Fascinating!

[bronwynrh]

Ok, friedrich, embedded in Radley's latest is the point I was trying to make about personal responsibility and health care. Apparently, there is absolutely no legal reason why health insurers shouldn't alter premiums for clients based on their fitness or habits (such as smoking, seatbelt-wearing, etc.), the way life insurers and other insurance underwriters do.

A quotation: ". . .because America is still primarily a third-party-pays system, we won't be ready for carrot-and-stick health insurance until we move more toward a consumer-driven system, where we as individuals begin to see just how much health care costs."

This stuff is really really amazing to me, folks. The people in charge don't even know what's law and what isn't - not even the lawyers!

So we could avoid all this legislation if the health insurance companies started charging people based on their behavior. Talk about waking people up to taking some personal responsibility! I think such a change would be far more effective than any legislation on portion sizes or information posting.

Comments

[ex-friedrich47.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, alot of the people who now have the most unhealthy lifestyles and the poorest diets have no health insurance. So insurance costs are unlikely to affect their behavior, although their behavior will affect what we all have to pay for emergency care, hospital construction, lost time due to sick days, etc....

I see this as another situation where short-term profits for large corporations hold back the long-term growth of our national economy.

[bramey.livejournal.com]

Oh, but there are plenty of super-wealthy people who don't carry insurance, either.

I hate to call on statistics, as they can only be trusted so far, but I would like to see some number on precisely who does and does not have coverage (perforce or by choice), and some real data on the spread of unhealthy lifestyles/obesity etc across income brackets.

It is far from true that wealthy (or even middle class) people are skinny healthy people, by and large. That sort of impression seems to me to come more from people trying to toe some sort of party line or other ideological affiliation than any basis in fact.

Only real data would bear either of us out on this one, I think.

Health?

[ex-friedrich47.livejournal.com]

You are right again. Some of the least healthy I have met were doctors. We had neighbors in Nashville and both parents were doctors. Both smoked, drank to excess, and the father was truly obese. They also left the cesspool in their front yard covered only by a thin sheet of plywood.

The father used to spend all Saturday and Sunday plowing through six-pack after six-pack propped in front of at least 5 color televisions all tuned to different sports channels so that he could watch several football games simultaneously.

Re: Health?

[bramey.livejournal.com]

*blink* *blink*

That's truly terrifying.

[ex-friedrich47.livejournal.com]

But I do agree that health insurance companies should be able to adjust their rates according to lifestyle, as I said in a comment to the previous entry.

This is not over yet, is it?

[bramey.livejournal.com]

Never! :-D

[bramey.livejournal.com]

Ok, did you mean is the summit over? I don't know, but I think so.

Hm

:-D

[ex-friedrich47.livejournal.com]

No. I meant the argument. But I did run out of steam. We will have to take it up at some future date.

[bramey.livejournal.com]

I just ran out of procrastination time. I'm so buried under pressure right now that involved political discussions (much as I love them because they help me work things out) only make me feel guilty, worthless and depressed.

I'm trying to keep track so I can be aware, but I'm afraid I can't invest any good time to processing all the information. This is of course a fact that also depresses me.

I wish I could just be done with this shit already. I'm losing all desire to finish because it's all too frustrating and I want to just start a real life. *scream*

/rant

[boreal.livejournal.com]

I have to disagree, because I can see the ol hop and jump over to looking at genetics and even what diseases you acquire to dump your health insurance or up the cost.

Married woman is faithful. Husband goes out, cheats, picks up HIV, gives it to her. "Well I'm sorry Mrs. So and So, we're increased your rates by 40,000% because you should have been more responsible and known what your husband is doing and what the risks of unprotected sex were in a relationship you couldn't verify wasn't monogamous even though you had an understanding..."

I think seat belts are one thing. I think smoking is another entirely and they shouldn't be penalized for it. I'm fit, I don't smoke, I never have, I have never tried ANY illegal drug, ever, I've always worn my seatbelt and so on. I've LOVE a break in my insurance costs. However. I would not want it hanging over my head that if I got HIV because I made a stupid choice, I would be dropped from my insurance or have to pay insane rates because of 'an error in judgement' which is what they seem to use to justify smoking and being overweight and so on.

Maybe I completely misunderstood what you were saying. But that's my thoughts on it anyhow. :)

[bramey.livejournal.com]

Oh, I completely agree that it's a briar patch. Who decides who's a "good" risk and who's a "bad" one?

I know.

I think it's worth a look though. There's got to be a better way than what we've got now. It'll take some creativity, but I'm sure we could come up with something that works.

[boreal.livejournal.com]

I do agree with you-- there has to be a better situation than there is now. However, I see the medical industry turning into something like any other business: money talks. And as long as they're making money hand over fist (and charging 20$ per individual latex glove used when cleaning a patient's room, or charging a man for breastfeeding instruction, or not giving itemized lists as STANDARD billing, instead of having to jump through hoops to get one... ) then the system isn't going to change. They're making money, they know it, and they like it. They probably sit around like enron employees laughing it up as they slip in all sorts of 'accidental' charges and a load of purposeful over-charges.

How do we get change anymore? In politics, or business... I mean, has anyone figured out a surefire way to evoke change? Or are we all gonna go crazy and create kickass bulldozers?

[bramey.livejournal.com]

I think we'll just see things get worse and worse until there's some sort of revolution. An intellectual and political one - not a guns and coups sort of thing.

I hope.

Maybe those huge charges for tylenol and tissues in hospitals is the way they recover the costs of treating those patients who never pay up. Every problem is feeding all the other problems in a great big horrible loop of awfulness.

[boreal.livejournal.com]

I believe most hospitals get at least some federal coverage for patients who don't pay up. And if hospitals wanted to be honest about what they're doing, there should be a seperate surcharge that would be "for the other patients who don't pay up." That could be a percentage based on the total cost of the bill. Instead of mis-charging patients for procedures or items they never needed, or never had or never used, or overcharging on basics and so on.

The only way change will happen is if people do something about it. And look at Enron ...we all knew, KNEW we were being screwed in energy charges that summer with the blackouts and such. Could we as consumers prove it? Nope. Did we all storm the castle? Nope. Enron has to ef-up before the record could be clarified as to what happened.

And that is what is happening with gas prices. You think there not being enough refineries is an accident? Or that its true and not just some excuse? Oil supplies are running out, this is the end of the era for those companies and they need to make money hand over fist to finance new energy programs so they stay viable as a company, but also likely to pay off all the executives so they stick around and shut up. Its a logic I don't get with big business, but they do. And we pay for their 30 million dollar homes and vacations and so on. Because we're stupid enough to use their products.

As for small level movements, look at the interest this has generated in bio-diesal. Using vegetable oils for fuel in diesal cars (that have a converter system. Which is not too expensive, you can read more on the web.) And although that is generating a big movement, its still extremely small in size. Its not remotely mainstream. That's about the only 'revolution' that is being caused by hard gas prices. And its not much...

[dburr13.livejournal.com]

the insurance companies already charge more for various behaviours...especially the behaviour of getting old...as we'll all find out when we get to that state...they want to avoid insuring people who really need to be insured at costs...i do a talk show, once a month, with a guy from the state insurance bureau...the latest premium boost is for people who have a bad credit rating...so if you are deep in debt, looking to get yourself out of debt...they have made another hole for your boat!

[bramey.livejournal.com]

Awesome!

/sarcasm