Health Premiums

- PC -

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Posts
30,268
Likes
23
Location
Where No Birds Fly
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide/Sturt/Wingfield
Thread starter #1
On November 18 in the Australian

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11420676%5E2702,00.html

Australian Health Insurance Association chief executive Russell Schneider said it was too early to say whether private health insurance premiums would rise next year.

But he said there had been an 8.1 per cent increase in benefit payouts in the past 12 months and this justified the average 7.6 per cent rise in premiums last year.



Now on November 22

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1258&storyid=2266795

Health at a premium

By SUE DUNLEVY

November 22, 2004

THE need for a rise in private health insurance premiums next April is being examined by funds after they paid out a record $7.5 billion in benefits to members.


The Departments of Treasury and Finance have factored future premium rises into their health policy costings, a fact they revealed in their highly critical costing of Labor's Medicare Gold policy during the election campaign.

Premiums rose by an average $150 a family – or 7.6 per cent – in April this year after hospital benefit payouts rose by 8.9 per cent.


The Australian Health Insurance Association has revealed health fund benefit payouts have risen by a further 8.1 per cent to September 30 this year.


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

Good to see the pigs have their snouts in the trough

If as a business you are losing money hand over fist then you get out of the business.


Yes its a free market and the market charges what it believes the market can pay. Yet when a government regulation penalises you for not having health insurance then you dont belong in the free market.

If I decide to drink Pepsi why should I be penalised for not drinking Coke?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

mantis

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 9, 2001
Posts
36,917
Likes
1,072
Location
Away from redneck country
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Bombers
#2
You are talking about Insurance companies, greedy, corrupt organisations, that is why I haven't had any form of insurance for over 15 years, except for third party on my car rego, which I can't get out of.

I love the way they sook about having to pay out on claims, FFS that's what you're supposed to do, not just take peoples money & give nothing back. :mad:
 

dan warna

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
20,557
Likes
190
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#3
mantis said:
You are talking about Insurance companies, greedy, corrupt organisations, that is why I haven't had any form of insurance for over 15 years, except for third party on my car rego, which I can't get out of.

I love the way they sook about having to pay out on claims, FFS that's what you're supposed to do, not just take peoples money & give nothing back. :mad:
LMFAO for people who pay private health insurance.

I have used private health twice, and paid for it twice, no worries, $3600 all up up, and I've saved maybe $20,000 on health insurance, and I'd still have had to pay the gap.

And don't bother bringing up beign really sick, because if you are really sick you end up in the public health system anyway, as the private health is incapable or doestn't want to deal with the really sick.

I find it funny that its generally the ones who whinge about govt school wastage, and social welfare wastage as the ones who are SOOO quick to defend the handouts to overseas companies who provide private health for little return to the patient and lotsa profits to their cleints.

If you want private health go ahead, I don't care, I just think your a sheep.
 

hoss

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 28, 2004
Posts
7,141
Likes
2,953
Location
South
AFL Club
Fremantle
#4
dan warna said:
LMFAO for people who pay private health insurance.

I have used private health twice, and paid for it twice, no worries, $3600 all up up, and I've saved maybe $20,000 on health insurance, and I'd still have had to pay the gap.

And don't bother bringing up beign really sick, because if you are really sick you end up in the public health system anyway, as the private health is incapable or doestn't want to deal with the really sick.

I find it funny that its generally the ones who whinge about govt school wastage, and social welfare wastage as the ones who are SOOO quick to defend the handouts to overseas companies who provide private health for little return to the patient and lotsa profits to their cleints.

If you want private health go ahead, I don't care, I just think your a sheep.
Dan. Some of us have private health because it's cheaper. If the medicare surcharge at tax time costs you $900.00, and you can get hospital cover for around $700.00, then private hospital cover is costing you - $200.00.This is how my cover works out.

I think I should have private cover in any case, and don't mind contributing to the public health system for those Australians that need it. Funny thing is, because I live in such a remote area, if I was ever crook I'd only ever get to a public hospital anyhow.
 

- PC -

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Posts
30,268
Likes
23
Location
Where No Birds Fly
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide/Sturt/Wingfield
Thread starter #5
hoss said:
Dan. Some of us have private health because it's cheaper. If the medicare surcharge at tax time costs you $900.00, and you can get hospital cover for around $700.00, then private hospital cover is costing you - $200.00.This is how my cover works out.

I think I should have private cover in any case, and don't mind contributing to the public health system for those Australians that need it. Funny thing is, because I live in such a remote area, if I was ever crook I'd only ever get to a public hospital anyhow.
You just dont get it do you?

Minimum premium is $45 a week x 52 = $2340 Now add the $200 you spend YOU after all costs spend $2540

Yeh right thats a saving allright
 

hoss

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 28, 2004
Posts
7,141
Likes
2,953
Location
South
AFL Club
Fremantle
#6
PerthCrow said:
You just dont get it do you?

Minimum premium is $45 a week x 52 = $2340 Now add the $200 you spend YOU after all costs spend $2540

Yeh right thats a saving allright
No, I don't get it obviously. :) My private health insurance bill, after the rebate is about $700. This is less than I have to pay for the Medicare surcharge if I didn't have private hospital cover. Where do you get the minimum premium of $2340 from? Are you including the Medicare levy that we all have to pay?
 

Pantsless

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Posts
3,969
Likes
36
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Storm, Arse, Victory
#7
PerthCrow said:
You just dont get it do you?

Minimum premium is $45 a week x 52 = $2340 Now add the $200 you spend YOU after all costs spend $2540

Yeh right thats a saving allright
Mine costs $61 a month and that's with low excess...don't know where $45 a week comes from....
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#8
mantis said:
You are talking about Insurance companies, greedy, corrupt organisations, that is why I haven't had any form of insurance for over 15 years, except for third party on my car rego, which I can't get out of.

I love the way they sook about having to pay out on claims, FFS that's what you're supposed to do, not just take peoples money & give nothing back. :mad:
Aren't the Medical Insurance companies non profit? How can they be Greedy etc,

Costs go up as technology advances and lifespans increase.

The only inbalance is that the young are subsidising the old. There is no doubt that without the tax slug most younger people would be better to opt out.
 

- PC -

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Posts
30,268
Likes
23
Location
Where No Birds Fly
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide/Sturt/Wingfield
Thread starter #9
Pantsless said:
Mine costs $61 a month and that's with low excess...don't know where $45 a week comes from....
:p Thats what happens when you dont have insurance... I was trying to make a point that if you pay your premiums weekly or monthly that over the year you still pay an amount out. IMO what you receive back in benefit doesnt add up as a saving.

I would like to see a dedicated savings scheme where the government recognizes it is for the purpose of health and doesnt tax it. IF you require it you can withdraw and pay whatever hospital or specialist bills you need to pay. You may also pocket the 1st years savings after 5 years and each subsequent 1st year.

Pantsless $732 a year and what benefits do you get? Seems to me to be basic glasses and chiropractic and ambulance cover? A pair of glasses cost approx $ 280 to purchase and ambulance cover can be gotten for $75 a year approx ... Do you use $370 chiro cover?

As I said I just dont see the benefit..maybe been in good medical condition helps...most of my maladies e.g. thyroid are maintained by my GP who bulk bills. I havent been in hospital for 20 years, I wear glasses and my back gives me grief for a few days.

My belief is if I need urgent medical attention I will get it whether I have medical insurance or not. The after emergency care I may have to wait...thats the gamble I take

I remember reading ''the Potts'' cartoon and the young lad asked Uncle D)ck? why he didnt have insurance.... (paraphrase) ''they are gambling I die old and I am gambling they are wrong''

No matter how you try with insurance companies you cant win..they wouldnt be in business if you could win.
 

afc9798

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Posts
7,495
Likes
19
Location
To the Left of the Right
AFL Club
Adelaide
#11
Frodo said:
Aren't the Medical Insurance companies non profit? How can they be Greedy etc,

Costs go up as technology advances
HAHAHAHAHAHA- non-profit????? You're kidding right, private companies providing a not for profit service. Get a grip Frodo. And as for the technology argument, costs also decrease as technology finds ways of better treating disease at a lower cost and more efficiently, I bet we don't see savings passed on when the costs come down.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pantsless

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Posts
3,969
Likes
36
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Storm, Arse, Victory
#12
PerthCrow said:
:p Thats what happens when you dont have insurance... I was trying to make a point that if you pay your premiums weekly or monthly that over the year you still pay an amount out. IMO what you receive back in benefit doesnt add up as a saving.

I would like to see a dedicated savings scheme where the government recognizes it is for the purpose of health and doesnt tax it. IF you require it you can withdraw and pay whatever hospital or specialist bills you need to pay. You may also pocket the 1st years savings after 5 years and each subsequent 1st year.

Pantsless $732 a year and what benefits do you get? Seems to me to be basic glasses and chiropractic and ambulance cover? A pair of glasses cost approx $ 280 to purchase and ambulance cover can be gotten for $75 a year approx ... Do you use $370 chiro cover?

As I said I just dont see the benefit..maybe been in good medical condition helps...most of my maladies e.g. thyroid are maintained by my GP who bulk bills. I havent been in hospital for 20 years, I wear glasses and my back gives me grief for a few days.

My belief is if I need urgent medical attention I will get it whether I have medical insurance or not. The after emergency care I may have to wait...thats the gamble I take

I remember reading ''the Potts'' cartoon and the young lad asked Uncle D)ck? why he didnt have insurance.... (paraphrase) ''they are gambling I die old and I am gambling they are wrong''

No matter how you try with insurance companies you cant win..they wouldnt be in business if you could win.
You've definitely got me thinking...I signed up thru work as I was playing footy and I've seen people with no private get bad injuries and be totally screwed...the other reason is the over 30yo loading, but myself and my fiance (soon to be wife) will be moving to New Zealand in a couple of years and I don't know if they have that in NZ.

It just goes out of account and now I'm a retired footballer I probably don't need it anymore...but I really have to check my Medicare levy shyte beforehand...
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Posts
10,086
Likes
175
Location
Elwood
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
South Fremantle Bulldogs, Arsenal.
#13
hoss said:
No, I don't get it obviously. :) My private health insurance bill, after the rebate is about $700. This is less than I have to pay for the Medicare surcharge if I didn't have private hospital cover.

This is the one and only reason i have private health insurance aswell.

I pay $90 per month for health insurance, thats $1080 per year. Take away the 30% rebate and its cheaper than getting hit with the extra 1% penalty tax for not having the insurance.
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#15
afc9798 said:
HAHAHAHAHAHA- non-profit????? You're kidding right, private companies providing a not for profit service. Get a grip Frodo. And as for the technology argument, costs also decrease as technology finds ways of better treating disease at a lower cost and more efficiently, I bet we don't see savings passed on when the costs come down.
Look at their annual returns for proof. Anyone can see them.

Technology costs don't decrease, at least not new technology. Old hat may get cheaper. And yes, costs do come down (eg generic drugs ) but the cost of the better more modern drugs are higher. Xray costs are lower but MRI scans are much more expensive.
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#16
About Medibank Private
Medibank Private was established by the Federal Government in 1976. It has been an autonomous Federal Government Business Enterprise since 1998.

As Australia's largest, and only national, health fund, Medibank Private has approximately 30% of Australia's private health insurance market, covering almost three million people, or almost one in three of the country's privately insured population.

As a not-for-profit health fund, it is committed to making private health insurance attractive and affordable for all Australians on a sustainable basis.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
66,386
Likes
26,087
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
#17
Thers should be an inquiry.

These bastards had advertising everywhere which was thinly veiled liberal party support. Saying premiums would rise under labour

Now the other bastards are back in power and guess what ? Premiums will rise anyway.

And we trust them with our lives ?
 

dan warna

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
20,557
Likes
190
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#18
The problem with private is if you are old or really sick you get flicked to the public system anyway.

ie. my dad had a heart attack about 3 years ago, ended up in a top public hospital, the private system said no thanks, we can't handle you.

they pay about $2200 p/a and won't let go, but still have to use public system when really sick.

I reckon over my life I am way ahead and have had top cover.

the health insurance industry, with the exception of medicare private, have had massive profits over the past few years, THEY are profit oriented business.

Mayne Nickless is one of the biggest private hospitals networks going around and they don't do it for the love of their patients (although I had my ops at one of their hospitals, the staff were mostly fantastic, one specialist was a moron though)

I have no problems with people choosing private over public, i hvae done so, and will do so again, HOWEVER i don't think insurance companies should be subsidised.

I don't think I would have a problem if the hospital or hospital network was DIRECTLY subsidised per operation as a rebate, that I think would be fair, but handing over billions of dollars that go to overseas companies for profit is a waste of money and time, and merely corporate welfare.

want to give people choice? direct the money to the private hospital DIRECTLY per operation, that way folks can select the private hospital, pay the same gap and the insurance suckers wont get their slice of fat.

about 3 billion dollars extra to hospital networks private and public.
 

- PC -

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Posts
30,268
Likes
23
Location
Where No Birds Fly
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide/Sturt/Wingfield
Thread starter #19
dan warna said:
the health insurance industry, with the exception of medicare private, have had massive profits over the past few years, THEY are profit oriented business.


I have no problems with people choosing private over public, i hvae done so, and will do so again, HOWEVER i don't think insurance companies should be subsidised.
I don't think I would have a problem if the hospital or hospital network was DIRECTLY subsidised per operation as a rebate, that I think would be fair, but handing over billions of dollars that go to overseas companies for profit is a waste of money and time, and merely corporate welfare.

want to give people choice? direct the money to the private hospital DIRECTLY per operation, that way folks can select the private hospital, pay the same gap and the insurance suckers wont get their slice of fat.

about 3 billion dollars extra to hospital networks private and public

.
Great post

What about the workers compensation rorts

http://wa.greens.org.au/policy/social/workerscomp

The current system of workers compensation is failing to be affordable or to provide a comprehensive insurance cover for injured workers. A statutory insurance system covers workers for injury and rehabilitation costs and provides a wage while off work.

The 1999 Act failed to provide measures to lower workplace accidents and included reduced sanctions against irresponsible employers. The Act was a lost opportunity to lower costs and reduce suffering. It should be noted that it has been calculated that around 92% of workplace injuries are avoidable.

The stated intention of the Minister for Workplace Relations was to reduce the legal costs in the system. The Act achieves the opposite effect as the clauses are extremely complicated and written in almost unreadable "legalese". This creates work for lawyers and makes it impossible for most injured workers to understand their rights or responsibilities.

The Act does not address the principle causes of the premium rates rises and concentrates solely on preventing all but the most severely injured workers from accessing common law.

In practice, insurance doctors who specialise in disproving injury claims treat injured workers as malingerers. The psychological impact on these workers is devastating. While a huge effort is spent on disproving injury claims, little effort is made to ensure that compensation payments are made speedily or that the concerns of workers are dealt with.

Medical costs for treating people on workers compensation are significantly higher than for the general public. Insurance companies disputing claims that are clearly warranted and where negligence is obvious add significant costs to the system. There must be sanctions for this behaviour.


Medical costs for treating people on workers comp cost governments and employers NOT insurance companies.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=c...p.pdf+workers+compensation+medical+cost&hl=en

Just look at the rorts compared to a standard consult
 

afc9798

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Posts
7,495
Likes
19
Location
To the Left of the Right
AFL Club
Adelaide
#20
Frodo said:
About Medibank Private
Medibank Private was established by the Federal Government in 1976. It has been an autonomous Federal Government Business Enterprise since 1998.

As Australia's largest, and only national, health fund, Medibank Private has approximately 30% of Australia's private health insurance market, covering almost three million people, or almost one in three of the country's privately insured population.

As a not-for-profit health fund, it is committed to making private health insurance attractive and affordable for all Australians on a sustainable basis.
What about the companies that cover the other 70% of Australians? I think you'll find that not for profit is stretching the bounds of credibility. This is like saying that credit unions are not for profit. I've got a contact in Nigeria that needs someone to look after some money, can you help?
 

Qsaint

Cancelled
Joined
May 6, 2004
Posts
15,460
Likes
165
Location
Brisvegas
AFL Club
St Kilda
#21
Frodo said:
What I would like to see is employers being able to pay for their employees cover without incurring FBT.
Why other than the marginal tax saving?

Michael Hawker?? The CEO of IAG (NRMA CGU etc etc) once stated that it was stupid for insurance companies that were privately owned to get into private health he thought it was a better deal to run the revenue through medicare and give people a choice of a private option at that level.


Private doctors/hospitals are charging more and more for services because thier is more people able to pay.

QSaint's first law of price increases, the price will always rise if a government regulates and subsidises a product.
 
Top Bottom