re institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care of

Of all the people who are riding along with me on a daily basis with a hand in my pocket to divide what I earn amongst themselves, the ones I resent the most are associated with taking my money for the so-called peace of mind provided by insurance. To me, it is incredible to see how big a part insurance premiums play in all aspects of our lives, and how little actually winds up truly covering the reasons why we dupe ourselves into buying these products. The insurance game is particularly interesting in the way it has evolved to permeate so many aspects of our social infrastructure, while offering so little in return on the investment required.

No matter what sort of insurance one purchases, there are a number of intrinsic elements common to all, with some twists that deserve closer scrutiny. The primary operating principle behind buying insurance for the consumer is to pay out a premium cost that is proportionately smaller than the disastrous expense that would be incurred if a hypothetical event covered by the policy were ever to occur. Insurance companies are masters at determining enough credible, but rare circumstances to justify a fear based level of concern over the potential of a disaster to induce people to feel as if they need the kind of financial protection being offered by the insurance sales pitch.

Certain types of insurance have become mandatory for the completion of a transaction, as in the case of purchasing a home or automobile, or receiving adequate health care. Regardless of whether the policy will actually cover the reason for a loss of property, anything requiring an extended obligation or debt for ownership will also have some kind of insurance obligation associated with the completion of the transaction, adding a significant layer of hidden costs to fulfillment of the obligation. For the insurance companies themselves, the purpose for doing business is profit. These companies are not simply brokering funds to those to need it from those who currently do not. Contrary to the perceived purpose for creating an insurance vehicle, the actual practice is to build a hugely profitable business based on plausible fears, while avoiding actual payouts of real benefits as much as possible. In short, the insurance company is in business to enrich the lives of its agents and the company as a whole, by appearing to provide protection to its policy holders.

To help protect the funds collected from policy holders, insurance companies have instituted a host of mechanisms to minimize their own risks of ever having to pay the costs of doing business with policy holders. Some of these mechanisms include canceling policies in areas where risk of pay out has proven more severe, raising premiums or canceling polices of those who actually file claims, finding legal loopholes to deny claims, including high co-pays and deductibles for some of the more frequent claim events, and appealing for government assistance in times when larger scale disasters actually cause the need to pay out large scale benefits to policy holders. There are also many areas where an insurance company simply does not cover problems that actually occur on a frequent basis.

As the Baby Boomer generation moves through its life cycle, one of the more acute disconnects between actual coverage and real needs can be seen with the health care industry. As the health care industry charges exorbitant rates that continue to escalate in an effort to maintain profitability for services actually provided to the growing number of patients moving through the system, insurance companies continue to raise premium costs to maintain their secondary level of profits for covering the costs they are being forced to pay out on the rising number of policy holders who are attempting to utilize their insurance benefits.

For the first time in our history, we are seeing a serious consumer burden being generated by the institutional load of a double profit based system of benefit coverage. True reform of our current profit based health care and prescription medicine systems does not lie in turning the administration of health care needs over to lumbering government institutions for adequate management. A more realistic plan of reform would be to examine ways to eliminate the cost burden of profit based insurance premiums, and channel consumer payment of costs directly into health care institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care off

enough credible, but rare circumstances to justify a fear based level of concern over the potential of a disaster to induce people to feel as if they need the kind of financial protection being offered by the insurance sales pitch.

Certain types of insurance have become mandatory for the completion of a transaction, as in the case of purchasing a home or automobile, or receiving adequate health care. Regardless of whether the policy will actually cover the reason for a loss of property, anything requiring an extended obligation or debt for ownership will also have some kind of insurance obligation associated with the completion of the transaction, adding a significant layer of hidden costs to fulfillment of the obligation. For the insurance companies themselves, the purpose for doing business is profit. These companies are not simply brokering funds to those to need it from those who currently do not. Contrary to the perceived purpose for creating an insurance vehicle, the actual practice is to build a hugely profitable business based on plausible fears, while avoiding actual payouts of real benefits as much as possible. In short, the insurance company is in business to enrich the lives of its agents and the company as a whole, by appearing to provide protection to its policy holders.

To help protect the funds collected from policy holders, insurance companies have instituted a host of mechanisms to minimize their own risks of ever having to pay the costs of doing business with policy holders. Some of these mechanisms include canceling policies in areas where risk of pay out has proven more severe, raising premiums or canceling polices of those who actually file claims, finding legal loopholes to deny claims, including high co-pays and deductibles for some of the more frequent claim events, and appealing for government assistance in times when larger scale disasters actually cause the need to pay out large scale benefits to policy holders. There are also many areas where an insurance company simply does not cover problems that actually occur on a frequent basis.

As the Baby Boomer generation moves through its life cycle, one of the more acute disconnects between actual coverage and real needs can be seen with the health care industry. As the health care industry charges exorbitant rates that continue to escalate in an effort to maintain profitability for services actually provided to the growing number of patients moving through the system, insurance companies continue to raise premium costs to maintain their secondary level of profits for covering the costs they are being forced to pay out on the rising number of policy holders who are attempting to utilize their insurance benefits.

For the first time in our history, we are seeing a serious consumer burden being generated by the institutional load of a double profit based system of benefit coverage. True reform of our current profit based health care and prescription medicine systems does not lie in turning the administration of health care needs over to lumbering government institutions for adequate management. A more realistic plan of reform would be to examine ways to eliminate the cost burden of profit based insurance premiums, and channel consumer payment of costs directly into health care institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care of

f real benefits as much as possible. In short, the insurance company is in business to enrich the lives of its agents and the company as a whole, by appearing to provide protection to its policy holders.

To help protect the funds collected from policy holders, insurance companies have instituted a host of mechanisms to minimize their own risks of ever having to pay the costs of doing business with policy holders. Some of these mechanisms include canceling policies in areas where risk of pay out has proven more severe, raising premiums or canceling polices of those who actually file claims, finding legal loopholes to deny claims, including high co-pays and deductibles for some of the more frequent claim events, and appealing for government assistance in times when larger scale disasters actually cause the need to pay out large scale benefits to policy holders. There are also many areas where an insurance company simply does not cover problems that actually occur on a frequent basis.

As the Baby Boomer generation moves through its life cycle, one of the more acute disconnects between actual coverage and real needs can be seen with the health care industry. As the health care industry charges exorbitant rates that continue to escalate in an effort to maintain profitability for services actually provided to the growing number of patients moving through the system, insurance companies continue to raise premium costs to maintain their secondary level of profits for covering the costs they are being forced to pay out on the rising number of policy holders who are attempting to utilize their insurance benefits.

For the first time in our history, we are seeing a serious consumer burden being generated by the institutional load of a double profit based system of benefit coverage. True reform of our current profit based health care and prescription medicine systems does not lie in turning the administration of health care needs over to lumbering government institutions for adequate management. A more realistic plan of reform would be to examine ways to eliminate the cost burden of profit based insurance premiums, and channel consumer payment of costs directly into health care institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care of

actual coverage and real needs can be seen with the health care industry. As the health care industry charges exorbitant rates that continue to escalate in an effort to maintain profitability for services actually provided to the growing number of patients moving through the system, insurance companies continue to raise premium costs to maintain their secondary level of profits for covering the costs they are being forced to pay out on the rising number of policy holders who are attempting to utilize their insurance benefits.

For the first time in our history, we are seeing a serious consumer burden being generated by the institutional load of a double profit based system of benefit coverage. True reform of our current profit based health care and prescription medicine systems does not lie in turning the administration of health care needs over to lumbering government institutions for adequate management. A more realistic plan of reform would be to examine ways to eliminate the cost burden of profit based insurance premiums, and channel consumer payment of costs directly into health care institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care of

re institutions providing actual patient care services. Instead of funneling available consumer dollars from consumer to profit based insurance, then on to profit based health care systems, it would make more sense to channel consumer funds directly from consumers to health care systems, without the insurance middle men to add increased costs to the already difficult consumer burdens associated with health care needs.

If established health care systems could tap into the steady flow if income currently being absorbed by insurance underwriters, these institutions would be able to meet their current needs more readily, and have room to plan more efficiently for future growth within the industry. By receiving funds from people who want the assurance of care at some point in the future, and channeling the profits toward those who currently need health care while continuing to contribute to their own needs, a significant reduction in current costs could be realized. Millions of Americans are finding they can no longer afford the burden of supporting the double profit system of health care offered by our country as the solution to our individual needs. It is time to restructure and refocus the health care system to reward the efforts of care givers, without lining the pockets of those who have come to stand between us and those who are capable of providing the care we need.