Insurance industry stats

I just came across these stats in an article I was reading.  How can there possibly any doubt that lobbying has single handedly taken over Washington?  Especially in light of the fact that the healthcare plans on the table are pushing for more insured rather than single payer system?  If we don't shove out the insurance companies, how are the prices for our healthcare ever expected to go down, or even stay at the current level for any length of time? 87% in 10 years?  Absolutely ridiculous.  We are not reaping any benefit from it whatsoever.   

"As premiums have ballooned by 87 percent in the past decade, insurance-industry profits have climbed from $20.8 billion in 2002 to $57.5 billion in 2006. During that same period, health-care interests spent $2.2 billion on federal lobbying, more than did any other sector, and as of last month, had flooded the presidential candidates with over $11 million in campaign contributions to keep the present system intact."

• Insurance industry stats - Think Liberal
  • Insurance companies and the politicians they buy.. - have the blood of US citizens on their hands.~kam
    • How ironic about the AMA. - Think Liberal
      • Health Insurance/Health Care sm - whorn

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

NEW YORK To mark what it called the 1000 Days of the Iraq war, the London daily The Independent offered extensive coverage today, featuring a by-the-numbers approach.

Here are some of their calculations:

$204.4 billion: The cost to the U.S of the war so far.

2,339: Allied troops killed

15,955: US troops wounded in action

98: U.K troops killed

30,000 : Estimated Iraqi civilian deaths

0: Number of WMDs found

66: Journalists killed in Iraq.

63: Journalists killed during Vietnam war

8: per cent of Iraqi children suffering acute malnutrition

53,470: Iraqi insurgents killed

67: per cent Iraqis who feel less secure because of occupation

$343: Average monthly salary for an Iraqi soldier. Average monthly salary for an American soldier in Iraq: $4,160.75

5: foreign civilians kidnapped per month

47: per cent Iraqis who never have enough electricity

20: casualties per month from unexploded mines

25-40: per cent Estimated unemployment rate, Nov 2005

251: Foreigners kidnapped

70: per cent of Iraqi's whose sewage system rarely works

183,000: British and American troops are still in action in Iraq.

13,000: from other nations

90: Daily attacks by insurgents in Nov '05. In Jun '03: 8

60-80: per cent Iraqis who are strongly opposed to presence of coalition troops

*
In an accompanying piece from Baghdad, the newspaper's Patrick Cockburn adds one more stat: A BBC poll yesterday showed that half of the Iraqis questioned say that Iraq needs a strong leader--while only 28 per cent cited democracy as a priority.

Iraqis are cynical about their political leaders, Cockburn writes. The election results are likely to show that the great majority of Iraqis will vote along ethnic or religious lines as Shia, Sunni or Kurds. The country is turning from a unitary state into a confederation.

There is no sign yet of the thousand-day war ending. Every month up to a thousand fresh corpses arrive at the mortuary in Baghdad. A new Iraq is emerging but it is already drenched in blood.

I feel the same way I felt about the bank bail-outs.  I would say no bail-outs for ANY business.  I think it borders on extortion.  First the banks need a bail-out, then it's the auto companies, then AmX reorganizes so they become a holding company so THEY an qualify for some of that free money.  Latest I read the newspapers are to be next in line.  Where does it all end?

My reason for my no bail-out opinion is, what did it accomplish for the banking industry?  Nothing if we are to believe there is a credit crisis.  I noticed this evening one of the local banks was advertising that they still have money available for loans.  Why is it that it's the big guys that get into trouble?  Let 'em suffer.  Bail-outs are going to do nothing for working middle class people.

As I said in an earlier post where do you think new automobiles will fit in consumers priority list when they are trying just to put food on the table and a roof over their heads?  Pretty far down I'd say.  There are new layoffs announced every day, many have nothing whatsoever to do with the automotive industry.

So that is why I say NO BAIL-OUTS. 

One more thing...UAW role in the automobile woes.  The public has been dreadfully misled.  Most seem to think the workers make some $70 an hour when in truth they make in the neighborhood of $27.00 an hour.  Not a word have I heard objecting to the executives who are paid some $6000 PLUS per hour and all kinds of perks like private jets, etc.  Wouldn't one think this would have a whole lot to do with their finances?  The one thing I think the union should concede is the job bank where they are paid 95%, I think it is, of their wages when they are laid off.  The rest of the workforce (and my husband spent his life working as a Teamster) should have to suffer through unemployment just like the majority of other employees.  I do think that employer provided benefits such as the unions have should be available to all workers.  It most surely comes in handy at retirement.  I  think everyone should have an opportunity to retire in their older years and Social Security sure doesn't covere living expenses.  I wonder if there are any MTs who have retirement benefits?  Probably not.  Most seem now-a-days hard pressed to even make a living.

My DH and I were talking the other day and we were talking about the criticism of GM.  For one, we are both so sick and tired of hearing people say that GM was stupid for building bigger trucks and SUVs.  Once again....GM built these because that is what consumers wanted. 

Remember back when your parents had a smaller vehicles and we used to cram 5 kids in the back seat.  How many of those kids were in car seats?  How many even had their seat belts on?  Nowadays....you can't do that.  Kids have to be in a booster seat until they are 4 feet 7 inches and all people must wear a seat belt.  Now tell me this.....how many car seats can you fit in a small car?  If you have more than 2 children....you are really pushing it.

I've heard numerous complaints about why GM didn't make more fuel efficient vehicles.  Well....let's discuss this a tad bit shall we.  The government regulates certain safety standards for vehicles.  They go through several crash tests to see which cars are safer.  What does this mean.....this means more reinforcement in the vehicles frame which makes vehicles heavier.  What does the weight do?  Well, the extra material as well as the crash testing causes prices to go up and the extra weight makes the vehicles less fuel efficient. GM made the vehicles it did because at the time....that is what consumers wanted and they also had to meet Government safety standards. 

Compact cars are great for single people or married couples without children, but I'd like to see you take a trip in one of those with three kids in car seats plus all of your luggage, etc. 

I opened my post, and the text was there.  I saw an empty box with the "dead x," so that may have been what didn't go through.

Were you unable to read the text, too?  Try going to OneNewsNow.com (Fred Jackson) - 11/3/2008 7:35:00 AM, and you should be able to open it.  That should be the easiest.

When my grandparents came over from Italy via Ellis Island (& legally, too!), they settled in Monongahela, PA.  My grandfather worked in the coal mine, & they managed to raise 9 kids, all who went on to get doctorates, DDS, etc.  So it can be done (sorry for the memory lane)! 

LMK if you can open it, etc.  Setting family aside, I respect the hard, dangerous work these coal miners do.  The Global Warming (now named Climate Change) goofs are behind this, too.  It's a joke--on us.

I happen to think that the auto industry does need a bailout.  No, I don't agree with keeping the current management, and I do believe in making stipulations for how that money is spent.  I know most of you will disagree with that, but here's what I'm seeing in TN.

Congressman Zach Wamp (R) from TN was on the tube last night talkiing about how he does not want to do the bailout.  If that's his opinion that fine ----- However, lets look at his reason.  TN has been bidding for a new Volkswagon plant which has recently come to fruition---right here in my home town by the way.  He has been pushing for this for years.  This is obviously a good thing for people in TN because of the jobs it would create.  What I find ironic though is that he would let American companies go down the tubes and yet support a foreign auto maker.   My honest opinion about guys like this, is that they want the job creation, regardless of where the real money is going (overseas) and they would like to do this in such a manner so as to cut out unions. 

ARRRGGGGHHHH!!!!

They keep flip-flopping. The second link is Paulson's idea. That was probably posted before but am posting again just in case.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27721013

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27712153

Good article and the guy they interviewed, Peter DeLorenzo (?) - a guy all up on the auto biz - said neither McCain nor Obama had a clue when it came to the auto industry.  The article gave a little bit of the voting records on both related to the auto industry.

Candidates Voting Record On Auto Industry-Related Issues:
Clean Energy Achievement Criteria (2007): McCain - no vote; Obama - Yes
Preventing Petroleum Export Organizations (NOPEC Act of 2007): McCain - no vote; Obama - Yes
Reduction in Dependence on Foreign Oil (2005): McCain - No, Obama - Yes
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (No) Drilling Amendment (2005): McCain - Yes, Obama - Yes

Does Palin kno McCain voted no on reducing dependence on foreign oil?

We get 28-30 MPH with it. Why they didn't brag this up, I have no idea. It has power, too. We could keep up with the V8's with no problem. Had a very large luxury Delta 98 LS and it was the best car we ever had...but the frame rotted away, so we kept the motor and put it into a Buick LeSabre.

Part of the problem is the unions. I've always been a union supporter, but they have really killed the industry in this country in the past 20 years. That's why there are no steel industries here anymore. That's why auto workers make a fantastic wage. Once they make good to fantastic wages, they won't back down.

Face it. People are greedy and this is a gigantic wake up call, but if they don't want to, or aren't willing to, take pay cuts, or pay more for their health insurance, then we're doomed to fall into a greater depression than seen in the 30s. A me-first-and-only-me economy doesn't work.

Example:  Teachers in my area are screaming and going on strike because they don't want to pay more for health insurance. They pay $40 biweekly.  I pay $200 a pay and before that, I paid $630 a month.  I'm happy paying $200 a month. Are they? Nope. It's me-me-me. When are people going to wake up?

Barack Obama And Joe Biden Have Consistently Lied To Americans About John McCain's Plan. Their claims have failed every fact-check - from CBS to the Washington Post. John McCain is not going to raise taxes on middle class families. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the only ones in this race that plan to raise taxes.

OBAMA FICTION
John McCain Will Tax Health Care Benefits For The First Time And Will Be the Largest Middle Class Tax Increase In History.

What's the difference who says no?  Some insurance companies pretty much say no to everything but wellness visits - and that's simply so they can find out if you develop a condition, so they can drop your coverage on a threabare excuse, or jack your rates to the moon so you'll have to drop it.  Then no other company has to cover you due to it being preexisting.  I don't want to pay for insurance that only covers me if I'm not sick!

At least if there was universal healthcare, even with a wait, they'd have to treat you eventually instead of NEVER.  And do it for free.

...involved in the transcription of patient notes?

That just doesn't make sense.

we are all driving basically the same model and we are insuring it for what could possibly happen, not what will or actually does. 

Way back in the 1960s when I first started working, my company's health insurance did not cover single women for most 'female' issues, especially birth control and/or pregnancy-related issues, which has since been deemed discriminatory.  Now you must cover everyone equally for every contingency. 

The only way to individually ajust coverage costs would to be to exclude coverage based on genetic testing and/or family history, or maybe lifestyle issues such as alcohol or tobacco use or risky behavior like sky diving, which consumers have been fighting for years.  This would probably also be deemed discriminatory.

should have checked a few things out.

I feel for you, but a pre-existing condition is NOT uninsurable if you have had insurance for 30 days prior to the illness.

Case in point: We had private health insurance paid for out of our own pockets for 6 years. DH had open heart surgery. In the meantime I got a job with a company, signed up for insurance and they stated a 1 year before they would insure him. Yet, it was less than 30 days since I signed up. All I needed was a Certificate of Insurance from our private carrier, and then no waiting period. I got that, and he is now totally insured under the company plan.

If you did not cancel your insurance until after your problem, you have a way out. Just ask the former insurance company for a certificate of insurance and no one can turn you down.

I'm not trying to be mean or whatever you want to call it, I'm trying to help, so don't take it the wrong way. Best of luck and hopefully, things will turn around for you.

Doesn't anybody in DC have a conscience?  The system as it stands now is disgusting.  They are literally making billions by killing of thousands upon thousands (maybe millions?) of Americans.  Anyone with half a brain should recognize profit-driven health insurance only serves the best interest of the CEOs of the insurance companies - not healthcare recipients! This needs to change NOW!

I saw my first AMA commercial last night urging people to vote with the millions of uninsured Americans in mind.  I loved it!  It is at least a step in the right direction.  Vote with the healthcare crisis in mind people!

cost $1,000 or more a month?

Health insurance premiums, plus their refusal to insure people with preexisting conditions, are becoming prohibitive costwise for many (millions of Americans) to afford.

Though the example you gave may be true for some younger folks, I believe that's the exception and not the rule.

There is a huge crisis in healthcare in this country today.  Good for you that you can afford it and just blame everyone else who can't.  Maybe someday soon you'll be in the same boat with the 50-odd million Americans who simply can't afford it.  Who will you blame then?

I agree with some of what you said about the state representatives being held accountable.  I did vote for Senate candidates in the last election based on their stances on healthcare.  One of them has been working tirelessly (with many others) to expand CHIP health insurance to kids to more middle-income children in the state, and he was successful!  Now that the income bracket was raised, my 6-year-old has healthcare again, and I am so grateful! (Bush is threatening to veto the legislation that expanded CHIP to more families, though, so I'm praying he does not do that).

I am relatively young (26) and so many of my friends do not vote.  I am always encouraging them to do just that (whether they vote Democrat or Republican), and I think if Senate recall (I think that's what you called it) was in place, more of them might vote.  For now, we just have to hope they keep their campaign promises in hopes of being re-elected.

I know Congress needs to pass the bills on health insurance, and I know many of the Congressmen (on both sides of the aisle) have been bought and paid for by the insurance companies, and that is very disturbing to me.  That's one of the reasons I like Obama so much - I think he is a good man who has not been "bought and paid for" by any big corporations.

I think America needs to cover all medical costs for our children and our elderly, and I hope more Republicans candidates will address that issue.  We need to take better care of our most helpless citizens.

That's fine you don't care about the fact that many families are working their fingers to the bone just to pay for necessities, including health insurance, but I do.  I care very much and am very sad that so many people in this country only seem to care about children that come from upper middle class and rich families.  I guess they deserve better health care than the middle-class kids.  I don't know how people that feel that way can go to bed with a clear conscience.

People in Congress that we took the time to elect put a lot of effort into negotiating this bill to make both parties relatively happy.  YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE TAXED FOR IT.  THE CIGARETTE TAX WOULD HAVE GONE UP.  Keep telling yourself what you need to tell yourself to sleep at night, but the fact is kids with diabetes from a lower-middle-class income family have less of a chance of surviving than a child from an upper class income family.  That is a sad, sad, fact.