1) As the majority of real estate agents are self-employed/independent contractors, their costs for health coverage has to be HUGE. Single payer would help get rid of one gigantic expense to the majority in the industry.

2) If they weren’t forced to pay premiums through their employers, as well as huge medical bills when the occur, how much more income would individuals have to spend on other things like, oh, I don’t know… HOUSE PAYMENTS?

The NAOR’s “non-position” position smacks of some incestuous relationship between the large corporate real estate franchises and the insurance industry.

I’m late to the party because I am a chicken. You are brave to dive right into the fray.

The issue is complex, but there are some simple conclusions that can be drawn.

For profit health care is something of an oxymoron. The trouble is that providing good care for the sick is in direct conflict with profit margins. I was

I was in this field as a researcher for 15 years. Many of the physicians that I worked with were from European countries and they were shocked at how bad the situation was over here. They didn’t understand why we had no national program and were shocked at the costs of the for profit system and how many loopholes were available to dump the truly sick.

Enjoying the debate here. I just want to add that many NAR members can get basic coverage from the REALTORS® Core Health Insurance (RCHI) program. You can find out more about that here:
http://www.realtor.org/realtor_benefits/benefits_partners/core_health_insurance

Brian Summerfield
Online Editor, REALTOR® Magazine

Its not like we could ask Jimmy to help us, but let not gather and talk about a Union ~

Add illegal immigrants to the mix – can they be insured?

I believe you should either be a citizen or in this country legally. The burden on the medical community and the penal system is already outrageous. Fix that first.

I’m retired military. When I joined the Navy in 1982 I was promised “Free Health Care for LIFE.”

By 1994 I was paying for Tricare Prime.

By the time I retired in 2003, the cost for this plan had tripled.

Retired now, my premiums are easily 1/3rd lower than most other plans – but that’s not my point.

If you think ANOTHER Government-mandated health plan is not going to also triple in cost in very short order, you need a urinalysis.

KW came out with a somewhat reasonable insurance for agents in February. I’ve not done the research to see how many of our 70K plus agents have taken the plunge – so I don’t know if it’s working or not. At least they’re trying.

My plan – as it is – works for me and my family. I don’t like it but I like the alternatives less. The one thing that does work is that it is set up into regions (four, I believe). This seems to work a lot better than the state exchanges proposal possibly could.

Navy Chief, Navy Pride

I’m past weary of those who hold the post office up as a model of government inefficiency, yet at the same time argue that a government option would magically operate at some cost advantage over private insurers. The USPS delivers 220 billion pieces of mail annually at rates that are less than half that charged by other developed nations. While the postal service reported a loss for its 2007 and 2008 fiscals due to declines in mail volume, it turned a profit in 2006. Its express delivery business competes on a level playing field with its main rivals, UPS and FedEx, who play in a far more profitable market space. The USPS earns customer satisfaction scores across all its lines of business in excess of 90% — on par with its competitors.

The same argument applies to Medicare, which insures a segment of the population largely abandoned by the private sector. Its year-over-year cost increases are primarily a function of the fees it pays providers, not the service it delivers its insureds. This imbalance is one of the issues being addressed in comprehensive health care legislation.

Face it, folks. If we’re going to curtail runaway health care costs and extend affordable coverage options to individuals and small businesses, there are going to have to be changes.

See, we are not that far apart once we start talking about specifics

That, my good friend, may be the poster child for false premise.

Still, your questions are in the minds of many of us. Truth be told, if the gov’t would simply allow the insurance industry to compete opening, across state lines, and more or less unfettered except for what we’d all surely agree would be required minimum regulation, price would indeed head south while efficiency would increase.

sidenote: The president said today that the public option is a member paid system that is being proposed that would not ride the tax dollar, but rather be paid by the actual participants of the plan- I didn’t say this fiction was a reality, but until the actual bill is put forward, we really won’t know.

The kill grandma part of the bill in the senate has been killed due to the potential to misinterperate the language, this however doesn’t mean it wont find its way back in, but with better language.

I think for the most part, none of you have any real issues with NARs hopes for what they want to see in the bill, so I’ll drop them a kudo on that point (so far).

Tort reform and allowing state to state would go a very long way to making a dent, I’m also liking what I’m seeing on the city HMO in Colorado I heard about today. Could it be done nationally, I’m not sure, but as a hybrid state to state, city to city, it’s very interesting.

I love the debate that’s going on, I love that people are so fired up on both sides of this issue, it feels American on so many levels, but I’m not happy with the feeling that if you have an opinion you should be afraid of the gov, or from some fringe group, I think that needs to stop as I really want to hear what everyone has to say, and my hopes is that in all of the madness, something realistic would come.

As for who can or doesn’t pay for insurance and for what reason, that’s utter non-sense and ignores the middle of the road family that has astronomical health care costs for whatever reason or ends up uncovered due to pre-existing conditions.

I don’t agree with Obama on anything, lets make that clear, but I can find some common ground on the notion that it’s about time we did something.

My parents at one time with health insurance were kicking out a grand a month in medicine alone, and on a fixed income, that’s a nightmare and in some months may go without.

Carry on

The only way this discussion gets revived is if this bill dies. That only happens if good men and women who have been elected to serve people serve them instead of their party.

@Mariana – Unfortunately we have reached critical mass in the US where not solving the health care issue will have severe negative impacts on everyone. We already have health care for the indigent. We have mandatory requirements for minimum health care with children in the public schools. Private insurance costs will only rise without intelligent answers to Erion’s questions.

Even if we elect to take the stance that health care is an every man for themselves situation, that isnt the case if you have elderly family members to care for or are close to getting on the AARP mailing list your self.

NAR should have an opinion on this, as this can certainly change the fabric of free enterprise, of which home ownership is at the core.

Good night, everyone. Don’t get sick …

@Bawldguy – The thing is that this isn’t about competition. This is about statism.

@Matthew – I appreciate the points you make, which are valid on all counts. The problem NAR has though is one of their own making. NAR has so muddied the waters with their identity that even their own membership isnt sure of what they are and what they do. Lobbyist for the homeowner, or trade group for the agent? Then toss in the word “benefits” to justify dues, and people start to wonder “Hey, if we are talking benes, instead of bartering our buying power to get 10% off Fed Ex, how about a discount on something this side of catastrophic health coverage?”.

Suppose for a second that government is no longer involved in this debate. If you, I and all 300 million other Americans took at look at the current healthcare system, would you say that it needs reform? If yes, in that same framework, what would be the answers to my questions? I’m not partisan and I certainly am not advocating for government involvement necessarily. How can we resolve these issues irrespective of our views on big bad governement or big bad insurance corps?

For starters, if they get their way, it wont matter whether you are self employed or not. Dig down a few pounds into this 10 pound stack of paper that NO legislator has read completely, and you’ll find that there is no incentive for an employer to not switch to the govvie product. Quite the opposite, as fees and taxes will be levied for not participating.

If this passed tomorrow, the only people keeping their current health insurance in 5 years will be our beloved elected officials and their minions.

Add a rider that requires all of Congress to have the same health care plan offered up in this steaming pile, and it would be DOA.

Maybe if someone on the NAR PAC actually read this, they would have an opinion.