patrick.net

ZippyDDoodah says

Maybe he/she will finally stop foaming at the mouth and offer us some real solutions for a change.

As anyone reading this thread can see for themselves, I’m the ONLY one on this thread except for LowlysmartRenter who made suggestions for solutions to the health care system in my very first post. The rest is just sniping from those like you who want to discourage any real discussion. That’s why you came out with your absurd “analogy” regarding national defense.

Zippo, I think you're getting your Liberals confused. Oh, sorry, you must be right due to your superior nature even though the evidence in this thread proves otherwise.

ZippyDDoodah says

Health care should be dealt with like food. We need both to live, yet health care has attracted massive govt. interference which has driven up prices

Yes, Zippy, your analogies are much, much better...

tatupu70 says

ZippyDDoodah says

Health care should be dealt with like food. We need both to live, yet health care has attracted massive govt. interference which has driven up prices

Yes, Zippy, your analogies are much, much better…

That's because government never interferes with agriculture, food preparation, inspection, or delivery, ever. C'mon tatupu70, get with the program. Zippo is far superior and it's time we just silently admire the intellect.

>>We already have a clear example of what results in healthcare when individuals make their own decisions - Laser/Lasik eye treatments have steadily improved in quality while going down in price.

Zippy, I think you are overlooking something obvious: Lasik is not a *necessary* procedure, as a heart surgery is. There exist ultra-cheap alternatives. They are called eyeglasses (or contact lenses), and you can get them all over the web for $40.

If you can demonstrate that ALL lifesaving medical procedures have cheap and safe alternatives, then we can talk again. But was we all know, that is not the case and likely never will be. Your argument does not hold water.

The reason lasik is getting cheaper is competitive pressure, nothing else.

Lasik is a simple procedure that is elective, has a great sales team pushing it, and requires almost no doctors time. I had it done, it was 15 minute procedure at most. The most time was spent in discussions and sales pitches.

Heart surgery there is *NO* time to comparative shop, it's a done deal. When you need it, you need to get it done asap. It requires massive amounts of high tech gear, it requires massive numbers of trained professionals.

How about we have an option to stop paying for defense spending as well? Any tax payer who doesn't deem it necessary can have a 50% deduction on their taxes. Let's see what happens next year. The whole mentality of "let someone else pay" would probably take over.

Medical isn't something people might need, it is something they will need at some point in their life. If they don't understand this, then it's a failure in the education system. We don't buy military defense insurance, we invest in it, because it will be needed at some point. It's just a fact of life. Medical falls into the same category. It needs the government to ensure everyone pitches in for something everyone needs, whether they "want it" or not.

LowlySmartRenter says

It’s cute how we think we have a voice about health care.

I think it's even cuter that zippy thinks we're stupid, yet condescends to bestow his wisdom upon us. His keyboard seems stuck on that link, but otherwise he seems like a nice chap. simchaland says

I don’t know what malt liquor will do for defense but it may help some people around here to relax.

Mixed drinks are clearly a necessity here. It's hard to take you seriously when you're obviously lacking in your awareness of situational alcohol appropriateness. It was my college major.

What happened to bob2356 and his angry demands to "Back up your opinions with facts!"? As soon as said opinions were backed up with linked citations, he seems to have exited out the back door in search of his credibility.

Lasik is a simple procedure that is elective, has a great sales team pushing it, and requires almost no doctors time. I had it done, it was 15 minute procedure at most. The most time was spent in discussions and sales pitches.

Heart surgery there is *NO* time to comparative shop, it’s a done deal. When you need it, you need to get it done asap. It requires massive amounts of high tech gear, it requires massive numbers of trained professionals.

Yet with all those sales pitches, the quality kept improving and the cost keeps dropping.. unlike other medical procedures that are widely covered by insurance. Why do you think that is and what could we possibly learn from it?

Btw, modern Lasik also requires expensive "high tech gear" too in case you didn't know. Many medical procedures covered by insurance involve plenty of time to comparative shop. And others offer opportunities, if there was freedom to do so, to negotiate *In advance* for discounted rates for emergency situations.

The Laser/Lasik example is still standing tall at this point

I try to be personally responsible for my healthcare. I currently enjoy healthcare insurance through my employer. The problem I see is that premiums have increased and continue to increase so much that my employer my have to drop or radically decrease coverage. I have a self-employed friend now paying $1800 a month to cover himself, his wife, and e children. It is no Cadillac plan. That is $21600 per year. He makes about 100k. His fed and state taxes are half that. Once you think about it, considering the vast array of services ranging the worlds most powerful defense to providing medical care for the most cronically Ill it seems to me that the taxpayer is getting a pretty good bang for their buck.

As far as I am aware there are only 3 insurance companies doing business in California. Where is the competition? There is none because basically the insurers collude to fix rates. And try to find a catastrophic policy. Sorry, they want high deductable comprehensive but still very high cost. Frankly insurers are currently jacking rates into the stratosphere because they like all the rest of the financials are taking a thurough assbeating in real estate-commercial. The execs and board members will get their asses fired if they pass the losses on to share holders. So the only way to save themselves is to screw the ratpayers. This is the main reason why we should have open competition in the insurance market. This is also why we should have a public option. Why should I not have a choice of paying premiums to the gov for healthcare is I so desire?

Isn't it a bit odd that the supposedly competitive insurance don't want to compete with gov? Could it be that maybe insurers have to many legacy costs to compete? I think so.

I am trying to be responsible but the insurers have rigged the game.

elliemae says

simchaland says

I don’t know what malt liquor will do for defense but it may help some people around here to relax.

Mixed drinks are clearly a necessity here. It’s hard to take you seriously when you’re obviously lacking in your awareness of situational alcohol appropriateness. It was my college major.

Bloody Mary's all around! My treat.

Frankly insurers are currently jacking rates into the stratosphere because they like all the rest of the financials are taking a thurough assbeating in real estate-commercial.The execs and board members will get their asses fired if they pass the losses on to share holders. So the only way to save themselves is to screw the ratpayers.

They've probably taken losses in real estate. But they are small in comparison. Insurance companies operate on a 2% - 4% profit margin. The total profits of the largest 10 insurance companies in the US, that total is less than 1/2 of the amount Medicare fraud every year. And that fraud-ridden, wasteful as hell government system is what we have to look forward to with Obamacare

Why should I not have a choice of paying premiums to the gov for healthcare is I so desire?

Because I, and the other 53% of those in this country still paying taxes will have to pay to subsidize you. Pull your own weight

2 to 4 percent? Why would anyone run a company for 2 percent? Oh I know, how bout for the mulimillion dollar salaries.

Oh and just so we're here I said premiums not subsidies. I already pay subsidies-some to grossly overpaid executives.

By the way I have and continue to work and pay my way through life.

Maybe zip needs to cool down and concentrate a little harder on peddling his overpriced insurance.

Gosh, and private health insurance companies have the cream of the crop. Imagine if they had to cover those expensive folks, like the elderly, the disabled?

I was shocked to hear that only three insurance companies operate in California. In Oregon we have plenty of competition but it doesn't seem to lower costs. Our options: LifeWise, BC/BS, Aetna, United Health, Kaiser, Providence, HealthNet, Pacific Source, ODS and that's just off the top of my head.

A recent example of how personal experiences shape your opinions:

I was visiting the in-laws this weekend in the Puget Sound area. My MIL is 62, unemployed and without health insurance, mentioned her before. My SIL and BIL are anti-universal health care in a big way and would even like to see Medicare and Medicaid shrunk. They recently dropped employer sponsored health care as they started their own business and discovered that individual plans have lower premiums for similar coverage compared to group health which lead them to the belief that uninsured people have no excuse due to the individual plan options.

Well, their 18 month old has numerous food allergies and early signs of asthma. The child has been hospitalized 2x already for breathing problems. This is where you find out how good of coverage you have. Well, they owed nearly $3K out of pocket. When the BIL asked about a payment plan the billing office was able to hook them up with assistance which covered the entire bill not paid by insurance. I was shocked that they qualified considering they have insurance and he makes nearly $100K. And now the latest, their premium got increased 20%.

It will be interesting to hear how the health care conversations go now that they will be frequent users of the system as it is very likely their child will be an asthmatic.

Honest Abe says

The saying goes like this: “Take whatever you want and pay for it”, NOT ‘take what you want and force others to pay for it’. The former represents personal responsibility, the latter represents your typical liberal, do-gooder, free-loader, socialist, elite, dependent, “its nooooot fair”, whiney, the world owes me, cry baby, over-reaching, manipulative, coercive, nanny-state, democratic stinkin’ thinkin…YUCK.

@ABE

If you dont think you will ever need these services then you are lost. Many people in our nation cannot afford to take what they need and pay for it so it is the responsibility of those of us who can to assist them. You need to relinquish the thought that all socialism is bad because its not, and stop thinking that all capitalism is good because the recession has shown that it is not.

-You run to church to give 10% tithes so the church can prosper and spread your hatred of other religions but refuse to spend the same for programs that actually help assist our communities.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we are going to provide health care to the poor because you believe that the POOR are BLACK/MEXICAN when in actuality whites still make up a majority of the lower income families in terms of sheer numbers.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we liberals are attempting to introduce banking legislation, but proclaim your excitement when told we would invade Iraq to destroy another 1 million muslim lives.

- You would rather engage in war with other countries than take care of the problems hear in America

- You and the PARTY OF NO refuse to allow our nation to spend on programs aimed at progressing past a 3rd world education system, health care system, economic system but are openly OK with spending 1 trillion a year on War and Defense.

Leigh:
I liked the diaper head! Does this mean I have to change my icon?

elliemae says

Leigh:

I liked the diaper head! Does this mean I have to change my icon?

No, keep the Aussie:O) The pull-up wasn't keeping the sh!t out so I gotta think of something else.hehehe

She's almost 3 now, might do a grown-up pic. Right now she's trying to herd cats out back. Not working out so well...

Zippy,

>>The Laser/Lasik example is still standing tall at this point

Huh? I completely exposed the fallacy of your example, and you just ignore it.

The Veterans Administration (VA) is real good about helping Vets live a healthier life style. They have a number of programs that do that. Anti-smoking, weight control, etc.

This helps the Vets as well as reducing the cost of healthcare.

ZippyDDoodah says

What happened to bob2356 and his angry demands to “Back up your opinions with facts!”? As soon as said opinions were backed up with linked citations, he seems to have exited out the back door in search of his credibility.

Bob was out of town kitesurfing for a few days. I bow to your superior attitude thank you. You are correct on the average deduction number. My experience was to be distorted by the fact the regional market I worked in was heavily represented by the HMO/POS segment. My experience based on this dovetails very nicely with your cited article by the way. I didn't realize and failed to research the fact the national market was so much higher in the PPO model. Mea Culpa.

I didn't demand anything, angry or not. I just asked for some backup to your strongly worded assertion that having people buy their own insurance would make a major difference in the cost of health care in the United States. A research article on the rates of utilization broken out by the level of deduction would be interesting, but I haven't been able to uncover one. I assumed you did and could provide it. Once we have this data we could extrapolate it against the total health care costs and see what the real savings on a system wide basis would be. Otherwise what you are offering is a theory not a suggestion.

For the record I always thought that making benefits tax deductible to business without being considered income to the employee was a very bad idea. Not because of deductions, but because it means large unfair distortions across the entire tax system.

I question you on this point because I have never bought into the skin in the game article of faith. I don't believe, in my opinion, that there are very many people who wake up in the morning and say "I'm going to the doctor just because I have unlimited health insurance". Going to the doctor is a pain in the ass. You have to take time off work, drive there, and wait forever. People go to the doctor because they are sick, not just because they can. I also question whether there is any real savings in people avoiding going to a doctor until they are very sick. Frequently things are are very easy to treat at an early stage become much more difficult (expensive) if treatment is delayed. Providing your research on utilization vs deductions would be a major help in proving or disproving this THEORY of mine based on anecdotal experience.

At one time many of our hospitals were private charities. At one time almost everyone paid for medical out of pocket. At one time average lifespan was less than 40 years. At one time almost all medical treatment consisted of helping people die in comfort. This time was less than 2 generations ago. We have almost doubled the average lifespan in those 2 generations. The majority of conditions that are routinely treated today were a death sentence prior to the 1950's. Cancer? Here is some codeine, have a nice funeral. Heart disease? Have some nitro and a short life. Diabeties? Been good to know you. Etc. Etc. This additional lifespan is the direct result of very expensive medical treatment. Like a bumper sticker I once saw said "Ass, Gas, or Grass no one rides free".

The question should be how do we balance cost vs results. This is not addressed by a bunch of stick to the wall feel good crap thrown out on an ideological basis. There are real world working examples to look at. Places like the Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic deliver very good medical care at very reasonable costs (relative to the rest of the US). Excellent utilization of IT, tightly controlled costs, high standards of excellence, constant review of best practice procedures, close management of resource utilizaton are some (but certainly not all) of the things that make this possible. Things that are sadly lacking in the practice of health care across the country. Items that are also sadly lacking in any discussion of controlling the cost of health care.

So my suggestion (if I were king) is to study what works in the real world, like Mayo, and implement it on a national basis, while leaving out the sound bite libertarian posturing. I would even study what those awful socialist furriners are doing to let their people get medical care for half the cost of the US. Things like the no fault medical malpractice in NZ come to mind. Lasik is simply not a viable example of cost savings. It's a elective procedure that has a dirt cheap alternative.

Interesting that the article cited has a 12% denial rate overall with a denial rate of 30% for 60-64 year olds. I would have to wonder who the 12% were, why they were denied, and how they ended up paying for their medical care. I don't know but I would guess many were people who had pre existing conditions (ie the people who were actually sick) and couldn't get medical insurance at all. Which means they most likely ended up being cared for by some government program. Or as you zippippy would like to say, the governments fraud-ridden, wasteful track record in providing healthcare. That would be piss poor substitute healthcare to all the people that private insurance companies won't touch. Wonderful how the all the free markets in America have become privatized profits and socialized losses.

Honest Abe says

The saying goes like this: “Take whatever you want and pay for it”, NOT ‘take what you want and force others to pay for it’. The former represents personal responsibility, the latter represents your typical liberal, do-gooder, free-loader, socialist, elite, dependent, “its nooooot fair”, whiney, the world owes me, cry baby, over-reaching, manipulative, coercive, nanny-state, democratic stinkin’ thinkin…YUCK.

Since caring for a medically fragile child is damn expensive, abortions should be performed soon after that 18 weeks ultrasound demonstrates the abnormalities: Down's, Fragile X, Spina Bifada? And any baby born prior to 28 weeks gestation should be left to die due to the complications and long NICU stay?

Since chemo therapy is damn expensive one should check into hospice with a confirmed diagnosis?

My delivery, an uncomplicated vaginal birth was $20K in 2009. Let's say your changes brings health care costs down 50%. Could I come up with $10K to pay for delivery? How's that for birth control?!

Top rated medical care comes from countries like France, Germany, Norway, etc. All cheaper per person than the US, all end up superb care, and everyone is covered.

The US system is like communism. Show us one country where communism thrived and succeeded. It didn't. The US system is in the same boat. It's the only country left hanging onto a system that doesn't work. Ugh.

I read somewhere that 60% of bankruptcies where from medical costs and those people HAD coverage. That says something right there.

Bob, you coward, don't go running off kite surfing again when you have zippy to answer to. Do I have to tell you kids everything?

elliemae says

Bob, you coward, don’t go running off kite surfing again when you have zippy to answer to. Do I have to tell you kids everything?

Sorry, it's coming into winter here in the southern hemisphere. I need to get my days in NOW.
Damn, PKennedy took my last argument on the subject. How does the rest of the first world provide health care at half the cost without any charges to the patients at all? They should be totally overrun by people using up that free health care because they can. I was saving that.

Isn't there a Wii game that you can do, kite surfing-wise? Stand in your living room, put a fan on and put in a DVD or something. But stand by your computer. You have an obligation that you shouldn't be shirking.

ZippyDDoodah says

What happened to bob2356 and his angry demands to “Back up your opinions with facts!”? As soon as said opinions were backed up with linked citations, he seems to have exited out the back door in search of his credibility.

Unless you were searching for your credibility on the water. That's cool - if OJ could search for the "real killers" on every golf course in Florida, you certainly can choose your search location. But next time clear it with us.

There is no crying in patnet ball!

Leigh says

Honest Abe says

The saying goes like this: “Take whatever you want and pay for it”, NOT ‘take what you want and force others to pay for it’. The former represents personal responsibility, the latter represents your typical liberal, do-gooder, free-loader, socialist, elite, dependent, “its nooooot fair”, whiney, the world owes me, cry baby, over-reaching, manipulative, coercive, nanny-state, democratic stinkin’ thinkin…YUCK.

Since caring for a medically fragile child is damn expensive, abortions should be performed soon after that 18 weeks ultrasound demonstrates the abnormalities: Down’s, Fragile X, Spina Bifada? And any baby born prior to 28 weeks gestation should be left to die due to the complications and long NICU stay?
Since chemo therapy is damn expensive one should check into hospice with a confirmed diagnosis?
My delivery, an uncomplicated vaginal birth was $20K in 2009. Let’s say your changes brings health care costs down 50%. Could I come up with $10K to pay for delivery? How’s that for birth control?!

Damn, thought I'd get a staunch Conservative to admit that there are certain conditions that would justify abortion....shoot.

I had an interesting case the other day, a younger man in his forties suffered from an auto -immune condition that wreaks havoc on his vascular system. The belief is that his 20 years working in the Texas oilfields contributed to his condition. Well, he is on his 5th amputation, this one a below the knee job. So now he has both lower legs gone along with a few digits. And is dialysis dependent. He sure as heck couldn't afford the care without Medicare/Medicaid to get him through the rough spots. Using Honest Abe's beliefs he should have been dead a few years ago but yet he continues to be a productive member of society, running an internet business.

Abe, I think my hospital would be 95% smaller if we didn't help each other out.

He sure as heck couldn’t afford the care without Medicare/Medicaid to get him through the rough spots. Using Honest Abe’s beliefs he should have been dead a few years ago but yet he continues to be a productive member of society, running an internet business.

Sounds like a sad situation, although your assertion about it being "believed" that working in TX oilfields contributed to his condition needs a bit more support, as many folks live their entire lives working on drilling rigs with no adverse effects. Also, if he is so "productive" with his internet business as you say, then why couldn't he buy his own health insurance?

Top rated medical care comes from countries like France, Germany, Norway, etc. All cheaper per person than the US, all end up superb care, and everyone is covered.

If "top rated" is defined by cancer survival rates, then every country you named sucks badly in comparison to our healthcare system since they don't even come close to our track record in that respect.

I haven't been sick in France or Germany, but I have been sick in Norway. Did you know that their restrictive system prevents you from buying any over-the-counter medicine beyond aspirin? Incredibly restrictive and inefficient. Norway for years also got away with paying their doctors and nurses peanuts compared to other western countries. Not sure what their comparative pay scale is these days

ZippyDDoodah says

He sure as heck couldn’t afford the care without Medicare/Medicaid to get him through the rough spots. Using Honest Abe’s beliefs he should have been dead a few years ago but yet he continues to be a productive member of society, running an internet business.

Sounds like a sad situation, although your assertion about it being “believed” that working in TX oilfields contributed to his condition needs a bit more support, as many folks live their entire lives working on drilling rigs with no adverse effects. Also, if he is so “productive” with his internet business as you say, then why couldn’t he buy his own health insurance?

Ever heard of that 'pre-existing condition' issue? Denied! But now that is by the way side, we'll see if he can afford the premium and deductible of a private plan, ,especially when they see his health history.

BTW, there are lots of cancers and disorders linked to the environment but it's very difficult to link cause and effect. Some folks are susceptible to cancers and disorders due to genetics. Multiple Myeloma, various leukemias. and disorders of the bone marrow are linked to pesticide and herbicide usage. I grew up in Iowa, every one of my relatives that farmed soy beans /or corn died of cancer. My dad died of MM at the age of 65. There are communities along the Missouri that pull water from the river due to contaminated ground water from farm run-off.

Sure, some farmers live to a ripe old age, then there are some that don't.

The concern with the oil industry is the benzene exposure. Next time I'm at work I'll search for some articles.

Leigh says

Ever heard of that ‘pre-existing condition’ issue? Denied! But now that is by the way side, we’ll see if he can afford the premium and deductible of a private plan, ,especially when they see his health history.

He paid into Medicare while he worked - and he's paying $100 a month for his part B premium. I'm willing to bet he buys Medicaid on a spenddown on those months he has outrageous co-pays. Amputations and dialysis aren't cheap, nor are the complications caused by dialysis. And Leigh - you left out R.A. & Lupus as auto immune diseases that are suspected to be caused by exposure to chemical agents. You're correct that no insurance would pick him up, but if he could find one that would his premiums would be in the thousands each month.

I guess in Zippy's world, the guy should have saved his money while he worked so that he could pay for such an event. Most of us will never make enough in our lifetimes to pay for the care that he has already received.

ZippyDDoodah says

If “top rated” is defined by cancer survival rates, then every country you named sucks badly in comparison to our healthcare system since they don’t even come close to our track record in that respect

Actually, that's not true. The study I saw compared 3 types of cancer in men and women. US was best in a couple of the categories, Japan was best in a couple and France was best in at least 1.

US is good at treating cancer, but so is France.

I guess in Zippy’s world, the guy should have saved his money while he worked so that he could pay for such an event.

That's a rather dishonest way of framing my position ellie. Paying for health insurance when you "don't need it" is to cover for catestrophic future injuries and illnesses.

ZippyDDoodah says

I guess in Zippy’s world, the guy should have saved his money while he worked so that he could pay for such an event.

That’s a rather dishonest way of framing my position ellie. Paying for health insurance when you “don’t need it” is to cover for catestrophic future injuries and illnesses.

Replace "Zippy" w/ "Honest Abe" and she would be accurate.

ZippyDDoodah says

That’s a rather dishonest way of framing my position ellie. Paying for health insurance when you “don’t need it” is to cover for catestrophic future injuries and illnesses.

What do you do when your insurer drops you because you've become too expensive?

What do you do when your insurer drops you because you’ve become too expensive?

If you've been paying your premiums, then to my knowledge they cannot drop you as long as you're under the lifetime cap of coverage. If they're able to find a loophole, such cases attract negative publicity causing customers and potential customers to switch policies away from the non-paying company to health insurance companies who do pay for legit claims, causing financial pain for the non-paying insurance company

Even if they don't drop you, raising the premiums will have the same effect.

Leigh says

Even if they don’t drop you, raising the premiums will have the same effect.

Not only that, but endless denials can mean death long before a procedure is approved.

ZippyDDoodah says

At one time, many/most of our hospitals were private charities. Private charities are better suited than the government to weed out the ‘truly needy’ from those who are gaming the system. With $60 billion/year in Medicare fraud alone, there are plenty of companies and individuals gaming the system now.

Zippy, you say that Medicare fraud is a government issue - but it's perpetrated by private companies, and private contractors to Medicare are the ones authorizing the payments. So it's a private thing too. Medicare helps a hell of a lot more people than it hurts - but these private companies make more money by processing each bill rather than by questioning it. Sure, the system needs to be changed - but just like the housing bubble was (in part) created by companies running rampant, so is Medicare fraud.

A single payor system would take care of that. Less of a chance to game the system when it's one agency paying the bills.

BTW, our local hospital is non-profit. Every year they give bonuses to staff because they make too much money. They could spend those bonus dollars on healthcare, but they're not required to. And they have a "foundation" that visits wealthy old people, do the hard sell and tries to get them to leave their money to the hospital. Some family members have found out the hard way when auntie dies and the will was changed.

Zippy, you say that Medicare fraud is a government issue - but it’s perpetrated by private companies, and private contractors to Medicare are the ones authorizing the payments. So it’s a private thing too

By your own admission in other threads, Medicare's "system" gives no incentive not to pay, so it's not "equally" the fault of private industry as you suggest. Medicare is responsible is for the fraud in their own program, period. In fact, private medical insurers would go bankrupt if they permitted only tiny fraction of the fraud which takes place under Medicare every year. Quit making excuses for the massive fraud

A single payor system would take care of that. Less of a chance to game the system when it’s one agency paying the bills.

That's as absurd as it is unsupported. A single payer health system would give more control to the government, which has already proven that it cannot control fraud or waste in the least. On what possible basis can you make the assertion that there would be "less of a chance" to game the system? Single payer does not = single provider. The fraud has occurred in paying out to health care providers

ZippyDDoodah says

If you’ve been paying your premiums, then to my knowledge they cannot drop you as long as you’re under the lifetime cap of coverage. If they’re able to find a loophole, such cases attract negative publicity causing customers and potential customers to switch policies away from the non-paying company to health insurance companies who do pay for legit claims, causing financial pain for the non-paying insurance company

Zippy--you're technically correct. What they do is jack up the premiums, making it impossible to keep the coverage. It's calling purging. Here's what Wendell Potter, former head of corporate communications for Cigna says about the practice:

“What we have today,” he told journalist Bill Moyers recently, “is Wall Street-run health care that has proven itself an untrustworthy partner to its customers, to the doctors and hospitals who deliver care, and to the state and federal governments that attempt to regulate it.”

Potter went into detail about how increasing corporatism, dwindling competition, and the slavish need to meet investors’ and Wall Street’s profit expectations has distorted the traditional role of health insurance. He said the game, today, is all about controlling what’s known as the “medical loss ratio,” an industry term for how much of a premium dollar the insurance company pays to actually cover medical costs.

And one of the chief ways insurance companies control the ratio is by purging employer accounts, he said.

“If a small business has an employee, for example, who suddenly has a lot of treatment, or is in an accident, and medical bills are piling up, and this employee is filing claims with the insurance company, that’ll be noticed by the insurance company,” he explained.

“And when that business is up for renewal, and it typically is up once a year, up for renewal, the underwriters will look at that. And they’ll say, ‘We need to jack up the rates here, because the experience’ — when I say experience, the claim experience, the number of claims filed — ‘was more than we anticipated.’

“Often they’ll do this, knowing that the employer will have no alternative but to leave. And that happens all the time,” he explained.