milkman636
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,545
- Location
- Palm of the Right Hand
- Tractor
- Bobcat CT335 + John Deere 1023e (former owner of Kubota BX2370-1, John Deere 5210, and Ford 2000)
As I stated in a previous post: I have looked at the online health insurance marketplace that our government promotes to see what what other insurance policies and cost may be available. A soon as I indicate my employer offers an insurance plan it says that I am not eligible. There are no further questions about the costs or benefits of the policy being offered. It's game over. They have built an insurance market place for only people that do not have employers offering any sort of health insurance. Why wouldn't our friends in D.C. build a marketplace that could serve all citizens? Wouldn't any marketplace increase its probability of success by serving a larger number of customers?The fact that you choose to use employer subsidized health care is not the same thing as "there are no practical alternatives".
Employers began offering subsidized health care as a way to attract employees with lower cost than simply offering higher wages. It was a win-win. Employers would pay, roughly, 35% on each dollar and the employee would save 50% on every dollar. Over time, the cost of benefits (mostly health insurance) rose, so employers are paying 55% or more on every dollar of salary.
The funny thing about insurance is that it floods the market with demand with no corresponding increase in supply. That causes prices to increase. Single payer only makes it worse. There is zero competition and the quality of care is much worse.
For example. My daughter is an RN. She got married about 18 months ago and they went to Italy for their honeymoon. She got appendicitis and had to have surgery while she was there. Prior to that, she, like many young people, believed the BS about how great 'free' Healthcare would be. She saw first hand, from a professional viewpoint how much worse the care was in Europe. They were decades behind the US in terms of technology and patient care.
In short, the money has to come from somewhere. In most other countries, the policy makers decide what level of care you get and when you get it...but the rich can still get better private care, often by traveling to the US to get it. When US people travel, it is often because of regulatory issues rather than pure cost, but for some it is cost. When people come to the US for care, it is because of the lack of quality of care or options. I'm sorry, but I'll take our broken system over their broken system all day long.
Prior to looking I had spent probably 100 hours arguing with my current carrier for taking money back from providers 18 months after the fact because they suspected an injury might have been work related. This was 18 months later, and I only found out because I was hit by collections for the debts. It took three months for them to decide it wasn't a work injury and restore payment to the medical providers. It seems like they complicate things a couple times a year just to see if I'll back down to let them off the hook. I pay thousands in premiums to this company for this kind of hassle, and I'm too the point that I'd pay a little more to not deal with this provider
My employer used offer alternative companies to select from, but they are down to one carrier now. 15 years ago when I hired in the health insurance was a no-cost benefit with no deductibles to meet. That lasted for 2 or 3 years and its been steadily creeping downhill since. It sucks that the best option for exploring different insurance may actually be exploring other jobs. The rest of my job has been good to me.