Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 621
Default 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.





  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 621
Default Whoops...

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.


  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Jim Jim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Default 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   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,312
Default 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


  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,868
Default Whoops...

In article ,
says...

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.


Puts too many bueareucrats out of business at the insurance companies.

2. Everybody going to primary care and counseled on the lifestyle
changes to keep them healthy. Heavy cost up front, but long term
payoff.


What do you do about fat doctors? When I was young and was caught with
cigarettes I received a lecture from my father about the evils of
smoking, while he was somking a cigarette himself.

A fat doctor telling me to lose weight isn't going to go over too well
either.

3. Free medical school. Takes care of all doctor needs.


Nope. No way. Aint going to happen. Nothing is free. If you want your
medical school paid for you are going to have to obligate yourself to
service of some kind with the understanding that if you break the
agreement you are compelled to reimburse whomever paid for all of your
expenses related to medical school.

Or, you can work for minimum wage the rest of your life. Your choice.

4. Catastrophic care taken care of by gov insurance.


Why does the government need to be involved? Is the government going to
pay for PMI too incase you default on your mortgage?


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.


Medical care is not a right.

  #10   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Whoops...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

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.


Puts too many bueareucrats out of business at the insurance companies.

2. Everybody going to primary care and counseled on the lifestyle
changes to keep them healthy. Heavy cost up front, but long term
payoff.


What do you do about fat doctors? When I was young and was caught with
cigarettes I received a lecture from my father about the evils of
smoking, while he was somking a cigarette himself.

A fat doctor telling me to lose weight isn't going to go over too well
either.

3. Free medical school. Takes care of all doctor needs.


Nope. No way. Aint going to happen. Nothing is free. If you want your
medical school paid for you are going to have to obligate yourself to
service of some kind with the understanding that if you break the
agreement you are compelled to reimburse whomever paid for all of your
expenses related to medical school.

Or, you can work for minimum wage the rest of your life. Your choice.

4. Catastrophic care taken care of by gov insurance.


Why does the government need to be involved? Is the government going to
pay for PMI too incase you default on your mortgage?


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.


Medical care is not a right.



Medical care is not a right, but it should be.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Whoops! John H.[_9_] General 5 September 8th 09 12:00 AM
Whoops jps General 1 August 8th 09 08:46 AM
FWIW!! Whoops! John H[_8_] General 39 January 30th 09 12:27 PM
Whoops hk General 4 August 16th 08 05:21 PM
Whoops...we bomb more civilians. Tuuk General 28 January 14th 05 12:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017