Here's something that will lower insurance premiums but not increase taxes.
1. Tort reform, obviously. This would lower the price of malpractice insurance, which would lower the price of medical bills, thus lowering insurance premiums.
2. Offer tax cuts to hospitals and insurance companies. This would not only allow hospitals to buy better equipment, it would lower insurance premiums. We could afford these tax cuts by ending wasteful spending, such as welfare.
Thedude27
You need consumer involvment like HSA account where it MATTERS how much you pay for care. If you can truely shop around everyone will win.
Insurance is for catastropic events not every little boo boo you get. Getting away from this is why it costs so much. If your auto insurance covered replacing windhield wipers, and oil changes and someone to gas your car how much do you think it would cost?
Look at comp vs pl-pd where plpd covers millions in property damage and liability and your comp only covers a 50K car. You pay MORE for comp. think about it. Compare the difference in tiny changes in the deductable too. a 1000 deductable vs 0 is a LARGE difference in cost because ppl deduct every little thing.
Handle the minor stuff out of pocket and when something serious happens you will have had affordable insurance to cover it.
Well Duh!
How do those two things giver government more control of the health care industry? Democrat politicians are not interested in fixing problems, they only want control.
Napolitano's Secret Police
Sounds like the opposite of this health tax bill.
How about individual can write off half of the cost of their insurance like business and then they may be able to afford it.
How bout allowing insurance to cross state lines
All simple and fast things to do.
Tati
hmmm i hadnt thought about tax cuts for hospitals... i like it, and it goes without saying that torte reform would lower health costs... i dont agree with eliminating welfare though,yes alot of people are getting money for nothing i would like that fixed but i'd rather some work be required to get your check than to eliminate the program, not all the people on welfare are lazy dead beats some are really in a tough spot in life
MikeGolf
I would add to tort reform that compensation payments for malpractice lawsuits (and other lawsuits in general) be limited to the process used to calculate disability for servicemembers wounded in combat. The lawyer would be awarded a set fee based on typical lawyers fees for the area.
This will end the practice of lawyers going for the 'win the lottery' style medical lawsuits.
gomanyes
Tort reform has already been enacted in several states. It has not had any noticeable effect on medical prices.
In theory, what you say is correct. However, in reality, insurance companies do not lower premiums when the price of medical bills go down. They just keep the extra money for themselves.
Who in the world would want to take an idea that has been tried in several states, and not worked, and enact it on a nationwide level?
Steve D
1) Tort reform would save only a VERY small portion of our health care dollars (less than 1/10th of 1% according to recently updated data from the CBO, This savings includes estimates of savings from the reduction in "defensive" medicine as well as lowering the number of payouts.
2) About 50% of hospitals are public hospitals and already pay no taxes. The other 50% already get a number of tax breaks, so lowering taxes there would not help. Also, it is doubtful that lowered taxes on insurance companies would lead to reductions in premiums that are significant. Taxes are only paid on net profits, so lowering taxes will just increase profits which most likely would be passed on to shareholders as opposed to policy holders.
Again, why concentrate on health insurance reform when we could be concentrating on health care reform - there are bigger savings available from getting people primary care so thewy do not have to use the ER as a primary care physician when the illness becomes serious (also increasing the number of unnecessary admissions). Primary care also contributes to better health (more frequent checkups, early intervention, counseling on healthy lifestyle changes).
If you want to save money in the insurance area, require insurance companies to change the claims submission process...according to a number of studies, Americans pay 20 to 25 cents of every dollar spent on health insurance for administrative costs, compared to about 8 cents for Canadians. That is over 10% of the health care tab spent on avoidable paperwork..a much bigger savings than tort reform. (One way to do that would be to use the size of the Medicare and Medicaid market to force companies to standardize ALL paperwork and claims processing - no standardized process, no money from Medicare or Medicaid). Next time you go to the doctor for a checkup or ear ache, count the people in teh office who are not medical staff - in many offices, the outnumber the medical staff (doctors and nurses). Just standardizing the process of claims could probably reduce these non-care related costs in half.
Tax breaks could be extended to companies offering HSAs who also offer some level of funding...HSAs with high deductibles, say $ 2,000 and $ 4,000 for individuals and families respectively, have much lower premiums. Offer added incentive for the HSA contribution much like a 401(k) - tax reductions for any company matching 50 cent son the dollar up to te deductible...so an individual could contribute up to $ 1,333 per year and have it matched at $ 666 by the employer, thus covering the deductible. Any money not used carries over and then can be used at retirement to pay Medicare premiums, thus lowering the burden on our retired/fixed income folks. If you want to help low-income folks, provide a 1 to 1 match on the employer contribution...every dollar contributed by the employee gets a match up to the max (say $ 666 per individual) and the employer matches at the same 50 cents on teh dollar. So in our $ 2,000 individual deductible HSA, the government kicks in $ 666, the worker $ 666 and the employer $ 666. Obviously, this phases out at some predetermined amount so that, at say $ 20,000 or whatever a year), we are back to $ 1,333 for the employee and $ 666 for the employer.
As a viable alternative or adjunct, allow states to license health care purchasing Co-ops that would help employers buy less expensive coverage (remember, the bigger the pool, the lower the premiums due to risk spreading).
Offer additional tax incentives for wellness plans - healthy people are cheaper.
Offer more tuition forgiveness to doctors who work at low-income clinics for a certain number of years after graduating from med school (say 4 or 5). Lower income people get primary care (and probably some specialized care), doctors aren't saddled with a quarter of a million dollars worth of debt, and ERs save money (see above)>
And the nice thing about all this is that each proposal is free standing and can be passed on its own, not in a 2,000 page health bill that no one understands. The plan would save money, use the free market system, not mandate health insurance, provide better health care, and make the population healthier.
Orignal From: Tips: How about this instead of heavy taxes?
Post a Comment