Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
NC insurer says timing of mailings unfortunate The Associated Press Wednesday, October 28, 2009 RALEIGH, N.C. — Even Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina acknowledges that its timing on two recent mailings was unfortunate. The News&Observer of Raleigh reported that customers first learned their rates will rise by an average of 11 percent next year. Then they got a flier urging them to send an enclosed preprinted, postage-paid note to Sen. Kay Hagan denouncing what the company says is unfair competition that would be imposed by a government-backed insurance plan. Congress is likely to consider that public option as it debates the health care overhaul. "No matter what you call it, if the federal government intervenes in the private health insurance market, it's a slippery slope to a single-payer system," the BCBS flier read. "Who wants that?" Indignant Blue Cross customers, complaining that their premium dollars are funding the campaign, have called Hagan's office to voice support for a public option. They've marked through the Blue Cross message on their postcards and changed it to show they support the public option, then mailed the cards. "I hope it backfires," said Mark Barroso, a documentary film maker in Chatham County who is a Blue Cross customer and recipient of the mailings. "I'm doing everything I can to make sure it does." Beth Silberman of Durham said she "went sort of bonkers" about the mailing. "You're hostage to them, and then they pull this," she said. "My new premiums are funding lobbying against competition. It's pretty disgusting." A spokesman in Hagan's office, David Hoffman, said the postcards have not yet begun arriving in the senator's office because of the mail screening process, but he said lots of people have called, angry about the insurer's tactics. Blue Cross spokesman Lew Borman said the mailing relied on voter registration records, not a customer list. Since the company controls more than half of the state's health insurance market, the names on the lists overlapped. He declined to reveal how much money the insurer paid for the mailing. He acknowledged the timing was unfortunate but said it was coincidental since one mailing was tied to current events in Washington and the other to when the insurer typically sends its annual notices about rate increases. "We said from the beginning we were going to be involved and would tell North Carolinians what kind of impact the health care proposals would have, and that's what we've been doing," Borman said. ___ ""No matter what you call it, if the federal government intervenes in the private health insurance market, it's a slippery slope to a single-payer system," the BCBS flier read. "Who wants that?" Lots of people, especially those who are getting screwed regularly by their health insurance companies, that's who. |
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:20:39 -0400, H the K
wrote: More and more, I am wondering why we need the health insurance company middleman between us and our medical providers. Yesterday Lou Dobbs had a panel of eminent doctors on for about half an hour and gave their leader the reins of the show. Their view boiled down to: 1. Standardization/computeriztion of all insurance forms. 2. Everybody going to primary care and counseled on the lifestyle changes to keep them healthy. Heavy cost up front, but long term payoff. 3. Free medical school. Takes care of all doctor needs. 4. Catastrophic care taken care of by gov insurance. They were confident that the nation's medical needs can be accomplished for much less money and with better results than is currently done. Many countries already do it. They made a lot of sense. But they seemed to be dedicated and ethical doctors. They weren't pols on the take for campaign contributions. --Vic |
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:20:39 -0400, H the K wrote: More and more, I am wondering why we need the health insurance company middleman between us and our medical providers. Good to see that you are wondering. That's a step in the right direction. I was beginning to think that your mouth had completely lost communication with your brain. |
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
H the K wrote:
On 10/30/09 2:16 PM, jps wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:15:37 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:21:46 -0400, H the wrote: NC insurer says timing of mailings unfortunate The Associated Press Wednesday, October 28, 2009 RALEIGH, N.C. — Even Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina acknowledges that its timing on two recent mailings was unfortunate. The News&Observer of Raleigh reported that customers first learned their rates will rise by an average of 11 percent next year. We are right in the middle of the insurance selection window. Lots of people are getting a package with something like that in it. IBM's retiree EPO (United) went from $860 to 988 a month. Our provider has sent out notifications that the program we've been part of for 5 or 6 years will no longer be offered. Of course the replacements will either curtail coverage or offer the same at an inflated rate. The timing couldn't be better to help folks realize that the public option is one of the few weapons against this legal fleecing. More and more, I am wondering why we need the health insurance company middleman between us and our medical providers. Seems to me that if you eliminated over time the private health insurers, the high profits they are skimming could be put to use providing needed care and coverage to Americans, costs would stabilize, and we could have serious negotiations on price with all manner of providers. BTW, what are their "net" profits? |
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
D. Duck wrote:
H the K wrote: On 10/30/09 2:16 PM, jps wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:15:37 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:21:46 -0400, H the wrote: NC insurer says timing of mailings unfortunate The Associated Press Wednesday, October 28, 2009 RALEIGH, N.C. — Even Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina acknowledges that its timing on two recent mailings was unfortunate. The News&Observer of Raleigh reported that customers first learned their rates will rise by an average of 11 percent next year. We are right in the middle of the insurance selection window. Lots of people are getting a package with something like that in it. IBM's retiree EPO (United) went from $860 to 988 a month. Our provider has sent out notifications that the program we've been part of for 5 or 6 years will no longer be offered. Of course the replacements will either curtail coverage or offer the same at an inflated rate. The timing couldn't be better to help folks realize that the public option is one of the few weapons against this legal fleecing. More and more, I am wondering why we need the health insurance company middleman between us and our medical providers. Seems to me that if you eliminated over time the private health insurers, the high profits they are skimming could be put to use providing needed care and coverage to Americans, costs would stabilize, and we could have serious negotiations on price with all manner of providers. BTW, what are their "net" profits? He doesn't know. He's just expelling hot air through his blow hole. |
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Whoops...
wrote in message
... On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:20:39 -0400, H the K wrote: We are right in the middle of the insurance selection window. Lots of people are getting a package with something like that in it. IBM's retiree EPO (United) went from $860 to 988 a month. Our provider has sent out notifications that the program we've been part of for 5 or 6 years will no longer be offered. Of course the replacements will either curtail coverage or offer the same at an inflated rate. The timing couldn't be better to help folks realize that the public option is one of the few weapons against this legal fleecing. More and more, I am wondering why we need the health insurance company middleman between us and our medical providers. Seems to me that if you eliminated over time the private health insurers, the high profits they are skimming could be put to use providing needed care and coverage to Americans, costs would stabilize, and we could have serious negotiations on price with all manner of providers. Medical services would be cheaper if we had to actually write a check. Insurance should really only be for catastrophic injuries and illnesses. We should be paying out of pocket for routine maintenance. That is the only way to cut out the middle man, whether that is the government or the insurance companies BTW insurance companies really don't have that high a profit margin when compared to other, similar sized companies. What about people who are unemployed for one reason or another? -- Nom=de=Plume |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Whoops! | General | |||
Whoops | General | |||
FWIW!! Whoops! | General | |||
Whoops | General | |||
Whoops...we bomb more civilians. | General |