<?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 for home insurance fees</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:28:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by Pascha</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>Pascha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-27</guid>
		<description>I think limiting the government involvement in health insurance to catastrophic care is an excellent idea.   If people paid out of pocket for doctors&#039; visits, those costs would come down pretty quickly. 

Of course, all the federal, state and local government employees who have very expensive health packages paid for by us would not give that up, so we would still have to pay for theirs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think limiting the government involvement in health <a href="http://www.TITLEHOMEINSURANCE.info/" style=""   onmouseover="self.status='http://www.TITLEHOMEINSURANCE.info/';return true;" onmouseout="self.status=''">insurance</a> to catastrophic care is an excellent idea.   If people paid out of pocket for doctors&#8217; visits, those costs would come down pretty quickly. </p>
<p>Of course, all the federal, state and local government employees who have very expensive health packages paid for by us would not give that up, so we would still have to pay for theirs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by The Patriot</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>The Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-26</guid>
		<description>Because that will not address the problems with the health system of the USA that results in it failing so many Americans.

I do not understand why so many Americans have fallen for lies about healthcare in the USA, abroad and also the planned reforms [1].  I mean, if the healthcare system in the USA is so good, why have no other nations taken it up?  Could it be due to the following facts?
FACT - the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet [2].
FACT - the US has higher death rates for kids under five than western European countries with universal health coverage [3].
Or if the US healthcare system is run so well, why not run the fire service like the healthcare system?  [4]
Maybe that is because in the USA, insurance companies push up costs, buy politicians and refuse to pay claims that people pay for [5].  (Look up Wendell Potter on YouTube to hear more if the link below is too long.)
Obama wants to make insurance cheaper, stop insurance companies from refusing health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and make sure they pay out when they are meant to [6], a system similar to that which works in Taiwan [7].  He debated this before he was elected [8].
Is it right that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and so many other industrialised nations with universal healthcare?
If you think my arguments are wrong, e-mail me with proof.  But if you can not, let Obama try to help America.  If he fails, vote him out in 2012.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because that will not address the problems with the health system of the USA that results in it failing so many Americans.</p>
<p>I do not understand why so many Americans have fallen for lies about healthcare in the USA, abroad and also the planned reforms [1].  I mean, if the healthcare system in the USA is so good, why have no other nations taken it up?  Could it be due to the following facts?<br />
FACT &#8211; the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet [2].<br />
FACT &#8211; the US has higher death rates for kids under five than western European countries with universal health coverage [3].<br />
Or if the US healthcare system is run so well, why not run the fire service like the healthcare system?  [4]<br />
Maybe that is because in the USA, <a href="http://www.TITLEHOMEINSURANCE.info/" style=""   onmouseover="self.status='http://www.TITLEHOMEINSURANCE.info/';return true;" onmouseout="self.status=''">insurance</a> companies push up costs, buy politicians and refuse to pay claims that people pay for [5].  (Look up Wendell Potter on YouTube to hear more if the link below is too long.)<br />
Obama wants to make insurance cheaper, stop insurance companies from refusing health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and make sure they pay out when they are meant to [6], a system similar to that which works in Taiwan [7].  He debated this before he was elected [8].<br />
Is it right that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and so many other industrialised nations with universal healthcare?<br />
If you think my arguments are wrong, e-mail me with proof.  But if you can not, let Obama try to help America.  If he fails, vote him out in 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by Contard H. Moshiach</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>Contard H. Moshiach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:46:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-25</guid>
		<description>Hospitals currently charge uninsured people up to 10x as much as they charge an insurance company for the same service.

Catastrophic insurance means people are practically &quot;uninsured&quot; for day-to-day services.

Would hospitals go ahead and charge everyone the &quot;uninsured&quot; rate? or the &quot;insured&quot; rate? or something in between?


&quot;In 2004, U.S. hospitals charged uninsured patients more than two-and-a-half times the amount they charged insurance companies for the same services, the study found. Hospitals also charged uninsured patients more than three times the allowable costs specified by Medicare.

In general, hospitals set prices for services but then negotiate discounts with private insurers. They are also limited as to what they can charge patients covered by Medicare and Medicaid.

The study, which examined hospital charges between 1984 and 2004, found an ever-widening gap between what hospitals charge insured and uninsured patients. In 1984, the uninsured were charged 1.35 times as much as Medicare for hospital services; by 2004 that number had grown to 3.07 times as much...&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hospitals currently charge uninsured people up to 10x as much as they charge an insurance company for the same service.</p>
<p>Catastrophic insurance means people are practically &#8220;uninsured&#8221; for day-to-day services.</p>
<p>Would hospitals go ahead and charge everyone the &#8220;uninsured&#8221; rate? or the &#8220;insured&#8221; rate? or something in between?</p>
<p>&#8220;In 2004, U.S. hospitals charged uninsured patients more than two-and-a-half times the amount they charged insurance companies for the same services, the study found. Hospitals also charged uninsured patients more than three times the allowable costs specified by Medicare.</p>
<p>In general, hospitals set prices for services but then negotiate discounts with private insurers. They are also limited as to what they can charge patients covered by Medicare and Medicaid.</p>
<p>The study, which examined hospital charges between 1984 and 2004, found an ever-widening gap between what hospitals charge insured and uninsured patients. In 1984, the uninsured were charged 1.35 times as much as Medicare for hospital services; by 2004 that number had grown to 3.07 times as much&#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by cbjack</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>cbjack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:37:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-24</guid>
		<description>Because most of us have very good health insurance now. And we want the dumb assed government to leave us alone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because most of us have very good health insurance now. And we want the dumb assed government to leave us alone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by froggy</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>froggy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-23</guid>
		<description>Because some people might have already had a diagnosis, and need ongoing treatment or medication to maintain the disease.  that might cost a lot of money and no one should go bankrupt because of this.  What if they all ready had a catastrophe? then what?  They are screwed?

This is for the middle class/upper middle class, not the poor. The dirt poor already have aid.  the wealthy do not give a shit and the middle class are enduring health care ins increases of 131% within the last decade.  Sorry-your idea does not solve the problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because some people might have already had a diagnosis, and need ongoing treatment or medication to maintain the disease.  that might cost a lot of money and no one should go bankrupt because of this.  What if they all ready had a catastrophe? then what?  They are screwed?</p>
<p>This is for the middle class/upper middle class, not the poor. The dirt poor already have aid.  the wealthy do not give a shit and the middle class are enduring health care ins increases of 131% within the last decade.  Sorry-your idea does not solve the problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by ruth</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>ruth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-22</guid>
		<description>How does this idea solve the problem of covering &quot;preexisting conditions?&quot;  How does this idea pass US Constitutional muster?  It&#039;s still a taking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How does this idea solve the problem of covering &#8220;preexisting conditions?&#8221;  How does this idea pass US Constitutional muster?  It&#8217;s still a taking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by Bella</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Bella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-21</guid>
		<description>Because catastrophic insurance does not result in people going to the doctor and getting things checked.  If you ignore going to the doctor and end up with breast cancer, your chances of survival are much worse if gets caught in it&#039;s later stages.

Enzyte, if you really think liberals are the only ones who have insurance issues you are dumber than I thought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because catastrophic insurance does not result in people going to the doctor and getting things checked.  If you ignore going to the doctor and end up with breast cancer, your chances of survival are much worse if gets caught in it&#8217;s later stages.</p>
<p>Enzyte, if you really think liberals are the only ones who have insurance issues you are dumber than I thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by Karle</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>Karle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-20</guid>
		<description>cause yea the food stamps is a great program to use as an example.....FAIL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cause yea the food stamps is a great program to use as an example&#8230;..FAIL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why not limit health insurance to catastrophic insurance and allow fee for service for everything else? by Enzyte Bob's 3rd Clone</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/comment-page-1/#comment-19</link>
		<dc:creator>Enzyte Bob's 3rd Clone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/16/why-not-limit-health-insurance-to-catastrophic-insurance-and-allow-fee-for-service-for-everything-else/#comment-19</guid>
		<description>I pay $113 a month for catastrophic insurance for my family
You telling me Liberals cant afford THAT?!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I pay $113 a month for catastrophic insurance for my family<br />
You telling me Liberals cant afford THAT?!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is it illegal to have to pay a delivery fee or insurance fee for winningany contest on-line or by a phone call by Gladys C</title>
		<link>http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/2010/01/03/is-it-illegal-to-have-to-pay-a-delivery-fee-or-insurance-fee-for-winningany-contest-on-line-or-by-a-phone-call/comment-page-1/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Gladys C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 02:39:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.homeinsurancefees.info/?p=18#comment-16</guid>
		<description>its a scam, all they want is your money. sorry.good luck and best wishes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>its a scam, all they want is your money. sorry.good luck and best wishes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
