2014

[TXINSURANCE]

I don't see standardized plans as a bad thing. You have a Standard Auto Policy and the HO-* policies for homeowners insurance. Standardizing P&C policies didn't ruin that part of the industry.

Health insurance policies are hard for the professionals to compare. (Maybe I should speak for myself, but after almost 25 years in the business, I find them hard and/or time consuming to compare.)

It should be easier to compare health insurance policies. The core benefits should have some standardization IMnsHO.

100% agreed.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for consumers to weed through the terms , limitations and garbage of policies. They should be letter designated A to Z (or whatever) with minimum coverage levels per letter.

 

[somarco]

Even with standardized plans (Med supps, HO, term life) most consumers still have no idea what they bought.

 

[ins.dave]

100% agreed.
They should be letter designated A to Z (or whatever) with minimum coverage levels per letter.

They will still get it twisted.
Trust me.

I don't agree.
For example, if someone wants to take a plan without r/x because they are say 63 years of age, and they already have a cost issue and they figure it is worth the risk to save the extra premium ...?
As long as they have been made abundantly clear of said risk, they should have the option.

 

[somarco]

People get real short memory's when the claim hit's and they "suddenly" find out their plan doesn't cover Rx, or has a $5,000 Rx limit, or an annual cap of $50,000 or . . . .

It's an E&O claim waiting to happen.

 

[ins.dave]

People get real short memory's when the claim hit's and they "suddenly" find out their plan doesn't cover Rx, or has a $5,000 Rx limit, or an annual cap of $50,000 or . . . .

It's an E&O claim waiting to happen.

Tough titty said the kitty.
Look here P. Pit, if a guy is, like I said, say 63 years of age and he has blood pressure and he gets rated and it is expensive, and we go over say a 5000 deductible hsa with and without integrated r/x and the difference is like 150 per month and he decides to KNOWINGLY assume that risk figuring it is a snowball's chance in h e double hockey sticks that he will require significant outpatient r/x therapy between now and medicare then what are you going to do? Not write him? Me doubts it. As long as he was made aware and not mislead, job well done. He is free to choose. Would you not agree? Same with the mortgage industry. You're dumb enough to by a house without knowing what your mortgage payment will be in 3 years ... then you shouldn't be a home owner. Let's legalize drugs to remove the 10,000 crime related deaths that surround the narcotics trade each year. Are a few morons gonna make pigs of themselves abd croak? Yep. So what? Far and away the lesser of 2 evils.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So does it look as though it is gonna go or what. How far along are they in the process. Seems like we keep jumping the gun here and getting it all wrong..........why am I even asking???/

Because you are stupid?

Is WHAT gonna go?
Please be specific.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

100% agreed.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for consumers to weed through the terms , limitations and garbage of policies. They should be letter designated A to Z (or whatever) with minimum coverage levels per letter.

That's where you are wrong Texas tea. As long as they seek out proper representation and have the mental capacity to know to do so, then they will be GUIDED in a knowledgeable direction to choose what ever level of risk THEY wish.
If they are dumb / arrogant enough to pay the same price and go to ehealth or to shop "direct" then they deserve whatever they get.
As in nature, the strong prosper and spread their seed to future generations while the weak strains of life die off.
Sad, but true. As it should and must be. If they didn't blow their money on the wrong health insurance, they will be stupid enough to do it else where. Enough mamby pamby let us hold your pee pee while you wee wee ...?
God d*mn it!


No, you can't.

Ron Paul 2012