Comments on: Are Health Insurance Companies the Villains?

By: Neil H.

Neil H. — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 13:35:24 +0000

Mark:

You are wrong. Or at least you are relying on a study that is interpreting the data wrong. Check out the NCPA study “Do Other Countries Have the Answers?

I don’t have the link handy, but it’s at this web site on the CDHC home page.

By: Mike M

Mike M — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 07:01:49 +0000

Insurance reform has emerged as the flashpoint of the week in health care reform. Unfortunately the two sides are polarized into the status quo vs replace or compete factions. REFORM is necessary and possible but requires compromise as well as a paradigm shift.

For Profit health insurers contribute significantly to the increased costs of health care in the United States and to ignore this issue only caters to their nearly omnipotent lobby. On the other hand private insurers are much more skilled at providing options for individuals and groups as well as promoting efficiency than is the government.

The Medical Loss Ratio for insurance companies is 70-75% compared to about 95%% for medicare. According to Regina Herzlinger 5% overhead is typical for companies in Switzerland where a competitive highly regulated market exists. All working citizens are required to carry some form of insurance ranging from “catastrophic only” to policies with “all the bells and whistles”.

I would suggest that regulated health care insurance similar to the Swiss system with costs overseen by health care equivalents of a Public Utility Commission could improve access and affordability without incurring excessive taxpayer burden.

By: Joanna Carrol

Joanna Carrol — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:31:13 +0000

Most people have term life through their employer. It is not covered under COBRA so there is no continuation; it can be converted but not at the employer discounted rate. So, portable? No. I’ve never seen a case where an employee can convert, upon retirement, to whole life thru company plans. Maybe it happens, I’ve never seen it. Now, the tricky part with company paid life insurance for employees, is that if an employee is hospitalized and not “actively at work” and he dies, the life insurance company does not pay. Maybe in some plans they do, maybe it’s in the fine print somewhere, but I’ve never seen a carrier pay when an employee who has not been actively at work, dies. In my experience, most carriers do offer an optional ‘individual’ policy where the employee pays the full premium, via payroll deduction, for additional insurance, and I always encourage employees to do so. Thankfully, I’m citing only 2 cases where co-workers died due to illness and the employer sponsored portion of their life insurance was not paid because they were not actively at work, in spite of premiums being paid. My point, life insurance does have its own problems, and they are never ridiculous.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:19:33 +0000

so I gathered this data by myself; mainly through online government sources.

Feel free to point me to more accurate data.

If you feel like ignoring data, than you are also “just another person with an opinion”

So, to both sides:

Is our present system the best in the world?

Conclusions
————
30 countries were analyzed, all but the US had universal coverage

1. Did the US system have the lowest infant mortality?
No, US was 25th of 30 countries

2. Did the US system have the longest life expectancy?
No, US was 20th of 30 countries

3. Did the US have the lowest cost per capita?
No, the US had the highest cost.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:14:43 +0000

finallly, per capita spending on health care

Rank Country Health Care Expenditure per person Universal Health Care
1 United States 20,400 NO
2 Luxembourg 19,381 YES
3 Norway 16,366 YES
4 Switzerland 15,367 YES
5 Iceland 14,732 YES
6 Germany 14,497 YES
7 Canada 13,462 YES
8 France 13,426 YES
9 Sweden 13,232 YES
10 Austria 12,900 YES
11 Australia 12,146 YES
12 Netherlands 11,683 YES
13 Belgium 11,140 YES
14 Italy 11,036 YES
15 Denmark 10,650 YES
16 United Kingdom 10,438 YES
17 Japan 10,223 YES
18 Finland 10,129 YES
19 Ireland 9,691 YES
20 New Zealand 8,884 YES
21 Spain 8,215 YES
22 Portugal 7,492 YES
23 Greece 7,476 YES
24 Hungary 5,077 YES
25 Slovenia 4,720 YES
26 South Korea 3,565 YES
27 Poland 3,112 YES
28 Slovakia 2,726 YES
29 Mexico 2,266 YES
30 Turkey 2,119 YES

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:12:30 +0000

US ranks 20th of 30 countries

Rank Country Life Expectancy Universal Health Care
1 Japan 82.02 YES
2 Sweden 80.63 YES
3 Australia 80.62 YES
4 Switzerland 80.62 YES
5 France 80.59 YES
6 Iceland 80.43 YES
7 Canada 80.34 YES
8 Italy 79.94 YES
9 Spain 79.78 YES
10 Norway 79.67 YES
11 Greece 79.38 YES
12 Austria 79.21 YES
13 Netherlands 79.11 YES
14 Luxembourg 79.03 YES
15 New Zealand 78.96 YES
16 Germany 78.95 YES
17 Belgium 78.92 YES
18 United Kingdom 78.7 YES
19 Finland 78.66 YES
20 United States 78 NO
21 Denmark 77.96 YES
22 Ireland 77.9 YES
23 Portugal 77.87 YES
24 South Korea 77.23 YES
25 Slovenia 76.53 YES
26 Mexico 75.63 YES
27 Poland 75.19 YES
28 Slovakia 74.95 YES
29 Hungary 72.92 YES
30 Turkey 72.88 YES

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:09:44 +0000

Infant Mortality: US ranks 25th of 30 countries

Rank Country Infant mortality rate (deaths/1,000 live births) Universal Health Care
1 Sweden 2.76 YES
2 Japan 2.8 YES
3 Iceland 3.27 YES
4 France 3.41 YES
5 Finland 3.52 YES
6 Norway 3.64 YES
7 Germany 4.08 YES
8 Switzerland 4.28 YES
9 Spain 4.31 YES
10 Slovenia 4.35 YES
11 Denmark 4.45 YES
12 Austria 4.54 YES
13 Belgium 4.56 YES
14 Australia 4.57 YES
15 Canada 4.63 YES
16 Luxembourg 4.68 YES
17 Netherlands 4.88 YES
18 Portugal 4.92 YES
19 United Kingdom 5.01 YES
20 Ireland 5.22 YES
21 Greece 5.34 YES
22 New Zealand 5.67 YES
23 Italy 5.72 YES
24 South Korea 6.05 YES
25 United States 6.37 NO
26 Poland 7.07 YES
27 Slovakia 7.12 YES
28 Hungary 8.21 YES
29 Mexico 19.63 YES
30 Turkey 38.33 YES

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:06:05 +0000

I’ve been reading a lot of claims on both sides of the health care debate.

a synopsis of many comments

Maintain status quo:
“American has the best health care system in the world. Countries with universal care are unhappy with their system”

Change health insurance policy:
” The health care system is inefficent, broken and many people are uninsured. Uninsured people use the emergency room when care is need and this increases costs.”

So, I decided to gather data. As I was taught a long time ago… “without data, you are just another person with an opinion”.

I decided to focus on (4) things:
per capita spending on health care
life expectancy
infant mortality
universal coverage (yes/no)

See below for my findings. Let me know if my numbers are wrong.

By: Mike Bond

Mike Bond — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:58:19 +0000

Marjorie is correct that under risk-adjusted premiums the chronically ill will pay very high insurance premiums. The solution to this is to subsidize the sick, not to overcharge the healthy. We know that the chronically ill often have numerous health problems. They are probably best dealt with by the “special needs plans” that allow groups of specialists to coordinate care for these people. You will get better health outcomes and more economical costs. The question is where to get the subsidy money from? A good start is to take the $200 plus billion in subsidy from employer premiums being tax free and reallocate that to individuals/families. Sicker individuals with lower incomes would receive large credits and the healthy folks with high incomes would get very little.

By: Marjorie

Marjorie — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:06:16 +0000

‘Patients with multiple sclerosis paid a mean of $34,167 out of pocket in 2007, diabetics paid $26,971, and those with injuries paid $25,096, the researchers found.’

That’s for people with insurance.

A family making the median income, and living within their means, could easily be driven into bankruptcy by those costs.

I stand by my statement; under our current system, insurance does not protect most middle class people from financial ruin if they get sick.

Also, you says Pelosi is making it up that people’s policies are cancelled when they get sick. I invite you to read the stories of Otto Raddatz: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090616/testimony_raddatz.pdf

Wittney Horton: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090616/testimony_horton.pdf

Robin Beaton: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090616/testimony_beaton.pdf

But I am sure these people are biased. Or they lied to Congress. These are uncomfortable things to believe, so let’s just not believe them, right.

Oh, except here’s a ream of supporting documentation, including a performance review praising an employee for finding creative ways to rescind sick people’s policies: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090616/rescissionmaterials.pdf