<p>My sincere greeting’s to those parents that care about their sons and daughters education. I come forth upon a massive issue today in the United States of America, Health Insurance. How are you coping with this horrendous dilemma?
Did you know that every country outside of the U.S offers free health insurance, or better yet, care? Did you know that attaching a severed finger would cost approximately 15,000 or more, depending on the finger? While in France or any other country is free of charge, absolute nothing!
Do you ever wonder why Health care Insurance company CEO’s are billionaires? Well there’s one of the factors. How are you coping with this major issue today?</p>
<p>“While in France or any other country is free of charge, absolute nothing!”</p>
<p>Sure it’s free. 
</p>
<p>please. folks ain’t that stupid. people get paid, things cost. Even free healthcare… it’s either a premium or it’s a tax. Your choice. but please don’t try and think most people are foolish enough to believe that removing a ceo is going to make the hospital charge, the doctors charge or the prescription cheaper… As much as I hate ceo salaries, they aren’t the real problem, just the easiest to point a finger at.</p>
<p>But please FREE? try again…</p>
<p>Yes it’s free. Tax is slightly higher than the U.S
Other than that, healthcare is entirely free. Hospitals in France even pay for your taxi rides from the hospital to ensure safety. Not to mention, college education is free, also the government appoints helpers to peoples’ home who just gave birth for free. Also babysitting centers there cost $1.00 per hour.
Also CEO salaries are just one of the factors mentioned in my previous post.
Is that good enough ‘‘try’’ Opie ofMaybery2?</p>
<p>William McGuire of UnitedHealth Group, the nation’s leading insurer, was the third-highest paid CEO on the Forbes list. His pay of $124.8 million could cover the average health insurance premiums of nearly 34,000 people. </p>
<p>“While executives are richly compensated, patients are tightening their belts,” Dr. Isaac Wornom, chairman of the Richmond Academy of Medicine, wrote last year. “Premiums, deductibles and co-pays are up, while benefits continue to shrink. One million Virginians – that’s one out of seven – have no health insurance at all, and this number is increasing… Half of the uninsured work full-time for small businesses that simply can’t afford the inflated rates.”</p>
<p>Mandatory universal health insurance in Massachusettes…</p>
<p>Blue Cross paid former CEO $16.4 million in retirement benefits</p>
<p>BOSTON --Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts paid its chairman, William C. Van Fassen, $2.96 million in salary and incentives last year, along with an additional $16.4 million in a lump sum retirement cash benefit, according to a Thursday filing with state regulators.</p>
<p>more stories like thisVan Faasen’s retirement package reflects the extraordinary work he did for the company that lost $8 million on the year he became its CEO in 1992, turning it into the state’s largest health insurance company that generated $265 million in profits in 2005 – the last year he worked as its chief executive officer, said company spokesman Chris Murphy.</p>
<p>State Sen. Mark Montigny, who has led the Senate’s insurance, health care as well as ways and means committees, criticized the $7 billion nonprofit health insurance company’s executive compensation as “outrageous.”</p>
<p>“There’s a lot of room, to me, for abuse, particularly when we are in the climate where we are trying to get people to sign up for the plan and Blue Cross is the dominant player in the state,” Montigny said, referring to the state’s mandatory universal health insurance program.</p>
<p>Appreciate your source dstark.</p>
<p>From Congressman Pete Stark…
REP. STARK JOINS FAMILIES USA TO RELEASE A REPORT SHOWING THAT MEDICARE PRIVATIZATION WILL COST SENIORS MORE IN ORDER TO PAY EXORBITANT COMPENSATION FOR HEALTH INSURANCE EXECUTIVES </p>
<p>June 25, 2003</p>
<p>WASHINGTON, DC Today, Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) joined Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Ron Pollack of Families USA to release a report showing the outrageous compensation packages given to executives of 11 major health insurance companies in 2002. These are the very same companies that the Republicans would turn Medicare over to if the House Republican Medicare bill becomes law.</p>
<p>This new report from Families USA highlights a key fact that needs to be brought forth as Republicans are seeking to privatize Medicare. By turning Medicare over to the private sector, House Republicans will be siphoning off government dollars that today provide medical care for seniors and people with disabilities. Instead, those dollars would be funneled to already lavishly compensated health insurance executives, said Rep. Stark.</p>
<p>The report entitled, Top Dollar: CEO Compensation in Medicares Private Insurance Plans, was compiled by Families USA. The following is a summary of its findings:</p>
<p>Compensation: The average annual compensation of the companies highest-paid executives, exclusive of unexercised stock options, was approximately $15.1 million. The former Chairman and CEO of Oxford Health Plans, Norman Payson, was paid over $76 million.
Stock Options: Company executives with the largest value of unexercised stock options had stock options worth, on average, $67.7 million. Chairman and CEO of UnitedHealth Group, William McGuire, reported a total value of nearly $530 million in unexercised stock options.
Medicare: The Administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) makes $130,000 per year. The Secretary of Health and Human Services makes $166,700 per year. Neither receive stock options.
The facts are in the report. The Republican Medicare prescription drug bill will mean even more money for these already outrageously paid executives, Stark said. Money that goes into the pockets of insurance executives as profit will mean more money out-of-pocket for seniors. Seniors ought to ask just who the Republican bill is supposed to benefit?</p>
<p><a href=“DV”>url=http://www.dissidentvoice.org/May05/Sklar0512.htm</a> Sklar: CEO Pay Still on Steroids</p>
<p>I’m agreeing with SDMS12.</p>
<p>[LA</a> Weekly - News - The Bad Doctor - Doug Ireland - The Essential Online Resource for Los Angeles](<a href=“http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/the-bad-doctor/3253/]LA”>http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/the-bad-doctor/3253/)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really. In 275+ countries doctors work without pay, hospitals are built for free, and medicine is produced in factories that didn’t cost anything? Free? Really?</p>
<p>Here’s the most basic economics rule of all: There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not true. First off, the term “free health care” is a dubious one; taxpayers pay the government to fund a service like the NHS in Britain. Most of Europe has a universal healthcare system, and whilst the United States is the only “wealthy” nation that does not have such a system, there are pros and cons. Parts of South and Central America have a universal health care system, but to questionable efficacy. Outside of Japan and South Korea, Asia practically is without universal health care.</p>
<p>If you’ve noticed, waiting times for nonurgent treatments in Europe are astronomically high (in contrast to our private healthcare system). Some major pharmaceutical companies in Europe (I’m thinking of Sanofi-Aventis off the top of my head) might balk if the United States were to attempt to transform into a public, universal healthcare system. While it would be a good thing in the end, I’m not sure our national infrastructure can support such an attempt.</p>
<p>Also, some Central American countries (I’m looking at Cuba in particular) have doctors working to practice in other countries because the pay is greater and the system is privatized. Are you sure you’re getting the bang for your back?</p>
<p>We already have universal health care in the US. It’s called Medicare.</p>
<p>The scary thing is that OP, who is apparently an American hs student, has no idea how “free” government programs are funded.</p>
<p>“It’s called Medicare.”</p>
<p>and you must buy a supplement to fill the holes in coverage. And there are alot of holes in mdedicare coverage. Please don’t cite zero premium plans as most are pretty sad things, if you know how they work. </p>
<p>“His pay of $124.8 million could cover the average health insurance premiums of nearly 34,000 people”</p>
<p>So his pay would cover .00075 of the uninsured in America? 34k out of 45 million? Are you begining to see how false your arguement is? </p>
<p>We do away with all the big dollars ceos of the health carriers, just how many are there by the way? a dozen? What else changes? Are you able to insure the 45 million “just” by nationalizing hc? C’mon now, do some math… it’s going to cost and it’s going to cost alot. </p>
<p>I’m all for reducing ceo compensation, by simply bringing back competition to the marketplace and not allowing medical insurance monopolies to form as they have since 1983 as part of the clinton plan… “Regional players” folks…on our way to five major carriers spliting the country up as per the plan. </p>
<p>The biggest cost drivers in health care as opus said…“is us.” </p>
<p>But that won’t get you votes to that honest about the situation. Our fast food, no exercise society is the biggest self induced illness country in the world. The best way to reduce the cost of healthcare is also the hardest as we all “want”, but very few are willing to “do”.</p>
<p>France </p>
<p>Income Bracket Tax Rate
Up to €4,191 0%
€4,191 - €8,242 7.05%
€8,242 - €14,506 19.74%
€14,506 - €23,489 29.14%
€23,489 - €38,218 38.54%
€38,218 - €47,131 43.94%
Above €47,131 49.58% </p>
<p>These are the 2005 french tax brackets.</p>
<p>To me, it looks like the top personal income tax bracket of 49.58% starts in US dollars (todays conversion rate euro = 1.4773 dollars) at $69,626.00.</p>
<p>Compared to the US tax rate of 25% for similar income levels. I get a tax difference of $17,113 more that the french are paying. Still want to argue how “free” HC in france is? </p>
<p>Since it sounds like you’re a student and not really a taxpayer, you may not see a 50% increase in your tax bracket as significant. Forgive me, but I do.</p>
<p>"“His pay of $124.8 million could cover the average health insurance premiums of nearly 34,000 people”</p>
<p>So his pay would cover .00075 of the uninsured in America? 34k out of 45 million? Are you begining to see how false your arguement is? </p>
<p>One guy’s pay can take care of 34,000 people? That’s a lot to put it mildly.
I agree it’s a very small factor in the overall scheme of things.
So what? It’s obscene to see one guy profiting so much on the backs of thousands of people.</p>
<p>No, medicare is not adequate in and of itself. Private insurance isn’t either. Medicare works prety well. Most people I know that have medicare are glad it exists.</p>
<p>I’m glad it exists. My costs will go down when I am eligible for medicare.</p>
<p>I lived in England for three years. I’ve lived here a lot longer. While I agree that health care is a big problem here, I would take our system over theirs any day.</p>
<p>The wait for routine health care is ridiculous. The facilities are unnacceptable. The level of care is scary. When we lived there, our company provided us with private helath insurance because the National Health Service was inadequate. A procedure my five year old had to have done would have been an 18 month wait. With our private health insurance, the same doctor did it that friday.</p>
<p>Plus what we paid in taxes for that “free” care was much, much more than the cost of our health insurance.</p>
<p>Look at the US. I pay taxes and I pay medical costs. If we change to a single payer system, or any system, and my medical costs drop more than my taxes go up, and the quality of medical care is the same or better, the change is a win.</p>
<p>I don’t care if my taxes go up to pay for medical care if my medical costs go down more.</p>
<p>You have to look taxes, medical costs, and quality and quantity of care before you can make an informed decision about which system is better.</p>
<p>I keep reading how we can’t have single payer because my taxes will go up. That’s not enough information for me to know if I benefit or not.</p>
<p>My hunch is I might benefit by a change. There is a lot of overhead in the system we have now. There is a middleman and just because it is a private sector middleman doesn’t mean the system we have now is better.</p>
<p>Also the precondition issue makes it difficult to shop around and look at different choices. You don’t always have choices. You’re stuck.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Tho’ a bit outdated, this reminded me of my sister’s experience with dentistry in the UK. She went in for a routine cleaning, and they looked at her like she was from Mars. They didn’t do routine cleanings there! On top of that, she said the dentist pulled tools out of his bag that looked like they came from the dark ages. Thereafter, she returned to the US for all her routine dental care and paid for it in cash.</p>
<p>“So what? It’s obscene to see one guy profiting so much on the backs of thousands of people.”</p>
<p>The same can be said about bill gates or any corporate exec. or even oprah… no arguement with me on this aspect. However, I do take exception to those who sell this main point as the “reason” health care costs what it does and what a tremendous savings we’ll have after… that’s a bunch of bs.</p>
<p>Claims are what make healthcare cost. Claims. Who produces claims? we do. We have to either learn to take better care of ourselves or have the government impose stronger sanctions to force us into better health… and really, do you see that happening? I don’t, it’s not our nature. We are in the land of overindulgence from everything from food, cars and so on… We could lower the cost of care simply by reducing the demand for care by living better lifestyles… but really, is that going to happen? </p>
<p>It’s either a tax or a premium, neither way is going to be cheap. At least at this point, some choice is involved. How are you going to feel if you have a choice of one? </p>
<p>“I’m glad it exists. My costs will go down when I am eligible for medicare”</p>
<p>then you will be faced with choosing a supplement to offset what isn’t covered by medicare… you will have choices to make. If you’re close to retirement, read closely what the different supps cover.</p>