Can you imagine saying to Blue Cross Blue Shield "You're out"

[Rosa Luxemburg]

What to do with the health insurance companies when a single payer health system comes in. Maybe they could merge with hospital groups and health centers, but they would no longer operate as insurance companies. What to do with all the health insurance company workers? Maybe they could be employed by the government collecting the health fee from the patients' salary......oh what fun!

[AzNick]

1. I know, I can't wait....

Oooh this is going to feel soooo good.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. I doubt they would be able to charge $1000+/mo & still have "customers"

the bastards.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. $1000 per month is shocking!

BSBS is only for the rich

[cap]

13. if only it were a mere $1000/month; my husband and I are paying $1700/month

if my husband were 4 years older, we'd be paying $2200/month to BCBS

[Rosa Luxemburg]

16. OMG!

we pay about $400

[cap]

31. how old are you?

[RollWithIt]

20. How many children do you have?

I'm just curious. Prior conditions before the policy was enacted? Again, just curious. Trying to learn more.

[cap]

30. None. Just hubby and me.

This is effn obscene. My husband is technically diabetic. He is in remission now due to bariatric surgery. His blood sugar is absolutely normal. But BCBS only charges based on age. Not prior condition. All people over 50 are whacked equally. On the other hand, he can't move to a lower cost insurance because of the prior condition. No one will take him.

[MercutioATC]

3. Don't hold your breath.

We may very well get universal access to health care, but I doubt that it will be single-payer.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. No harm in making plans eh?

[GreenTea]

5. I''d love it!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. Yes!

[uponit7771]

8. I would have a drink on that alone, it'd be nice

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. Champagne anyone?

it would be worth the splurge!

[wishlist]

9. Medicare claims are administered by private insurance contractors now

If there was a public option, I am sure it would have private insurance companies involved in the handling of claims in the same way Medicare contracts out to private insurance companies. Govt employees do not handle Medicare claims payments but only the enrollment which is done by Social Security Administration employees.

[MarjorieG]

10. So same admin set-up, maybe costs, for such different rates and coverage?

[DrToast]

11. Go read HR 676

It talks about what to do with the existing insurance companies.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

14. Thank you I did read it!

[BlooInBloo]

12. Hell yah. Oh wait - I can't remember which provider I have.

:P

[JimWis]

17. You bet I can. After those bastards quoted me coverage that

would cost me 2,800 per month because I have a pre-existing condition. I want to see BC/BS go away forever.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

19. They are disgusting. The pre-existing condition thing should go

In the UK you can have as many pre-existing conditions and they will treat you.

You would be paying about $30,000 a year for healthcare plus prescription and plus dental?

[Hepburn]

18. Yeah....

...:evilgrin:

I hope it happens very soon!

[eridani]

21. Private insurance won't go away

Single payer does not actually eliminate private health insurance. To be sure, more than a few insurance company victims would like that, and also to see tumbrils deployed immediately thereafter. But all countries with single payer, and even those with socialzed medicine, have private insurance.

In most other developed countries, though, private health insurance is strictly an add-on. It supplements government insurance; it does not compete directly. And it is NOT allowed to deny basic health care to anybody, to cherry-pick, to have preferred provider lists, or to rescind policies.

What single payer will do is to force them to give up the Enron business model (in which their profits come from denying care and cherry-picking the healthy) and to adopt that of private life insurance.

Unlike health insurance, life insurance is highly competitive and co-exists well with Social Security survivors' benefits. The crucial fact here is that everyone who works must pay FICA, even if they look at SS survivors' benefits and decide they want more income for their kids than that. Neither the life insurance companies nor those who buy their products take anything away from the pool of money that provides for widow(er)s and orphans who can't afford those products.

Naturally the health insurance industry is going to hate that every bit as much as outright abolishement, given that life insurance profit margins are much more like those of supermarkets than the ripoff excesses that they have traditionally gained from murder by spreadsheet.

The point of making this argument is to reassure those who think they have (and may actually have) a plan that provides more than a single payer comprehensive plan that they are free to add on (or ask their employers to add on) any bells and whistles that they want to add. Doing the math--

Comprehensive single payer benefit
+ add ons out of pocket or from private insurance
= Way, way more for way, way less than anyone is paying right now

Just from my own experience, my COBRA is $450/month, but the Washington Health Security Trust (a state level single payer proposal) can get me more than I'm getting now in coverage for $75-$100 (down to $0 for low income families) a month. (Also there would be a business payroll tax of 10% of payroll, sliding scale down to 1%.) $350/mo is far more than I'd probably spend on extras. More affluent people would thus be able to get, should they so choose, more than they are getting now, without draining the pool of health care dollars providing for those who can't afford the bells and whistles.

A “public option” could be anything. It could be run like a single payer program, allowing any individual or employer to enroll and having similar cost controls. But even under the best conditions, it saves only 9% compared to single payer.

Or it might be designed as a dumping ground for poor and sick people, allowing insurance companies to make even more profit diverting money from healthy people to their own bottom lines and away from paying for actual care. This is totally unacceptable.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

23. yes it is true that there is private health insurance in the UK and other places

people try to use private health insurance to attempt to 'jump the in the UK. However once you use the private insurance you have to stay in it for that health problem - you can't switch back and forth.

[eridani]

27. Exactly as it should be. If the affluent want extra bells and whistles fine

Similarly, I don't really care if Bill Gates has an expensive sprinkler and alarm system that I can't afford, as long as we get the same fire engine in case of fire.

[ncteechur]

22. I'd rather tell them, "You're coverage is denied."

[Rosa Luxemburg]

24. Wouldn't that be good - the shoe on the other foot!

I'll never forget the day when the HMO denied my husband being covered for radiation treatment.

[ecstatic]

25. Can't wait! nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. Me too!

[area51]

28. What would insurance cos. do if we got single-payer?

They could always sell supplemental insurance just like they do in first-world countries with single-payer.

Or if they don't want to do that, they can start selling life insurance, car insurance, homeowners' insurance .... :shrug:

[Rosa Luxemburg]

29. I guess they could melt into the background?

[harun]

32. Maybe try them for crimes against humanity?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

33. making money out of the sick

[tnlefty]

34. For years one of my favorite fantasies is to be able to write a

BIG fuck you letter to BCBS of TN. I'll write it, but I don't think I'll be able to deliver it in my lifetime.

Why not train those employees to pay claims and to also look for legitimate waste, fraud and abuse under a single payer system?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

35. yes