<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hits &amp; Misses &#8211; 2009/6/1</title>
	<atom:link href="http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/</link>
	<description>Health Care Policy and Reform Insights &#124; NCPA</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 02:53:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Greiner</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-43001</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Greiner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:46:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-43001</guid>
		<description>Bart, I strive to bring clarity to complexity.  What did I say that you disagree with?

I do think the UAW employees are being scammed into paying $1,400 a month for dangerous employer-based family health insurance when the security of HSA insurance is available for $198 a month in the free and open markets with a 24 month rate guarantee.

The UAW employees will buy anything.  They must be knee deep in ShamWows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bart, I strive to bring clarity to complexity.  What did I say that you disagree with?</p>
<p>I do think the UAW employees are being scammed into paying $1,400 a month for dangerous employer-based family health insurance when the security of HSA insurance is available for $198 a month in the free and open markets with a 24 month rate guarantee.</p>
<p>The UAW employees will buy anything.  They must be knee deep in ShamWows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42998</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42998</guid>
		<description>Ron, I agree with much of what you say.  But not all of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ron, I agree with much of what you say.  But not all of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Greiner</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42995</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Greiner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:37:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42995</guid>
		<description>The individual insurance is $354.75 per month so she would save $445.25 per month or $5,343 a year which is higher than the decreasing deductible.

Bart once you save more in premium than the size of your deductible it&#039;s impossible to lose.  Trust me, her group of one has co-pays and out-of-pockets as well.

It&#039;s simple math, individual insurance is a wiser move than the group of one.  I&#039;m sure her group of one doesn&#039;t keep her rates constant for 24 months like the individual insurance does either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The individual insurance is $354.75 per month so she would save $445.25 per month or $5,343 a year which is higher than the decreasing deductible.</p>
<p>Bart once you save more in premium than the size of your deductible it&#8217;s impossible to lose.  Trust me, her group of one has co-pays and out-of-pockets as well.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s simple math, individual insurance is a wiser move than the group of one.  I&#8217;m sure her group of one doesn&#8217;t keep her rates constant for 24 months like the individual insurance does either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42994</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:42:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42994</guid>
		<description>&gt; Bart, do you suggest that the insurable spouse join the uninsurable spouse on the group of two?

Not without good reason.  There doesn&#039;t appear to be one here.

NC Plan A, which might be more comparable to her comprehensive group policy, was $786.  $1,037 if she smokes.  Hopefully she won&#039;t get cancer and fire herself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Bart, do you suggest that the insurable spouse join the uninsurable spouse on the group of two?</p>
<p>Not without good reason.  There doesn&#8217;t appear to be one here.</p>
<p>NC Plan A, which might be more comparable to her comprehensive group policy, was $786.  $1,037 if she smokes.  Hopefully she won&#8217;t get cancer and fire herself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Greiner</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42990</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Greiner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42990</guid>
		<description>Bart, do you suggest that the insurable spouse join the uninsurable spouse on the group of two?

The article said, &quot;Sara Brown, a 51-year-old massage therapist in business for herself, didn&#039;t think she could qualify for group health insurance when she moved to North Carolina from California last year. But after an insurance company quoted her an individual policy that cost $1,200 a month and excluded coverage of her anxiety disorder, for which she takes daily medication, she sought help from Maura Carley, president and chief executive of Healthcare Navigation LLC, a Fairfield, Conn., firm that provides health-insurance advocacy for individuals, families and businesses.

Ms. Carley showed Ms. Brown that she was able to qualify for group coverage as a &quot;sole proprietor.&quot; Now she pays $800 a month for comprehensive coverage. &quot;Group coverage is the only way to get coverage you can possibly afford&quot; with a pre-existing condition, Ms. Brown says.&quot;

An anxiety disorder did not make her uninsurable as the article states.  With her anxiety [rate up] HSA individual insurance is available in Charlotte, N.C. for $354.75 per month instead of the $800 she is paying.  Yes, the anxiety medication would be a covered expense.

The N. Carolina high risk pool would cost her $426 for HSA qualifying coverage.

It&#039;s all online, check it out.

http://www.nchirp.org/

&quot;Group coverage is the only way to get coverage you can possibly afford&quot; with a pre-existing condition, Ms. Brown says.&quot;

Ms. Brown is wrong even after her &quot;expert&quot; advise.

Unless you disagree Bart.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bart, do you suggest that the insurable spouse join the uninsurable spouse on the group of two?</p>
<p>The article said, &#8220;Sara Brown, a 51-year-old massage therapist in business for herself, didn&#8217;t think she could qualify for group health insurance when she moved to North Carolina from California last year. But after an insurance company quoted her an individual policy that cost $1,200 a month and excluded coverage of her anxiety disorder, for which she takes daily medication, she sought help from Maura Carley, president and chief executive of Healthcare Navigation LLC, a Fairfield, Conn., firm that provides health-insurance advocacy for individuals, families and businesses.</p>
<p>Ms. Carley showed Ms. Brown that she was able to qualify for group coverage as a &#8220;sole proprietor.&#8221; Now she pays $800 a month for comprehensive coverage. &#8220;Group coverage is the only way to get coverage you can possibly afford&#8221; with a pre-existing condition, Ms. Brown says.&#8221;</p>
<p>An anxiety disorder did not make her uninsurable as the article states.  With her anxiety [rate up] HSA individual insurance is available in Charlotte, N.C. for $354.75 per month instead of the $800 she is paying.  Yes, the anxiety medication would be a covered expense.</p>
<p>The N. Carolina high risk pool would cost her $426 for HSA qualifying coverage.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s all online, check it out.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nchirp.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.nchirp.org/</a></p>
<p>&#8220;Group coverage is the only way to get coverage you can possibly afford&#8221; with a pre-existing condition, Ms. Brown says.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ms. Brown is wrong even after her &#8220;expert&#8221; advise.</p>
<p>Unless you disagree Bart.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42989</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 18:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42989</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;When someone gets cancer, like Tony Snow, and they are too sick to work they they are terminated off their dangerous employer-based insurance and they are uninsurable for low cost portable individual health insurance.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

...and then they have a valid reason to shop as a group of one or two.  I&#039;ll pass on the ad-hominem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>&#8220;When someone gets cancer, like Tony Snow, and they are too sick to work they they are terminated off their dangerous employer-based insurance and they are uninsurable for low cost portable individual health insurance.</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8230;and then they have a valid reason to shop as a group of one or two.  I&#8217;ll pass on the ad-hominem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Greiner</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42982</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Greiner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:33:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42982</guid>
		<description>Bart, I never said &quot;only people with drug problems or other moral shortcomings are uninsurable.&quot;  

When someone gets cancer, like Tony Snow, and they are too sick to work they they are terminated off their dangerous employer-based insurance and they are uninsurable for low cost portable individual health insurance.  As it should be.  This is exactly the reason a couple should not be a group of two.

Bart, is there anything you can understand?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bart, I never said &#8220;only people with drug problems or other moral shortcomings are uninsurable.&#8221;  </p>
<p>When someone gets cancer, like Tony Snow, and they are too sick to work they they are terminated off their dangerous employer-based insurance and they are uninsurable for low cost portable individual health insurance.  As it should be.  This is exactly the reason a couple should not be a group of two.</p>
<p>Bart, is there anything you can understand?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42977</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:22:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42977</guid>
		<description>So only people with drug problems or other moral shortcomings are uninsurable.  Thanks for the clarification.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So only people with drug problems or other moral shortcomings are uninsurable.  Thanks for the clarification.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Greiner</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42967</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Greiner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42967</guid>
		<description>Bart, they get a group of two because some smooth talking insurance agent sells it to them without full and proper disclosure.  That&#039;s why you need a good health insurance agent Bart.

I never said that everybody on dangerous employer-based insurance is insurable.  Rush Limbaugh with his drug problems would probably have some issues when it comes to insurability.  That&#039;s an understatement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bart, they get a group of two because some smooth talking insurance agent sells it to them without full and proper disclosure.  That&#8217;s why you need a good health insurance agent Bart.</p>
<p>I never said that everybody on dangerous employer-based insurance is insurable.  Rush Limbaugh with his drug problems would probably have some issues when it comes to insurability.  That&#8217;s an understatement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hits-misses-200961/comment-page-1/#comment-42966</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3650#comment-42966</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;Why do you insist that everybody on dangerous employer-based health insurance is uninsurable?&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Ron, to answer your question, I never have.  If they can find better coverage in the individual market, they should certainly run with it.

Why do you insist that everybody with employer-based coverage is insurable in the individual market?  And if they are insurable, why would they consider a group of two in the first place?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>&#8220;Why do you insist that everybody on dangerous employer-based health insurance is uninsurable?&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Ron, to answer your question, I never have.  If they can find better coverage in the individual market, they should certainly run with it.</p>
<p>Why do you insist that everybody with employer-based coverage is insurable in the individual market?  And if they are insurable, why would they consider a group of two in the first place?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

