Individual health insurance in the USVI

I think its the bloodsucking insurances companies and malpractice lawyers myself.

Sorry. No.

Are you interested in the facts? If so you might look here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_in_the_United_States

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/reawakening-liberty/2012/mar/29/why-health-care-so-expensive/

Those wanting obamacare do realize that gvt intereference in the market place is why health care costs are so high to begin with?

And More gvt interefernce is the answer? Sigh.......

The exact opposite is true.
Increased government interference leads to increased healthcare costs?
Are you suggesting that the United States government has more regulation and "interference" than France, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Russia, etc etc etc?
But...arent those countries "COMMUNIST", and "SOCIALIST"??
:S
You can't have it both ways now. (and don't even consider mentioning us being communist now 'since Obama', as our healthcare rates were sky high during Bush I, II, Reagan, etc).
-----------------

In reality, the healthcare industry is quite a bit like the financial industry: gross, negligent de-regulation led to the raping of the public, and very few getting rich.

Total regulation can absolutely KILL productivity, and send prices skyrocketing....... but nowhere nearly as much as zero regulation.
The brilliant thing Republicans have done is make the public THINK our level of regulation is closer to 100%, while in reality make it closer to 0% Why do we even have the terrible regulation that is the Sherman anti-trust act: making monopolies illegal? Please tell me how allowing monopolies lowers prices.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/26/21-graphs-that-show-americas-health-care-prices-are-ludicrous/

I think its the bloodsucking insurances companies and malpractice lawyers myself.

Actually, the malpractice lawyers have absolutely nothing to do with healthcare costs. There are numerous graphs and studies demonstrating this beyond all reasonable doubt- if you're interested.

Ironically that myth was begun by republicans because:
1. Trial lawyers largely finance the democratic party, and rule number one is to attack an opponents source of finances (see teachers now), and
2. Changes in public perception permitted a reduction in consumer rights, and more laws protecting THEIR source of money: big business!

It has nothing to do with ideology, and everything to do with greed and money. They can't just come out and say that though- they need to trick the public into voting their way, so they sneak something in to trick the masses: "muslims, gay marriage, abortion, obama,war on christmas, jeeeeeezus!!!!".....

and it works, because people like you are here arguing fervently in favor of policies that are blatantly against your own best interest. I really don't give a shit, I think it's brilliant, but at least call it what it is.

caribstx- that last paragraph was supposed to be for the prior post- that wasn't directed towards you at all!!

There are many procedures in demand for which there is limited scientific support. For example, a person with arthtitis and obesity with pain in the knees wants relief by a knee replacement. Would that person be better served by losing weight and doing PT? Probably. But the person goes to the surgeon and the surgeon is only too happy to comply. If that surgeon doesn't, the surgeon across the hall will do the procedure. In the early 90s there were no orthopods on St Thomas. Now there are several with large, successful practices. Are people better off? Has the price of health care come down? I am not disparaging the orthopedic surgeons. They are only doing what the community wants.

Medical care has little to do with health in many instances. We have gone from a nation of people who were responsible for their own well-being to one that craves quick fix procedures, and they want everyone else to help pay for them.

There are many procedures in demand for which there is limited scientific support. For example, a person with arthtitis and obesity with pain in the knees wants relief by a knee replacement. Would that person be better served by losing weight and doing PT? Probably. But the person goes to the surgeon and the surgeon is only too happy to comply. If that surgeon doesn't, the surgeon across the hall will do the procedure. In the early 90s there were no orthopods on St Thomas. Now there are several with large, successful practices. Are people better off? Has the price of health care come down? I am not disparaging the orthopedic surgeons. They are only doing what the community wants.

Medical care has little to do with health in many instances. We have gone from a nation of people who were responsible for their own well-being to one that craves quick fix procedures, and they want everyone else to help pay for them.

Very well stated and I whole heartedly agree.

There are many procedures in demand for which there is limited scientific support. For example, a person with arthtitis and obesity with pain in the knees wants relief by a knee replacement. Would that person be better served by losing weight and doing PT? Probably. But the person goes to the surgeon and the surgeon is only too happy to comply. If that surgeon doesn't, the surgeon across the hall will do the procedure. In the early 90s there were no orthopods on St Thomas. Now there are several with large, successful practices. Are people better off? Has the price of health care come down? I am not disparaging the orthopedic surgeons. They are only doing what the community wants.

Medical care has little to do with health in many instances. We have gone from a nation of people who were responsible for their own well-being to one that craves quick fix procedures, and they want everyone else to help pay for them.

Yes, well put indeed. So what's the answer? Educating people about how to take care of themselves? Rewarding preventative measures?

IMHO, competition in the insurance marketplace.

IMHO...take insurance company profit out of healthcare for a 30% overall savings.

if you took profit out of the healthcare you would have no healthcare

I'm not sure why that would be. Most of the other countries with universal healthcare don't use for profit insurance companies to maintain their system. Why should America? Additionally, single payer countries with universal health care typically have massive buying power because they are buying for entire countries or provinces, not just one or two or ten hospitals. More saving right there.

USA was not ready to accept a single payer option, probably because of the insurance lobby. I don't see how they can make the current plan work and now they've moved on to immigration reform. Legislative victories over practical solutions? Are practical solutions even a reality in today's political climate?

Why don't we just take the profit out of everything? The benefit that is mentioned for single payer healthcare and the savings based on buying power would also apply to grocery stores. Everyone has to eat, let's make food free! Why not make transportation free? Everyone needs to get around. Think of how convienent it would be not to have to pay for healthcare or food or transportation. And housing? It should be free too! Why should we just pick on the incomes of healthcare workers? Let's make everything free, then no one would need to work if they didn't want to.

Great idea right? I'm sure this would work and the US could be the greatest and freeist country in the world!

ROTFLMAO

Why don't we just take the profit out of everything? The benefit that is mentioned for single payer healthcare and the savings based on buying power would also apply to grocery stores. Everyone has to eat, let's make food free! Why not make transportation free? Everyone needs to get around. Think of how convienent it would be not to have to pay for healthcare or food or transportation. And housing? It should be free too! Why should we just pick on the incomes of healthcare workers? Let's make everything free, then no one would need to work if they didn't want to.

Great idea right? I'm sure this would work and the US could be the greatest and freeist country in the world!

ROTFLMAO

I am sure your facetious comment was made to point out how ridiculous it would be to have a totally free society. However, I want you to consider that healthcare is a different animal. It is not FREE, it will never be free and it should not be free. It should however be fair. It should not have the ability to bankrupt even a well prepared family. By fair, I mean that everyone should required to pay in a part of their income, but be protected against excessive profit taking by the huge insurance and pharmaceutical giants.

My preference is for universal healthcare. It works well for most of the world. Why not the USA? The USVI would be a huge beneficiary of universal healthcare. We would have the very best doctors in the world happy to practice medicine here. The whole system could be forced to improve it's medical delivery, and everyone would pay according to their ability and resources.

At the very least we need a single payer insurance like Medicare. When in the states I had a Medicare plan that was full and complete and only cost me about $2500 a year plus some copays. I can't get a plan like that in the USVI and the medical care is not as good.

Remember, nothing is free, and it shouldn't be. Fair is another thing entirely....

Why don't we just take the profit out of everything? The benefit that is mentioned for single payer healthcare and the savings based on buying power would also apply to grocery stores. Everyone has to eat, let's make food free! Why not make transportation free? Everyone needs to get around. Think of how convienent it would be not to have to pay for healthcare or food or transportation. And housing? It should be free too! Why should we just pick on the incomes of healthcare workers? Let's make everything free, then no one would need to work if they didn't want to.

Great idea right? I'm sure this would work and the US could be the greatest and freeist country in the world!

ROTFLMAO

I am sure your facetious comment was made to point out how ridiculous it would be to have a totally free society. However, I want you to consider that healthcare is a different animal. It is not FREE, it will never be free and it should not be free. It should however be fair. It should not have the ability to bankrupt even a well prepared family. By fair, I mean that everyone should required to pay in a part of their income, but be protected against excessive profit taking by the huge insurance and pharmaceutical giants.

My preference is for universal healthcare. It works well for most of the world. Why not the USA? The USVI would be a huge beneficiary of universal healthcare. We would have the very best doctors in the world happy to practice medicine here. The whole system could be forced to improve it's medical delivery, and everyone would pay according to their ability and resources.

At the very least we need a single payer insurance like Medicare. When in the states I had a Medicare plan that was full and complete and only cost me about $2500 a year plus some copays. I can't get a plan like that in the USVI and the medical care is not as good.

Remember, nothing is free, and it shouldn't be. Fair is another thing entirely....

Well said response.

I am sure your facetious comment was made to point out how ridiculous it would be to have a totally free society. However, I want you to consider that healthcare is a different animal. It is not FREE, it will never be free and it should not be free. It should however be fair. It should not have the ability to bankrupt even a well prepared family. By fair, I mean that everyone should required to pay in a part of their income, but be protected against excessive profit taking by the huge insurance and pharmaceutical giants.

My preference is for universal healthcare. It works well for most of the world. Why not the USA? The USVI would be a huge beneficiary of universal healthcare. We would have the very best doctors in the world happy to practice medicine here. The whole system could be forced to improve it's medical delivery, and everyone would pay according to their ability and resources.

At the very least we need a single payer insurance like Medicare. When in the states I had a Medicare plan that was full and complete and only cost me about $2500 a year plus some copays. I can't get a plan like that in the USVI and the medical care is not as good.

Remember, nothing is free, and it shouldn't be. Fair is another thing entirely....

Why is healthcare a different animal? Don't we have homeless people and starving people in the US? Why is it FAIR if different people pay different amounts for the same service? Why should everybody pay according to their ability and resources? Doesn't that mean that some people are subsidizing others?

If you think this is FAIR for healthcare then why not food and housing? Why doesn't the government take over food production and distribution and have a single payer system? Then everyone could purchase food according to their ability and resources. No more hungry people, anyone could walk into a grocery anywhere and help themselves to food. Then pay according to their ability and resources.

Is healthcare more essential than food and housing?

USA was not ready to accept a single payer option, probably because of the insurance lobby. I don't see how they can make the current plan work and now they've moved on to immigration reform. Legislative victories over practical solutions? Are practical solutions even a reality in today's political climate?

No, I think reality set in and they realized that in order to have a single payer system, you would have to have a large pool of money to start off with. They don't have that because Medicare and Medicaide are both basically broke. They have to fix the program that they have because it's the law of the land. I hope the elected officials are smart enough to fix the ACA before tackling immigration reform because once they add all of the Illegal turned legal immigrants to the dole and the ACA, we will really be bankrupt. If the Dems would just open up the options and allow people to purchase insurance across state lines, it would be better I think and would help the VI in being able to participate in the ACA. The problem is now, there are only a few health insurance providers willing to insure people in the VI because there aren't enough healthy people in the VI to subsidize the unhealthy people.

Quote: Rotorhead

"If you think this is FAIR for healthcare then why not food and housing? Why doesn't the government take over food production and distribution and have a single payer system? Then everyone could purchase food according to their ability and resources. No more hungry people, anyone could walk into a grocery anywhere and help themselves to food. Then pay according to their ability and resources."

quote : Ms Information

That sounds OK with me...

Quote: Rotorhead

"If you think this is FAIR for healthcare then why not food and housing? Why doesn't the government take over food production and distribution and have a single payer system? Then everyone could purchase food according to their ability and resources. No more hungry people, anyone could walk into a grocery anywhere and help themselves to food. Then pay according to their ability and resources."

quote : Ms Information

That sounds OK with me...

(:-() We are lost ............(td)

I am sure your facetious comment was made to point out how ridiculous it would be to have a totally free society. However, I want you to consider that healthcare is a different animal. It is not FREE, it will never be free and it should not be free. It should however be fair. It should not have the ability to bankrupt even a well prepared family. By fair, I mean that everyone should required to pay in a part of their income, but be protected against excessive profit taking by the huge insurance and pharmaceutical giants.

My preference is for universal healthcare. It works well for most of the world. Why not the USA? The USVI would be a huge beneficiary of universal healthcare. We would have the very best doctors in the world happy to practice medicine here. The whole system could be forced to improve it's medical delivery, and everyone would pay according to their ability and resources.

At the very least we need a single payer insurance like Medicare. When in the states I had a Medicare plan that was full and complete and only cost me about $2500 a year plus some copays. I can't get a plan like that in the USVI and the medical care is not as good.

Remember, nothing is free, and it shouldn't be. Fair is another thing entirely....

Why is healthcare a different animal? Don't we have homeless people and starving people in the US? Why is it FAIR if different people pay different amounts for the same service? Why should everybody pay according to their ability and resources? Doesn't that mean that some people are subsidizing others?

If you think this is FAIR for healthcare then why not food and housing? Why doesn't the government take over food production and distribution and have a single payer system? Then everyone could purchase food according to their ability and resources. No more hungry people, anyone could walk into a grocery anywhere and help themselves to food. Then pay according to their ability and resources.

Is healthcare more essential than food and housing?

Well, if we have people starving in this country after the dramatic spike in Food stamp participation there is really a problem because I ain't buying it.

How about if every ER and every ambulance in the country verify either insurance or ability to pay prior to treatment? Those who can't pay will be out of luck?

If this were our policy, exactly how long do you think it would take for those healthy young folks to reevaluate their need for insurance?

Not gonna happen, right? Well then we better figure out a better way or "we the people" will continue to foot the bill.

Some rural areas of the country have subscription fire departments. Each property owner pays a yearly charge for fire service to his/her structure. Every year there are news reports about a building whose owner didn't pay the charge, burning to the ground while the fire departments stands by and protects adjacent properties. This is certainly fair and no different than not treating people who aren't insured and can't afford to pay. But, I have to admit, as an American, it makes me very uncomfortable.

Some rural areas of the country have subscription fire departments. Each property owner pays a yearly charge for fire service to his/her structure. Every year there are news reports about a building whose owner didn't pay the charge, burning to the ground while the fire departments stands by and protects adjacent properties. This is certainly fair and no different than not treating people who aren't insured and can't afford to pay. But, I have to admit, as an American, it makes me very uncomfortable.

As an American, I feel that forced participation in these programs is anti-freedom. If I want to pool resources with other people to manage my risk then I should be able to do that, however I should also be allowed to opt out, that is freedom.

I think that the government does a poor job of making decisions. I disagree with many of them. I believe the fact that we have been involved in a war somewhere on the planet for the past 60 years shows their poor decision making skills. The choice of foreign governments that we consider allies shows their poor decision making skills. Government imposes too much overhead. Every time we put another segment of our economy under government control we give up a little freedom of choice.

"I heartily accept the motto,—“That government is best which governs least;” and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe,—“That government is best which governs not at all;” and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient."
—Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

Our economy is currently a monopoly of about 12 major corporations, most of which who receive significant and nauseating amounts of corporate welfare from our government. I don't consider that freedom either. Privatizing everything leads to even greater tyranny, just privately held economic tyranny - oligarchy. Sorry, I'll take a larger government to stop that. I've been too close to too much obscene amounts of money and power held by individuals and greed in my lifetime.

ETA: I was a Libertarian about ten years ago. Not any longer - I now consider them some of the most deluded sociopaths on the planet, in a general sense.

Rotorhead, so what would be your plan for dealing with those who could not pay for healthcare?