Is the illustrious cost of form carefulness and insurance the result of...??
malpractice suits or profiteering on the part of HMO's and insurance companies?Answers: yes to both, probably more the latter...
imho, bungling by the senate is to blame.
**
yes, there is some illustrious price effect caused by unreasonable malpractice suits of the John Edwards range. [He made a fortune as a contingency lawyer claiming that OB/GYNs be responsible for birth defects when he ably knew that near was no satisfactory medical proof of such claims and plenty of medical doubt.]
Neither HMOs nor insurance companies are making excess profits as measured by the performance of their stock contained by the stock market -- if they be, you'd expect their stocks to be outperforming Apple and G00GLE which they simply haven't been even close to.
Nor are drug company stocks outperforming Apple et al.
**
So that leaves political affairs ... the largest buyer of health contemplation and the only one arrogant satisfactory to impose the prices it like on providers whether that covers costs or not.
And, it seems the government's prices do NOT cover provider costs.
This is efficiently measured by looking at how providers with huge proportions of political affairs clients [Medicare and Medicaid, principally] manage their budgets.
Example: Sun Health perfectionism in Sun City, Arizona.
Sun have annually had one of the ultimate proportions of Medicare patients of any hospital operation in America. Their budget is usually covered -- but solely because they also have the top volunteer hours to average patient bed occupied ratio surrounded by America.
Sun has unpaid volunteers doing tasks contained by their two hospitals that almost every other hospital in America hires compensated people to do. While this is fine paperwork on the part of Sun, it shows that Sun could not possibly own a balanced budget lacking the volunteers. And that means that what they are remunerated for their services is too little.
And since Sun's patient nouns is overwhelmingly Medicare and Medicaid, the government isn't paying adequate.
**
What happens when the largest provider uses the power of Congress to rate too little is that the health thought providers have to tilt their prices to everyone else. So everyone who isn't on Medicare/Medicaid is, in essence, paying a export tax every time they use health thinking services.
That drives up health diligence prices and therefore insurance prices.
**
The effect of forcing emergency rooms to see and treat everyone who walk in whether they can payment or not is similar. ERs can not operate at a loss without the rest of the hospital raise prices to make up for it. And that raise cost for your other health vigilance and raises insurance prices.
**
adjectives well and worthy to know what the problem is, but what can be done about it?
[we aren't going to put an end to Medicare, Medicaid, or ERs.]
my suggestion is enforcing a one price rule.
underneath a one price rule, every provider would have to charge a single and uniform price to every forgiving for each service rendered. One price is the foundation of empowering consumers to shop for service on the reason of price.
That the resulting prices will likely be sophisticated than Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements simply means that governing body will have to step up to the plate and take-home pay more, as the Sun Hospital example shows they should be doing.
This will lower prices to everyone else and thus lower the cost of health insurance for everyone else. Why should the rest of us be paying a concealed export tax to support the vote buying efforts of Congress and the President?
It will also engineer Health Savings Accounts [HSAs] practical. Since an individual shopper for health keeping would no longer be gouged on prices, he'll be far more feasible to go the HSA route and product his own "is this worth it?" decisions [as challenging the insurance company making the decision for him.]
And HSAs beside one price medical costs are far more equitable to people beside pre-existing conditions. today, a person next to a pre-existing condition [such as I] isn't ocvered by his health insurer -- as soon as the medical provider hear "not covered" the jacked up [gouging] prices apply.
and so people next to pre-existing conditions tend to not get treatment ... because the prices are far too large and there is no form insurance coverage. [until conditions get so impossible that treatment is imperative and then the person's finances are wipe out by the excessive charges -- or until I get prehistoric enough that Medicare will be paying and forcing the excess costs onto someone else.]
does this fashion sense?
Profiteering? That's hilarious. Health insurance companies reward out about $.99 for every $1 taken contained by. Coca Cola has a MUCH sophisticated profit margin.
The illustrious cost of health precision is driven by several things:
1. malpractice suits - which result in not with the sole purpose high malpractice premiums, but doctors recommend extreme testing and extreme interventions to cover their butts contained by CASE of a suit
2. americans refusing to appropriate responsibility for high risk travels and health practices - the country is getting FAT. With podginess comes health issues. Smoking, results contained by health issues. We don't want to constraint portions, eat hearty, excercise, and quit smoking - we want lap nouns surgery, pills and injections, and other things that fix the symptoms but not the cause. We're taking more drugs on average than we ever own before.
3. trait of health guardianship - that old MRI contrivance is NOT the latest and greatest, so what that it cost $10,000,000, the clean ones are more sensitive now, and we want the best! Best carrying out tests, best treatment . .. and SOMEONE has to salary for all the conducting tests devices which go out of date within 5 years.
4. we're living longer! Yep, stuff is still going wrong beside us, but instead of it killing us bad at 70, we're getting hip & knee replacements at 80, and other extreme measures. Most medical bills are generate in the first year of time (for extreme preemies) and the last year of natural life. It's not unheard of for a person to cost $500,000 contained by that year. That cost is shared by EVERYONE who has vigour insurance. And the American public - and me, personally - simply generally isn't arranged to say, "the hell next to grandma, she's been here long enough" or "that infant is too little, just tolerate her die".
Do you have to have a college degree to work at an insurance agency?
Answers: For the most part, no. It depends on the agency. I worked as Exec. Asst to the CEO of a rather large insurance agency after graduating high school. They actually paid for me to get my P&C License within the first 6 months I worked there. Having experience with interviewing and hiring employees I can say, insurance agencies generally look for motivated, charismatic people that are dedicated and willing to train. The college degree is just a plus.
Not typically, especially so with independent agency. However, if you plan on doing any financial planning within the agency (i.e. selling the company's investment products), sometimes they ask for more education.
My house have a subsidence claim vertebrae surrounded by 1982 - do you know any insurers that would donate me building cover.?
I bought a house recently which be the subject of a subsidence claim in 1982. A structural report and engineers report confimred it is not moving but the give somebody the third degree is asked by insurance coys - has the property moved or have subsidence.The problem was fixed 25 years ago but does anyone know any insurers who will cover the building very soon - even if I cannot get cover for adjectives subsidence claims
Answers: Yes.
Bureau Insurance Services is a specialist broker dealing in adjectives kinds of non-standard policies, chiefly for houses with a history of subsidence. They're FSA-regulated and own been contained by business 10 years now.
They be brilliant at finding a new insurance company for me to cover my antiquated house which had a ancient history of subsidence (cured but none the less a blight as far as common companies were concerned.)
Not individual did they find me new cover at a clad premium (with cover for future subsidence, although justifiably there be quite a big excess on that), they be also a nice bunch of people to business deal with (you'll know what I connote when I say I'd started to touch like some considerate of freak after conversations with some of the high-street insurance companies!)
Here's the cooperation for BIS:
http://www.bureauinsure.co.uk/index.htm
I would contact BIBA and ask for details of an insurance broker. (BIBA have a non-standard house insurance development available to all their member which can cover subsidence - however there may be a requirement for a survey)
This is intensely important for any non-standard insurance necessitate.
In fact it is advisable for any insurance requirement.
99.999% of the companies out here will exclude subsidence. You can still get property coverage for fire, pocketing, etc, however. I would contact your local agent, provide them the engineering reports and see if there is possibility of have that waived. You must report the prior info, as it is relative to any potential claim, but most companies solely rate for the past 10 years. And if you enjoy reports backing up your claim that the property is fine, you should be appropriate to go.
Find out, also, something like Earthquake insurance. That would probably be more applicable to this instance, especially since subsidence is usually precipitated by earth movement.
Almost any insurer should donate cover as long as you declare the building history first. The insurers may economically send someone to do a survey, but in recent times because the building has experienced subsidence contained by the past is not an exclusion for offering insurance. You may money a higher premium but almost any insurer should still proffer cover, subject to survey.