Catching Up with Trumpcare – IOTW Report

Catching Up with Trumpcare

Monday, 20 March 2017, 0:02 BFH Uncategorized 48

Hear C. Steven Tucker HERE.

48 Comments on Catching Up with Trumpcare

  2. I mean no disrespect, but if your cutting your nut from the health INSURANCE INDUSTRY….well, I got issues about the bottom line of your premise…..Insurance companies/industry provide NOTHING but paper exchangers at a fee….

  4. For Gods Sake kill the health care crap after 12 pm my time…I need to sleep….I’m thinking of doing a remake of “Taxi Driver” and my Cab is full….

  5. He’s right Bad_Brad on his first assertion. The GOP SHOULD attempt to repeal the major health insurance regulations under Obamacare that have raised premiums. According to prior CBO scores, other outside estimates, and the Obama administration’s own estimates, those regulations have significant budgetary effects. Republicans should argue to the Senate parliamentarian that these regulations being repealed would be neither incidental nor extraneous. The repeal of those regulations would remove the terms and conditions under which Obamacare created its insurance subsidies in the first place, thus meeting the Byrd rule test. If successful, such efforts would provide relief on the issue Americans care most about: Reducing health costs and staggering premium increases. He’s WRONG however on point two, “that the bill will not pass without doing so”. The bill will pass as is without removing the regulations. They have the votes now because they only need 51 votes to pass it via the budget reconciliation process. Cruz is also wrong that those regulations can only be repealed via passage of this reconcilation bill. Dr. Tom Price our new H.H.S. secretary has enormous power as H.H.S. director to roll back regulations ON HIS OWN without congress. The PPACA (Obamacare law) uses the words “the Secretary shall” about 1,400 times. So, without congress and without this bill passing, Dr. Price can roll back many of these regulations on his own. Furthermore, this bill STARVES the primary funding sources for Obamacare by rolling back the taxes and fines on indivdiual and employers, if you STARVE Obamacare it will eventually die on it’s own and when it does, it’s regulations will no longer matter.

  6. Your premise is incorrect WillyGoatsGruff. Insurance companies provide the necessary capital to pay for expensive medical procedures that most Americans cannot afford, hence the need to ‘insure’ against them. Insurance companies have saved my client’s lives over and over again over the last 21 years and you and everyone else better PRAY that this bill reinventivizes health insurers to REENTER the health insurance marketplace because if they do not, the 19 million of us who buy our own health insurance (non employer sponsored) will have NO carriers to choose from next year. The situation is THAT dire. Learn more at https://csteventucker.com

  11. “Insurance companies provide necessary capital”….who’s capital and who decides?….they exchange paperwork and provide a fee….nothing more…..most of my rude prostate exhumes happened at the desk to provide insurance coverage….

  13. He’s right about that. That’s why Republicans can and SHOULD try to repeal the regulations as a BUDGETARY issue in the Reconcilation bill. However, if they cannot, as aforementioned, Dr. Price can roll back MANY of them and also as aformentioned, this bill STARVES the FUNDING sources for Obamacare. Starve it and it will die and then it’s regulations no longer matter.

  14. Those who pay the premiums provide the capital for the insurers to build the necessary reserves to pay large claims when they occur and they occur OFTEN. Who decides? The contract you sign decides. It states what is and what is not covered, just like any other legal insurance contract you would purchase to insure your home, car, business etc.

  15. I scrolled up…small town cable delay…..Please tell me, Why do we we need to have an insurance company grabbing a profit for handling paperwork that could be handled between a doctor and patient with a local accountant pushing the papers amongst ourselves?…..It could all be handled in the cost….

  16. @C. Steven – I think you need to rethink the idea that “insurance companies “provide” capital”. They do NOT provide capital – they selectively distribute capital that is provided by customers that pay premiums.

    The way you phrased that sounds like a government bureaucrat claiming that government has its own money to spend on whatever they deem fit (without regard for constitutional limits) when the fact is that it was confiscated from a taxpayer under the threat of force first.

  18. Bubba’sBrother, insurance companies CREATE capital FROM capital. How do they do so? By investing capital. Most large health insurers are PUBLICLY traded companies and the smaller ones are owned by larger insurers that are publicy traded. This means that they use the smaller amounts of capital they receive from policy holders to GROW and CREATE more and larger amounts of capital via the stock market. So yes, they DO create capital. Government doesn’t create ANYTHING. It ROBS from citizens (illegally) and then redistributes that money to others.

  20. @ C. Steven – that’s a fair point, but the “seed” money they invest to “create” capital wouldn’t exist without premiums being paid. While I can see and appreciate the need for some entity to oversee the financial aspects (like an insurance company) to paying for expensive treatments. insurance bureaucracies do add a costly layer to the medical care the end user receives.

    There is a lot of room for improvement in that area and the insurance company desired to keep the end users from knowing what is really happening with billing. The local hospital here (small town) bills insurance better than $1200 for a CT scan, but a sign posted at the check-in says if you are paying cash it is $400. The difference in pricing is tied up in the bureaucratic nightmare that is insurance payments vs. hospital billing. There is a lot of waste built into the process.

  21. “Many large insurers are PUBLICLY traded companies”…..WHAT IN THE LIVING NAME OF FRED do they provide to the economy outside of grabbing their Veg from Vinnie at the bar?…It’s a protection racket….ponzi….bodda booo….

  22. Yes and that is the problem with government MEDDLING in the health insurance industry. For example in 1979, there were a TOTAL of 279 mandates on health insurers nationwide. Today? There are more than 2,600. As with all things in the private sector, getting the BOOT of BIG government OFF the our necks is the answer. Government is soley responsible for the bureacractic nightmare this IS today’s health insurance and health care marketplace.

  23. “Starve it and it will die and then it’s regulations no longer matter.”

    So by the time the votes required on the third leg if Ocare has died underneath it’s own wait Dems are going to be required to make a very transparent vote to help get people their insurance?

  25. “It’s NOT a ‘Ponzi” scheme like Social Security is. It’s like any other insurance CONTRACT. No one calls their P&C (property and casualty) insurer a “protection racket” when their home burns down or floods. They are instead THANKFUL that their insurer has the necessary capital to rebuild their home. The same holds true for their business or their automobiles etc. And, the very SAME holds true for those with Cancer who I deal with every day. NONE of them call their health insurer a ‘protection racket’. They are instead GRATEFUL for that protection and THANKFUL that they were smart enough to purchase health insurance BEFORE they got sick.

  27. “As with all things in the private sector, getting the BOOT of BIG government OFF the our necks is the answer. Government is soley responsible for the bureacractic nightmare this IS today’s health insurance and health care marketplace.”

    On that point, I am in full agreement. I am simply very leery that the establishment hacks in congress won’t do anything to hurt their own pocketbooks (of which many have their palms greased by insurance (and pharmaceutical and other medically related) companies. That’s why I think a full repeal is the surest way to keep the congressional “smart guys” from screwing the pooch on this critically important item.

  30. I agree Bubba. I want FULL repeal but I also live in a cool place called REALITY and without 8 Democrat votes we ain’t gettin FULL repeal right now. Senator Cruz is smart enough to also understand this. Where your understanding (and mine) of this goes beyond his is that once Dr. Price gets done rolling back MANY of the Obamacare mandates and regulations ON HIS OWN and once the passage of the current Reconcilation bill GUTS the funding for Obamacare it will indeed die on it’s own and then as you so eloquently stated, the Dems will be in a WHOLE different political position than they are right now. It’s easy to oppose this repeal and replace bill so long as the $5 billion that Obama STOLE from the Treasury to give to health insurers to prop them up lasts and so long as the unconstitutional mandates and taxes on Americans continue. Once we kill those, they’re going to play ball and we will get the rest of the bill killed, maybe not on Thursday but most certainly in the near future.

  31. I do, I call my home insurance and my car insurance ponzi schemes….they don’t recognize shit, don’t pay for anything and are still glad to cash my check….just like health insurance….ya know, I mean no disrespect, but if ya earn your living from the health insurance industry, I know who you are…

  33. Why can’t the repubs in the senate just make a new rule to repeal the whole thing and have the house “deem it passed” like Pelosi did with Obamacare originally? I have no moral qualms with being sneeeaaaky when dealing with the vermin that passed this crap in the first place. Rules shouldn’t mean any more to us in getting rid of Obamacare than it did the dems in foisting Obamacare on us to begin with. It was never a valid law from its inception.

  35. Yes, I’m an expert on health care policy. How did I get there? By working WITHING that space for 21 years. And no, your homeowners insurer is NOT a “Ponzi scheme”. Social Security is a Ponzie scheme. Your home, life, auto and health insurer are simply entities who have more money than you that you agree to pay a small sum to each month to ENSURE that you are INSURED against said losses, loss of home, life, auto or good health. It’s as simple as that. Nothing more nothing less and most certainly not a “Ponzi scheme”. A “Ponzi scheme” is defined as: “A form of FRAUD (which insurance is NOT) in which belief in the success of a NONEXISTANT ENTERPRISE (insurers actually exist) is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors.” In short, you’re just plain wrong BillysGoatGruff and the simple truth is you, like most of us who pay insurance premiums simply don’t like doing so. I hope in your case though you realize the necessity of doing so. I know I do and all of my clients do, especially those who are very sick now.

  37. @C. Steven – I wish I was as confident as you are about the whole mess.

    @Willys – I’ve never had an insurance company refuse money from me either (at least a first blush). My car/auto insurance cancelled me right after my divorce without telling me, but they sent me a new bill anyway. I paid the bill for both and they kept the money despite denying me coverage. Months later after changing carriers, I was stopped for supposedly having a lapse in my car insurance coverage at some point (even though the county tag database showed I had not had a lapse – this was the only way I found out my policies had been cancelled). It took months to get my money back from the blood suckers.

  38. @Brad – “By the way, Willies looking for a veterinarian, not a doctor.”

    That’s ok – I’m not a lawyer either and the only thing I know about insurance has been gained from the painful dealings I’ve had with some of them. I could probably do as much for his animals as I could for him LOL.

  40. I’m just a “consultant” LOL – not a participant. Maybe if the insurers had to do things that required protective gloves, they would be a little better to deal with.

  41. @ CSteventucker….there is no doubt that you are a multi-yeared expert on insurance, but insurances is based on profit and loss, just like a ponzi scheme…just like health insurance….I think we should play a game of 8 ball…maybe 2 out of 3 if you need them….

  42. @Bad Brad….my vet is about 5′ 4″ and has hands that will scare the testicles out of a grown goat…..I met her husband once and he got out of his truck….and continued to get out of his truck for 3 minutes…his nickname was Eclipse…I still don’t know why he thinks I was flirting’….

  43. Steven are the high risk pools an amendment, or were they in the original version? In all the discussion, I hadn’t heard of them until now.
    That makes a huge difference. Now, forbid illegals from participating, and mod or eliminate the tax credit. It would be fine as a deduction. But shouldn’t pay people more than the tax they already paid.

  44. Insurance rates are based on risk. Risk is determined by many factors – your location, your claim history, your credit rating, your employment, your age, and on. An actuary is a business professional who deals with the measurement and management of risk, the insurance companies use them to determine how to set rates. Detroit has high auto theft, so for example(specifically), auto comp/coll rates are higher there than in the middle of Iowa.
    A policy pays out based only on what is covered under the policy. With auto and home insurance you, the insured, are under obligation to secure yourself and property against certain risks. If you fail to do so, that is considered negligence, and a insurance company is not going to cover certain losses you incur due to negligence. Be proactive and learn what your insurance companies will and will not pay out for.

    Most people do not know that flooding is not a covered loss. Burst pipes? Covered. Municipal sewer backs up into your house? Covered. Heavy rain and a floor results? Not covered. Nearly all flood insurance is under FEMA because insurance companies will not offer it, it is a separate policy that you must purchase from FEMA. Why won’t your home insurer cover flood? Potentially too catastrophic because it is not a constant for most of the country. No way to spread the risk if you can’t determine the risk. Most flood specific policies require a full payment of the 12 month term, so that is the reason many put off buying it. That and it can be a fight to get your claim payed.

  46. cst: thanks for the great explanations above. Apology to you for my nastiness (I’m rubbed raw on the verge of victory of a 7-year suit against govt body).

  47. All over the web I’m seeing how (to paraphrase) people think Obamacare covers the hospital bills after a car accident. The lefties got half the population hood-winked on health insurance.
    I like to think of insurance this way: Insurance is like a savings account with over-draft protection and a built-in GoFundMe site.

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.