Why the 'Group of Six Senators' Is Opposed to a Public Health Plan [View article]
If the CEOs of the five or six largest insurers told AHIP to propose real reforms of state and federal health insurance regs, they could kill the public option in a matter of days and reform health insurance markets without costing the Feds a fraction of the $2 to $4 trillion ObamaCare probably will cost over the next 10 years.
Why the 'Group of Six Senators' Is Opposed to a Public Health Plan [View article]
I wish the senators cared as much about insurers' shareholders as implied. I doubt it.
Heck, I wish the insurers were more concerned about their shareholders. If they did, they'd be waging a smarter campaign to reform fed and state health insurance regs.
Those regs have so distorted the health insurance markets that no insurer looks honest.
Problem is that the insurers' lobbyists helped draft the screwy state and federal regs. So it's hard to feel sorry for them.
Insurers are their own worst enemies. I don't think they really want to be in the insurance business.
Who at Zacks wrote this nonsense? It looks like a term paper from a high school junior. It's naive, dishonest and makes Zacks look like a tool of the DNC.
I'm wondering whether Zacks knows this has been published under it's byline? And I'm wondering whether SA knows who wrote it. That its featured on SA's front page is amazing.
Obama’s Health Insurance Plan Is No Panacea [View article]
ObamaCare will increase the cost of health insurance to enrollees for several reasons.
First, if the plan subsidizes health insurance for the 6 to 8 million uninsured American citizens who aren't eligible for existing programs and can't afford basic catastrophic plans, the plan will cost billions. This cohort tends to be uneducated, unemployable and, most important, chronically ill. They would need a lot of attention when they first got their coverage and would cost more to insure over time than most people.
Second, if Obama's public option health plan, which I call the Government HMO (GHMO), is enacted, it would initially lower premiums in an effort to drive private insurers out of the markets. After private insurers are gone, Congress would mandate that the plan offer more benefits, raise premiums and taxes on non participating employers and the rest of us and ease initial limits on access. We'd be in an expensive, low access single-payer plan, which is Obama's objective.
Third, if Congress goes the Wal-Mart employer mandated coverage, it will mandate all kinds of benefits at the behest of lobbyists and campaign contributors and raise premiums and taxes.
The literature is beginning to show what I've been saying for years. Most expensive preventive care is covered by insurers because the states mandate that coverage at the behest of providers who support politicians' election campaigns with contributions. Only a small part of preventive care cuts costs for the long term, and very little if any cuts costs for the long term.
Because preventive care contributors have the attention of members of Congress and presidential candidates, it's like ethanol, basically an expensive scam.
I've been writing and blogging on health care and health insurance businesses and economics for years at businessword.com.
It is amazing that people who claim to be health insurance experts continue to say there are 46 to 50 million uninsured. That's a number inflated by the government officials who believe in health care reform and publish it to help providers turn a small problem into a crisis. Their gambit worked and will give politicians and some providers' trade associations much more power, but it will cost everyone under 65 trillions.
Why the 'Group of Six Senators' Is Opposed to a Public Health Plan [View article]
Why the 'Group of Six Senators' Is Opposed to a Public Health Plan [View article]
Heck, I wish the insurers were more concerned about their shareholders. If they did, they'd be waging a smarter campaign to reform fed and state health insurance regs.
Those regs have so distorted the health insurance markets that no insurer looks honest.
Problem is that the insurers' lobbyists helped draft the screwy state and federal regs. So it's hard to feel sorry for them.
Insurers are their own worst enemies. I don't think they really want to be in the insurance business.
Why the 'Group of Six Senators' Is Opposed to a Public Health Plan [View article]
'Blue-Dogging' Health Care [View article]
I'm wondering whether Zacks knows this has been published under it's byline? And I'm wondering whether SA knows who wrote it. That its featured on SA's front page is amazing.
Obama Takes Pressure Off Health Insurers [View article]
Do these guys talk?
Obama Takes Pressure Off Health Insurers [View article]
Daily charts are here:
stockcharts.com/script...
Obama’s Health Insurance Plan Is No Panacea [View article]
First, if the plan subsidizes health insurance for the 6 to 8 million uninsured American citizens who aren't eligible for existing programs and can't afford basic catastrophic plans, the plan will cost billions. This cohort tends to be uneducated, unemployable and, most important, chronically ill. They would need a lot of attention when they first got their coverage and would cost more to insure over time than most people.
Second, if Obama's public option health plan, which I call the Government HMO (GHMO), is enacted, it would initially lower premiums in an effort to drive private insurers out of the markets. After private insurers are gone, Congress would mandate that the plan offer more benefits, raise premiums and taxes on non participating employers and the rest of us and ease initial limits on access. We'd be in an expensive, low access single-payer plan, which is Obama's objective.
Third, if Congress goes the Wal-Mart employer mandated coverage, it will mandate all kinds of benefits at the behest of lobbyists and campaign contributors and raise premiums and taxes.
The literature is beginning to show what I've been saying for years. Most expensive preventive care is covered by insurers because the states mandate that coverage at the behest of providers who support politicians' election campaigns with contributions. Only a small part of preventive care cuts costs for the long term, and very little if any cuts costs for the long term.
Because preventive care contributors have the attention of members of Congress and presidential candidates, it's like ethanol, basically an expensive scam.
I've been writing and blogging on health care and health insurance businesses and economics for years at businessword.com.
It is amazing that people who claim to be health insurance experts continue to say there are 46 to 50 million uninsured. That's a number inflated by the government officials who believe in health care reform and publish it to help providers turn a small problem into a crisis. Their gambit worked and will give politicians and some providers' trade associations much more power, but it will cost everyone under 65 trillions.
Cramer's Mad Money - Obama's Revenge (3/5/09) [View article]
The White House took on Cramer, and he extended his comments on the Obama Bear Market big time. Good for him.