare of health insurance in the US. 21 of 50 states have 1 company controlling over 50% of the market.  Also note that state after state is dominated by 1 of just a few companies.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/health_competitiveness.pdf


That's because it is federally mandated that you cannot buy insurance across state lines so it makes very little business sense to establish your insurance carrier in a new state if it's already locked up by someone else.   Would you want to have to create an entire replication of your business in each state just to serve a small portion of the potential customer base?

I told you, the government involvement has crushed the entire concept of free competition.

kinda funny how that site lists 2 insurers for Colorado and over the last 10 years our company has switched insurance like 4 times and it has never been one of those two....



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Have you just read half of what I wrote or the whole thing? Did you stop at this post and quote me or read the rest of the thread first?

Costs are high because of government intervention. Your choices of insurance carriers are limited because of government intervention. I don't really know how much more clear on this I can be.

If you want lower costs and more options, get the government out of the way.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Viper1 said:
Have you just read half of what I wrote or the whole thing? Did you stop at this post and quote me or read the rest of the thread first?

Costs are high because of government intervention. Your choices of insurance carriers are limited because of government intervention. I don't really know how much more clear on this I can be.

If you want lower costs and more options, get the government out of the way.


I read all your posts.

All I got is blah blah blah free market good, government bad...

you're like a broken record advocating deregulating everything...



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Ail said:
Viper1 said:
Have you just read half of what I wrote or the whole thing? Did you stop at this post and quote me or read the rest of the thread first?

Costs are high because of government intervention. Your choices of insurance carriers are limited because of government intervention. I don't really know how much more clear on this I can be.

If you want lower costs and more options, get the government out of the way.


I read all your posts.

All I got is blah blah blah free market good, government bad...

you're like a broken record advocating deregulating everything...

Which means you don't pay attention to them, you skim them with irritation that I don't concede to your views.   

If I sound like the proverbial broken record, it is only because it is necessary to repeat them as they are either ignored or attacked via straw man logic. 

Why don't you tell me why we need the current level of government intervention in all facets of health care?   Convince me that my ideals are wrong.



The rEVOLution is not being televised