1. Depending on where you live (no clue in CA), it might be one of the best payors 2. It's also one of the quickest turnaround payors as well
I think it has something to do with her knee, but the knee isn't going to be getting better no matter how much shit they do.
the complaint always was they didn't pay enough. I honestly have no idea. I know their primary doctor fairly well and she has a huge business with very wealthy people who wouldn't balk at paying out of their own pocket if she insisted. my suspicion is she's figured out a way for it to pay her properly.
Like I said - it depends on where you are. In some places, it might be one of the best payors, in others, it may not be. She takes Medicare and isn't direct pay/conceirge?
so here's my plan: 1) offer an expanded public option through medicare at cost for the non poor with some sort of rigorous means testing (more so than regular medicare) for the poor 2) dramatically lower barriers to entry for new insurance companies by reducing regulations (easier said than done) and potentially providing public capital for start ups 3) allow competition nationwide and get rid of the state bullshit (not sure why this hasnt' happened years ago) 4) eliminate the individual mandate, but dramatically raise the premium for people without continuous coverage who aren't healthy. what do you think?
1 trillion is still cheaper than 1.5 trillion, even if it is ridiculously expensive. I'd like to get your take on the entire issue honestly.
I've thought about this, I could certainly be wrong but it seems to me this is a different animal, it's about directly protecting citizens from the state, which is what the Bill of Rights is all about
My question with #3 has always been will it really make a difference. There is a BCBS in every state all of which all are subsidiary owned by Anthem Blue Cross. Wouldn't the state line restriction effectively combine 50 BCBS insurers into 1 national BCBS insurer? I could easily see the argument where lifting of the state line restriction would make it easier for new insurers to enter the market, but I'm not convinced it would make much of a difference with the current players. I'm pro #3, just wondering the real world impact.
i'm mostly talking about standardizing the approval process and regulations for new insurance plans across state lines. as a guy with an insurance license, I can tell you that no state is more ****ed up than California. there are products I can sell in texas or nevada that I've been waiting for approval in California for 5 years. products that are more beneficial to the consumer. no joke. now I primarily do health insurance as a favor to clients, so i'm not an expert per se, but I've done enough in different state to know that some states suck ass, like Arizona or California, and others are far better for essentially the same product. at worst having one set of regulations reduces regulation costs and barriers to entry which should reduce premiums.
It's common practice for judges to appoint private attorneys in cases where the public defenders aren't qualified to handle.
I hot no problem with this. Hell, 99% of these problems are solved with a little common sense, it seems to me.
The Bill of Rights addresses 3 basic things, life, liberty & property, none of which can be taken away without due process. Healthcare is a life issue in my opinion.
seems like you could make them attest that they don't have assets excluding $X amount or they will be subject to fines of $X. obviously would be a [itch bay] to enforce, but most people, if they have the means, won't risk breaking the law even if it's likely not to be found out. at this point they don't "feel" like they are doing anything illegal if you know what I mean, even though it's clearly unethical.
I'm with you. I mean, right now, I'm able to provide healthcare coverage for me and my family. I hope to continue to be able to do this, but I'd like for something to be there if I'm not. Anyone can find themselves in dire straights not of their own making. No one is immune to that. I want to make my own way in the world. I don't want others to do it for me, but I'd like a safety net if the above scenario happens to me, or anyone else.
It'd be harder to create a market that the consumer is so in the dark on cost and services too. It's such a bastardized system I don't think it will ever be fixed
It's also common practice where the attorneys are from a list where they have volunteered to do the work. Rarely does it go outside of this except in the most tricky of situations.