How about if we just eliminate the government in its entirety from the health industry.

I know a struggling young man whose mother killed his father and tried to kill him. I gave him $50 so he could get his GED by taking the test. He passed on the first try and has it.
He is currently struggling to afford gas money by working at a Subway way on the other side of Birmingham because a very close Walmart can only offer him a part-time job because of Obamacare.
Harry Reid would call the above a "Republican lie."
Sorry, I'm one of those Tea Party "terrorists."
Got methane to pass? Let's hear it for the unaffordable Affordable Healthcare Act.

But at least in *real* gambling, you have the choice whether to place the bet or not. If you decide the risk outweighs the possible gain... you can walk away from the table. No one is holding a gun to your head and telling you to put your chips on the pretty green table... NOW.

Obitemeacare (and other legally "mandatory" insurance schemes ) take away that free choice and put the gun to your head... saying, in essence, we don't care if it's a bad bet, or you know you'll lose - you're still gonna make that bet.

Insurance - in the right circumstances - aren't a bad deal. And as an investment, as long as it's managed correctly, will make a healthy profit. But mandated and regulated by the government, it becomes just another Looter Vehicle to separate you from your hard earned cash, and hand it over to said looter that bought into the house side of the table. Why do you think some insurance companies "donate" office space to their state insurance commissioners?

My dad, and both stepmoms, worked in the industry, and would sing its praises... hiding the reality of what it is. Seeing the truth behind it, I am *not* a fan of the industry.

In the late 30's/early 40's, insurance did not exist. When we needed to visit a doctor or go to a hospital, we did so, paying everything out of pocket. While this may seem daunting (almost shocking), the costs were relatively low, because malpractice insurance did not exist and doctors competed for business. Without malpractice insurance and health insurance, the costs were VERY low. Employers eventually started to offer paid-for health insurance to attract the right employees. So at that time the insurance industry was born.

Obviously, medical science has leapt forward tremendously and people are living longer. Can you imagine what it would be like to actually go back to such a system in which healthcare was affordable to the point that out-of-pocket was not astronomical? Wouldn't that be much simpler?

Today's system of compulsory purchasing of health insurance is a diametric opposite of what we were in the 30's/40's.

I joined a vast but still private association that agrees to share expenses, while also coaching one another about how not to stay at high risk for the development of chronic illness. I already know how much money I will save, even beyond what I was paying already.

That's the way Corporate America hires their CEOs, no? Hire the person with the "best intentions". LOL!

During the 2008 election I commented that I would not hire Obama as a first-line manager in my group. He is truly the least qualified person in any room he enters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy8JttV64...

My guesstimate is that the 30 million or so that were uninsured were that way for a reason. The only reason I have insurance is because my wife at the time had some medical issues that needed to be taken care of. That and I had retired from the military and they offered a good plan. So, even after that and the divorce I kept the insurance as it was better than what my employer offered. Otherwise, it has been several years since I have been to the doctor and see no reason to go anytime soon. I will probably be out of the country before I need anything from a medical practitioner and then American insurance is out the window.

If you want to reduce the cost of health care you don't add more government. Here are some straight forward proposals to reduce the cost:

1) Eliminate pain and suffering in med malpractice cases. Cap damages to say $500k
2) Eliminate the FDA
3) Eliminate the deduction for health care. Either make it a private deduction or just get rid of it.
4) Declare all State limitations on what Insurance companies have to provide unconstitutional under the commerce clause.
5) Block grant out medicare and medicaid and then phase them out.
6) Eliminate the licensing requirements for doctors.

Within two years of this the price of health care would drop 30-50%

And you voted for him twice and raised money for him.

"But his heart is in the right place?"

Bravo! :)

Have to make one point in my agreement with you YNGH, and that is this.

Since Obamacare it is no longer legalized gambling it is now most definitely legalized extortion

One of the proposals along the way has been to allow insurance portability, in order for a person to be able to choose whether a new policy was better than the old... Alas, this did not fit into the Obamacare "one size fits all" approach of centralized governmental regulation of our healthcare. <sigh>

I agree with all of this including this good line:
"The way "insurance" works today under Obamacare would be analogous to not having automobile insurance until you have an accident."
Health problems, though, are increasingly more predictable than auto-accidents. I think the model of insuring against health problems was close to falling apart. Many people had "insurance" thought an employer where maybe they didn't even want to work anymore but it was under a plan sponsored by that employer that they got their cancer diagnosis and became ineligible for insurance (as the peril had already occurred).
People were rightly trying to pay companies to bear the risk of an expensive health problem, but it wasn't working that well. Sometimes it was someone with a congenital health problem or someone on a group plan when he got sick, but often it was just people who didn't want to pay for insurance until _after_ the peril occurred.

I also like the line that absent a profit motive, "insurance company and can only survive as a clearinghouse for federal subsidies." It does seem like they only exist under the new system b/c they were a strong lobby.

I believe all this was coming anyway because of genetic testing. The very model of insurance was breaking down. Spreading the risk was starting already to look like socializing the risk of being born with bad genes.

I can't say that I am a fan of insurance companies, but we need to look at what insurance is...it is legalized gambling on the part of the insurance company. The insurance company is betting on you, while you are making the other bet. If the odds are stacked against the insurance company, what motivation do they have beyond the altruistic "doing good for all of man" (as they go out of business)? Like any other company, insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to make a profit for their shareholders. When that motivation is legislatively stopped, it ceases to be an insurance company and can only survive as a clearinghouse for federal subsidies.

The way "insurance" works today under Obamacare would be analogous to not having automobile insurance until you have an accident. Then you sign up for insurance and have your car repaired. Makes no sense, does it?

The long and short of it is that we don't really have insurance under Obamacare. What we really have is more of the same: income redistribution.

"we're going to "insure" 30 million more people while not increasing the number of healthcare professionals, all while reducing competition amongst the insurance companies. "
Yes! And I agree with the scare quotes on "insure" since most of these people are people for whom the peril has already occurred. Most of the people who didn't have insurance before and are now buying "insurance" will have the most costly risk profile. I actually think the _idea_ of spreading risk in this way makes sense, but it's foolish for anyone to think it will come cheap. When my wife and I last did underwriting they took blood and went over literally every occasion when I had thrown my back out. They told me how much I would save if I lost a few pounds. I have always been healthy though-- good cholesterol and other vitals.. I knew my premiums would double if I were in the same risk pool with people who were sick. Indeed they would have doubled if I hadn't found a way to stay on the underwritten plan. I'm okay with them doubling, though, b/c the point of insurance is to spread risk, and it seems inefficient to put me in a lower risk pool just b/c I was healthy when I did underwriting and to penalize someone who got sick before they had a chance. This will be even more true when simple tests can predict future diseases; at that point "insuring" against non-acquired non-accident sickness will be impossible. I don't have all the answers, but I knew from the outset insuring 30 million people, most of whom had a history of illness, would NOT be cheap.