Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Insurers under Obamacare seek 50% hike
Date:	6/2/2015 8:23:58 AM

As predicted, the already high costs for those Obamacare plans are money losers for the insurers and they are asking for a 50% rate increase.  This is why having the government in charge of health care was a bad idea, is a bad idea and will always be a bad idea.  Government does nothing well except to kill our enemies/break things and manage infrastructure.  So left wing nuts, I told you so.  Reality bites doesn't it?

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Insurers under Obamacare seek 50% hike
Date:	6/2/2015 7:57:14 PM

Insurers were wrong the first year with dental insurance and rates incresed dramatically the seond year. It was the result of insureds who ignored dental care suddenly having coverage and getting treatment. It leveled out after a few years, rates stabilized, and some came down.

Pre-existing coverage is probably the reason for the increase. If the rates are too high, the Insureds will receive a refund. The Insurance companies have to return premiums if losses are under 80%. 

It has nothing to do with Obama or the Left. Rather, it is about the marketplace. You should understand the profit motive. Do you really think the Right has a solution? The free market would still be raising rates as it would be the same Insurance companies underwriting the plans.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Really that clueless?!?!?!?
Date:	6/2/2015 8:35:28 PM

Cmon GF, you can't possibly be that clueless.  Health insurance rates skyrocketed after the passage of Obamacare, then when the actual program was implemented the costs were even higher and now they want a 50% increase on top of that. No one can possibly be that ignorant. As a small business owner I lived it, it is well documented and only those completely out of touch with reality think otherwise. That is of course the definition of a left wing nut.  Reality bites GF and you can deny it all you want but that doesn't change anything. Wow.....

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Really that clueless?!?!?!?
Date:	6/2/2015 9:56:57 PM

What is the loss ratio of your plan?  Give us some numbers. You throw broad statements and blame everyone else. Maybe, your plan was used by employees and now you have to pay the piper. A small business can have their rates increased with one large claim. To suggest I am clueless is rather funny but I won't bore you with the details since you are Tea Party member who knows it allllllll.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	CLUELESS RESPONDS TO KNOW IT ALL
Date:	6/2/2015 11:09:50 PM

"Rising health insurance prices have been the subject of growing scrutiny for years as critics of so-called "Obamacare" point to rate increases as a signal the law isn't working. But rates have risen as much as 20 or 30 percent in recent years.

insurance companies have said their early enrollees were sicker than they had anticipated and were requiring more costly care.

United said that, in addition to more office visits and other consumer services, larger reimbursements to doctors and hospitals and more expensive medical technology contributed to its increase.

"Medical costs are going up, and we are changing our rates to reflect this increase. We expect medical costs to go up 10 percent. Medical costs go up mainly for two reasons: Providers raise their prices and members get more medical care," Aetna wrote in its filing, also citing increased costs for prescriptions and outpatient hospital services.

This year also marks the first time insurers are basing their premiums on a full year of cost or claims data. That's a first for plans sold on the overhaul's public insurance exchanges, which started enrolling customers in fall 2013.

Rates for 2015, for instance, were set based on only a few months of data collected last spring. insurers normally want to see a couple of years of claims from a patient population before they set rates."

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	CLUELESS RESPONDS TO KNOW IT ALL
Date:	6/3/2015 12:24:47 AM

Reality check!  More people are covered by insurance now than ever before... getting needed medical care, earlier than before.  More people are in the insured pool who were previously excluded by insurance companies who were becoming increasingly good at cherry picking and eliminating certain subscribers in order to enhance their profits.   It's still capitalism at work, and the previous system didn't have mercy on the uninsured.    The rate increases are not being sought by the government, you know.

The new system isn't 'government run healthcare' either.   At best, its a hybrid of for-profit insurers and regulations that prohibit price gouging, pre-existing condition exclusions, and maxmimum portability of the policies.     Anyone who does not think that gov't needs to establish regulations over critical sectors of our economy is dangerously short sighted.....especially when it comes to a national healthcare policy.

It has not helped the situation that conservatives have continually attacked the ACA, doing all they could to scare off new enrollees and interfer with the benefits of the new law.     Many of the locals I talk think that my "Obamacare policy" is somehow different from the one they got from Blue Cross Blue Shield.   They are afraid to use the Federal Exchange as a marketplace for their own insurance needs because they think it is some sort of trick by 'that Black Guy in the White House".  

But many of them are, for one reason or another, finding that they NEED to get a policy from a federal exchange because there is no way they can otherwise get access to the lower premiums of an insurance pool.   Ask my brother in law,  an ardent Obama-hater.   Diagnosed with cancer, he's unable to work due to treatment.     Social Security Disablilty and Medicare are not going to provide health insurance to his wife and dependents.  

Prior to ACA, he would be hopelessly indigent, with his wife and child at risk.... in short order.  That's why we need the ACA.   If conservatives would stop their hysterical attacks... .and admit their complete lack of an alternative plan... then we will see what the market can do.  

Of course, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the latest conservative attack... be prepared for a national crisis with some pretty bad political fall out for all of us.   Supporters and Opponents alike.   But don't blame us.   We built the boat, you shot holes in the transom.   Don't blame us for your aim.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Really that clueless?!?!?!?
Date:	6/3/2015 8:22:56 AM

Here are some facts and if you want to come talk to my CFO she will confirm them for you.  You know where I work.

Our loss ratio has never varied more than 5% year on year.  In the decade before Obamacare our health insurance costs went up an average of 8% per year.  After the passage of Obamacare our rates went up an average 18% per year and our last renewal before we went to a PEO the increase was 23%.  We went out onto the markets every year.  I attended numerous conferences on heath care and the implications of Obamacare and the one consistent theme of every single one of them said that it would increase costs dramatically and it has.  That is a fact.

Yes GF, you are clueless if you think these rate increases are not a direct result of Obamacare......or ideologically blind.  Either way.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	CLUELESS RESPONDS TO KNOW IT ALL
Date:	6/3/2015 8:26:28 AM

And your point is what?  Of course the insurers are getting hit by sick people.  Now you can get insurance at any time so just wait until you are sick and then sign up.  Predicted outcome of Obamacare.  Of course costs are going up.  Just look at what happens with Medicare and Medicade each and every day.  Predicted outcome of Obamacare. 

Thank you for proving my point GF.  All these reasons are a result of Obamacare.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	And all the results were predicted
Date:	6/3/2015 8:30:59 AM (updated 6/3/2015 9:01:40 AM)

You are likewise clueless about what is involved with Obamacare and the impact it had on business, especially small business.  As for your little factoid about more people being insured than ever before please tell me how many of those newly insured were Medicare and Medicaid versus traditional health insurance.  And how many people lost the plan they liked?  And how many lost the doctor they liked?

Costs have risen dramatically since its passage, as predicted.  Deal with reality and save the talking points for low information goverment school morons.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Really that clueless?!?!?!?
Date:	6/3/2015 11:59:56 AM

After Clintoncare went down the Right had 8 years and they did nothing. Now, they have all the answers. Why didn't the right come up with a marketplace solution during Bush years? You know as well as I that they really don't give a crap for the uninsured. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	That's hilarious and absurd
Date:	6/3/2015 12:57:20 PM (updated 6/3/2015 12:59:17 PM)

That's just great GF, excoriate the GOP for not screwing up the health care system by having the federal government getting involved in something that doesnt need their involvement.  Do you realize how absurd that is?!?!?  Who am I kidding, of course not.

There was no heath care crisis.  It did not even register in the top 20 issues on the minds of the American people.  Well as screwed up as it is today its finally on their minds all right......and all because of a poorly written monstrosity passed with zero involvement by the GOP that were intentionally removed from the process by Reid/Pelosi because God forbid, they might actually add amendments that made sense.  And despite numerous all out efforts by the administration and a fawning, sycophanitic media a majority of Americans still oppose the law.

Only someone that supports this horrendous law and can't deal with the fact that all the bad things I predicted have come to pass and none of the promises made ended up being true would be clueless enough to respond by saying that the party that didn't screw our health care system up were wrong for not screwing it up.  Sometimes GF I really wonder if you could possibly believe what you post.....the other left wing nuts I don't doubt they believe the nonsense but I had some hope for you........

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	That's hilarious and absurd
Date:	6/3/2015 1:58:22 PM

Well, we are still waiting on the GOP to propose a plan, aren't we?   It is beginning to look like the only thing you guys can agree on is that we need to (somehow) go back to the way things were before.    Pre-existing condition exclusions, cherry picked subscriber groups, minimum regulation of the insurance industry, and large segments of the US population unable to afford or gain access to health care.

No, the new subscribers to the ACA are not coming from Medicaid/Medicare roles... many are people who were previously excluded from getting any insurance by the rules created by for-profit corporations who had no real interest in the state of our national healthcare.   It is clear to reasonable people that we would not want national health care policy written by for-profit insurers anymore than we would benefit from foreign policy being directed by Halliburton.  

It has always amused me that the conservative, leave-private-business-alone lobby would oppose the ACA.   After all, without the ACA, private businesses (hospitals, medical groups, etc) are forced to bear the financial burden of caring for the uninsured.   In this country, hospitals are legally required to deliver medical treatment regardless of ability to pay.   Even minimum levels of ER and hospital based care is quite expensive, but if the hospital refuses to provide this ... they are exposed to grave legal consequences.   So, they treat the patient to the point that they can be discharged, and the uncollectable bill becomes bad debt.   Patients leave, and since they were uninsured, they don't have outpatient medical followup care to sustain their health and minimize additional healthcare costs.   THAT was a huge contributor to the escalating healthcare costs in this country.

Now that doesn't sound like a fair way to treat these corporations and never did.   So the unspoken, contradictory and hypocritical message from Conservatives:  You would rather force these corporations to pay the bill for the uninsured citizenry regardless of the impact on their operation.   That, in other words, is a heavy burden highly distructive to their business.   Don't take my word for it, ask any hospital exec whether they would want Grady Hospital closed and the indigent load absorbed among the remaining facilities.   Ask the administrators who had to close small hospitals because they could not attract a decent mix of insured patients to somewhat offset the unpaid indigent bills.  

And no, we are not seeing people signup for insurance on the day before they need it.    THAT is what would happen if you took away the requirement that all of us have to have medical insurance... for our personal benefit, for our family, and to a very real extent... for the good of the nation.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	READ WHAT I POSTED
Date:	6/3/2015 2:10:21 PM

I did not suggest a government program. Rather, I said "Why didn't the right come up with a marketplace solution during Bush years?" Now, answer that question. Not a big deal in FOX surveys. Screw those with health issues and no insurance....I have my insurance. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	ASKED AND ANSWERED
Date:	6/3/2015 2:15:05 PM

Read my post. No one cared about this issue.  So why should they do anything?

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	You are still clueless
Date:	6/3/2015 2:41:13 PM (updated 6/3/2015 2:47:41 PM)

Let me address the first paragraph.  I simply do not have the time to address all your nonsense.  Suffice it to say that pretty much everything you posted was as wrong as your first paragraph.

"Well, we are still waiting on the GOP to propose a plan, aren't we?"  

Why is that the left always want a plan?  We have seen the results of the federal government's idea of a plan and it is a train wreck.  The GOP has proposed a goodly number of responsible and reasonable targeted legislateive changes should Obamacare be repealed and replaced with sensible reforms.  Tort reform, portability, reduced barriers to market coverage, etc. but you would never know that because you get all your news from the lamestream media or HuffnPuff Post.

"It is beginning to look like the only thing you guys can agree on is that we need to (somehow) go back to the way things were before. Pre-existing condition exclusions, cherry picked subscriber groups, minimum regulation of the insurance industry, and large segments of the US population unable to afford or gain access to health care."  

Where do I start?  How about at the absurd statement at the end?  Prior to Obamacare even the proponents claimed that about 15% of Americans did not have health insurance (said number was in doubt even then and likely overstated to sell the law).  So unless 15% represents a large segment and 85% is a small segment in fact the opposite was true.  Not only that but studies at the time indicated that 85% of those already insured liked their insurance.  And finally, of that likely overstated 15% many had access to health insurance but did not buy it (mostly the young making a rational decision of risk versus reward).  And that's just health insurance and not health care.  Recall the promise that all those that used the emergency room for their care would suddenly have insurance.  They had access to health care......oh and by the way, the numbers still using the emergency room have gone up demonstrating yet another lie told to the American people.  So your closing statement in that paragraph was wrong and ill informed.....no surprise.

Minimal regualtion of the insurance industry is quite a laugher as well.  Do a little research and you will find that other than banks, insurance companies are some of the most regulated both on a federal and state level.  But hey, now that they are government contractors all they have to do is make contributions to the Clinton Family Crime Foundation and they can get all sorts of preferential treatment.

Cherry picked subscriber groups is a nasty code word for underwriting.  But the fact is every company that I ever joined simply signed me up for health insurance.  No cherry picking, and that is the experiecne of most of those covered through their employer.  But for individual plans no doubt the underwriting process was needed otherwise people would not have insurance until they needed it which is called adverse selection.  That is death for insurance companies.....sort of like buying homeowners insurance after your house burns down.  That my clueless friend is not insurance.

Ah yes, pre-existing conditions.  Finally you have blindly stumbled on a legitimate issue that affected a small percentage of those trying to get insurance.  Now had the Democrats tackled that issue along with trying to cover those that did not have access to health insurance and actually wanted it (maybe 8%-10% at most) then I think we could all get on board.  But that wasn't the goal.  The goal was to have 100% of Americans having to go throught hte government for their health insurance.  Make good little socialists out of all of us.

Name:	waterph -	Reply
Subject:	You are still clueless
Date:	6/3/2015 3:08:32 PM

Martiniman

To make things fair, you need to tie one hand behind your back when confronted simultaneously by GF and copper...! These two remind me of some of my relatives. Believed statements like:

- Bush lied

- No WMDs

- Healthcare cost will be $2500 less per family

- Keep your own Dr.

- Obama did not create ISIS - JV group

- Line in the sand was not violated in Syria

- Clinton Foundatio, no corruption related yo Hillary's behavior as SOS

- Things are great

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Sad but true
Date:	6/3/2015 3:23:47 PM

It really isn't fair but when you are operating from emotion and good intentions instead of cold, hard facts and the cognitive ability to analyze those facts with logic and reason you will have to take your lumps from me.  I know far too many left wing nuts that believe all the things in your list.  As Reagan said, and I paraphrase, its not that liberals are ignorant, they just believe so much that isn't true.

Sadly, I think they may actually believe that Obamacare is a good thing despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  Although GF may have tried to deflect from this reality by whining about the GOP not having solved a problem that very few people even cared about.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Insurers under Obamacare seek 50% hike
Date:	6/3/2015 3:49:23 PM

Before the economy went into a tail spin, the vast majority of Americans thought that health care reform was one of the top issues facing this country.  The truth is that the uninsured cost everyone more money - in terms of higher premiums, higher costs for medical care.  You cannot escape that fact beause the uninusred who are ill are going to show up at the ER for treatment and they will be treated, and when they have no ability to pay, the debt will be written off.  And we know who it is written off to -yes, that is right, those of us who are insured.  Because that is how it works.   Every year, I watch my health care premiums go up anywhere from 3 - 5%.  One year, it went up 12%.  It has a tiered drug benefit and basically they try to get everyone on generics.  Every year the co-pays go up a couple of dollars and the coverage on medical tests goes down a bit. 

The problem of health care has not gone away.  I have no idea if Obamacare is great or it is miserable.  Thankfully, I don't have to care, because I was able to carry my health insurance into retirement.  But, I have read a number of interviews with people that think it answered their problem of affordable healthcare.  Forgive me if I do not get terribly excited by businesses complaints about it, because any time they have to pay for something additional for workers, they will whine and cry and pass the cost onto their customers.  The biggest complaint I have heard from Drs. is of the additional paperwork involved.  As far as having to change Drs., well, anytime you change your health care to a new company, there is the resulting "Dr. not in the network" problem.  You can either continue with your Dr and pay out of pocket or you can move to a new Dr. in the network. 

I am not defending or supporting Obamacare.  But I will give credit that someone finally did something.  Don't get me started on health care vouchers, because anyone who supports that idea must be entirely stupid and learns nothing from the past. 

Just my two cents.  And we know what that is worth.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Need to look at the polls
Date:	6/3/2015 4:01:30 PM

Hound, your opening statement is incorrect.  In 2004 the most important issues were jobs and the economy, terrorism, moral issues and Iraq.  In 2012 the most important issues were almost the same.  Health care barely registered at 8% in 2004 and even lower in 2012 when Obama was elected.  In 1998 when Bush was first elected the results were even lower for health care.  And when you look at the internals for the issue of health care the biggest concern of Americans was the cost.  Obamacare has made that worse.  Those are the facts.

And I disagree that doing something stupid like Obamacare is bette than nothing.  And I am paying the price with my company to show for it.  It is a bad idea, a bad law, poorly implemented and a train wreck.  Hard to believe anyone but the most ideologically blind cannot see that.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Need to look at the polls
Date:	6/3/2015 4:46:57 PM

I'm not ideologically blind.   I don't put much stock in polls, because depending on who is conducting the polls and how the questions are worded often decides the results of the poll.  Personally, the year that my health care premiums went up 12% I was quite concerned as were many others.  I'm thinking it was around 2007.  My health at the time prompted several Saturday night trips to the ER. and the ER would be loaded with people that had no insurance and couldn't afford to see a Dr.   I've had a number of friends who say that they are sick, but can't go to the Dr because they can't afford the cost of an office visit.  Some has since signed up for Obamacase and are satisfied and others haven't. 

What all of it boils down to is a social contract. People need a health care plan that they can afford and is made available to them.  If we can spend billions on unwinnable wars, billions to aid to Africa and billions everytime some national disaster happens in a 3rd world country, surely there can be an affordable health care system.  And I'm sorry, I don't have much sympathy for business here.  They have denied that they have a social responsibility to provide a retirement system for employees, they now treat their employees like contract workers, and have figured out that they don't have to raise the pay or hire more workers, because they can just make the ones that they have work more hours and take on 2-3 additional jobs or outsource to a lower wage economy.  I'm not against business, but I do believe in the social contract that existed for decades and seemed to work quite well. 

Now you can call me a left wingnut or anything else you can think of because I don't agree with you.  And no, I'm not in favor of socialized medicine or anything even close to resembling it.  If a Republican is elected in 2016 (which is looking more and more doubtful in the declared field of candidates), then we will see what they do.  But I can guarentee you that a vouncher system is not the answer.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Source for your view?
Date:	6/3/2015 4:59:47 PM (updated 6/3/2015 5:06:57 PM)

OK, then how do you know that health care was the most important issue on the minds of Americans?  What is your factual basis for that belief?  I was merely responding to your contention that it was a big issue and my clear recollection that it wasn't.  My sources are multiple polls taken during the Bush years that asked respondents to list the issues of most importance to them.    These polls were done by right leaning, left leaning and everywhere in between polling outfilts.  I would agree it is wise to view any one poll with a grain of salt but if they all say essentially the same thing it is probably on the mark.  So unless you can prove to me with real data that health care was a burning issue during the Bush years I stick with my contention that you are wrong.

If you don't think Obamacare is a train wreck and are not ideologically blind, which I accept, then there is something else at work here.  Even if you love the idea of the federal government controlling one sixth of our economy you would have to be intellectually dishonest to think Obamacare is better than what we had before.  Sorry Hound, but given the significant cost increases, the lost plans, the lost doctors and all the lies told to justify this law your position is incomprehensible to me.  

As for your anecdotal stories, recent studies have shown that MORE people are using the ER for primary care than did before Obamacare.  And the reason people can't afford the doctor visit is the deductible under Obamacare is significantly higher than they had with their old "Cadillac" plan that were outlawed.  Trust me, if you can't afford the doctor visit you can't afford the premium under Obamacare.  

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Source for your view?
Date:	6/3/2015 6:45:19 PM

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue.   It doesn't much matter, since neither you or I are in a position to do something about it.  As I have said before, I have no idea whether Obamacare is a good solution - time will tell, or some Republican will get elected in 2016 and they will do away with it.  But, my thinking  is that health care in this country is still a problem and premiums and costs will continue to rise.  Perhaps there is someone out there with a better solution.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Wishful thinking
Date:	6/3/2015 6:53:10 PM

For the record even if a Republican wins in 2016 I seriously doubt they will actually have the gonads to repeal Obamacare. Heck, the current crop in Congress are talking about replacing the subsidies if the administration loses in the SC. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Wishful thinking
Date:	6/3/2015 9:04:10 PM

The  Right told so many lies about Obamacare that  most seniors oppossed it. Death squads, higher medicare premiums, overcrowding of doctor offices, and the lies went on. FOX has a median age of 68 for their viewers. No wonder surveys by FOX would show their viewers did not think healthcare was an issue. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	FNC Derangement Syndrome
Date:	6/4/2015 8:10:53 AM

Your derangement with Fox News is not healthy.  FNC reaches far, far fewer viewers than the govt media complex which is in the bag for Obamacare.  It is opposed at all age groups.  The lies told were by Obama and the media sycophants on the left.  Deal with the truth GF.  It is a disaster and that is why a majority oppose it.  Come back to reality GF, it will hurt but in the end you will be better off for it.  Higher prices, lost plans, lost doctors, etc.  All predicted and all have come to pass.

Name:	Shortbus -	Reply
Subject:	Shortbuscare
Date:	6/4/2015 9:53:56 AM (updated 6/4/2015 10:16:26 AM)

Why yell and scream at each other about what is in place?

If you are compassionate, then semi-socialism is unavoidable.

Put down what you think is better.

Less fortunate and dumb n lazy types medical bills paid directly by the gubment (with a copay) straight off hospital losses.

They also can't sue without insurance.

Fat people & smokers pay a higher copay.  (is this illegal?)

Productive working people with insurance get better doctors and can sue, just like in the pre-Obama days.

Insurance would be like it was after decades of tweaking.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/how-affordable-is-the-affordable-care-act-118428.html

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Shortbuscare
Date:	6/4/2015 11:19:59 AM

Not sure we are yelling and screaming.....more like robust disagreement.  But I firmly believe that it is not compassionate to have the federal government involved in health care and health insurance.  When they are everywhere its been tried it costs more, results in rationing and ultimately leads to monstrosities like the NIH in the UK.  One thing for sure is that anything the federal government is involved in will not be beneficial to a majority of Americans.

My alternative is sensible reforms using market-based principals that gets the consumer-doctor relationship as close as possible instead of thrid parties that distort the market.  Some examples include tort reform so doctors are not so inclined to practice defensive medicine.  Another is to allow portability so the insured does not rely solely on their employer for health insurance like they don't rely on the employer for homeowners or auto insurance.  A third would be to create a high risk pool that could address the issues of pre-existing conditions and that could be a place where the government can be of assistance.  There are a lot of other sensible reforms that would improve what was the best system in the world.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	At least we can agree on
Date:	6/4/2015 2:43:43 PM

tort reform.  And do something about Medicaid.  Far too many people get Medicaid.  And I agree with you about portability. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	At least we can agree on
Date:	6/4/2015 5:02:06 PM

We have an HSA and regularly push back on the defensive medicine crap because we pay for it.  When the doctor says we have to do a bunch of tests we ask why and push back and far too often they readily back down.  That is what I mean by getting the consumer paying for the services closer to the decision and working with the doctor.  And believe me, I would love for an employee to come to me and say they already have insurance that they are bringing along (because they get it from their spouses).  Music to my ears and if we get the employer out of the middle and allow. people to buy health insurance the way they buy auto and home we would all be better off.  There are lots of other very good and sensible reforms that are market driven versus government run and that is what we need.  Repeal and replace Obamacare and get rid of the large subsidies for people that don't really need them if not for the ridiculously high cost of the policies offered through the exchange......and getting higher.

Name:	Shortbus -	Reply
Subject:	At least we can agree on
Date:	6/4/2015 6:08:24 PM

I hear that many of the tests are for CYA only - driven by lawyers.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	At least we can agree on
Date:	6/4/2015 6:37:42 PM

My casual observation is that Drs. order tests to cover themselves.  They need to prove that they took every precaution, in case a patient decides to sue.  I've heard of people asking Drs. "do you have insurance?" 

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	At least we can agree on
Date:	6/6/2015 6:24:38 AM

I have no proof, but strongly suspect that to be the case.

Name:	realfast64 -	Reply
Subject:	CLUELESS RESPONDS TO KNOW IT ALL
Date:	6/8/2015 9:01:49 PM

 20-30 percent increase in recent years. really    then why are people in south caroline screaming because BC/BS is stating 26% increase is in the very near future?   and tell me when any thing had a increase of 26-50 % GF and you sucked it up and kept your B mouth shut.