See, here is the thing: regulated insurance companies have recorded complaints with state regulators and anyone can look up the data and see how many complaints a given company has had, how many per thousand policyholders, what the trend is over a few years, etc. With religious healthcare mumbo-jumbo, there is no transparency. How would we know if a particular organization was screwing its supplicants (or whatever they are called) left, right and center?
See, here is the thing: I asked if you could find any evidence that there are problems, and once again you go off with name calling (mumbo jumbo, supplicants) and ranting about how things are supposed to be in your well regulated world. (BTW, you sound like the kind who irons underwear, and snaps chalk lines before shoveling snow.) These programs are geared to a very specific and small audience. IF they had all the issues that you claim, don't you think it just might show up ANYWHERE on the net, be it warnings from fellow churchgoers, or even articles about entire congregations leaving after a member suffered from financial ruin, since their Christian share program failed them?
Bottom line is successful programs like this are probably a lot more common than you think. The largest Amish community in my state runs a very substantial one. It a cost sharing program involving voluntary contributions from members, and cooperation from local providers. It's been going on for decades, and is based on a self insurance model that has gone on for centuries. It probably violates most regulations you cherish, yet manages to provide reliable low cost care for tens of thousands, without screwing anybody.
I know, this must be simply impossible, right?
I will thank you to leave the personal comments out of it.
I think it is clear from the antics of dirtbag equity indexed annuity sellers that sufficiently motivated crooks can be very good at quashing negative reviews on line. Not long ago this forum got edited with extreme prejudice because MMM was threatened with a lawsuit. An effective tactic, and there are others. So I do not believe that random crap you can google up tells you much on this sort of thing.
The problem with these unregulated mumbo-jumbo sharing schemes is that there is no transparency and no backstop. When I buy health insurance I am not insuring my health, I am insuring my net worth. I am parting with a certain sum of money to ensure that if a possible negative outcome shows up I will not be bankrupted by the loss (just like liability/umbrella insurance). As such, it is very, very important to me that the entity I am paying to cut the downside tail off the distribution of outcomes has the wherewithal to stand up to their guarantee. Other than feel-good stuff and a lack of bad reviews when you google, there is absolutely no way to determine whether the mumbo-jumbo plans will actually be there if bad stuff happens. Simple as that. Yep, things have (allegedly - nobody really knows) gone swimmingly in the past. Will they in the future? Who knows? Contrast this to actual insurance issued by a creditworthy insurer. Failures are EXTREMELY rare, you can generally figure out they are coming with a tiny bit of due diligence, and when they do happen the losses to policyholders tend to be very small. I can also tell what the service levels/complaint ratios look like. All of this means that I can actually have some confidence that my counterparty will stand up to their guarantee if the shit hits the fan. Nobody rational can say the same about the mumbo-jumbo sharing schemes without deluding themselves.
I understand that some people are touched in the head like to live dangerously. Great for them. I take risks I am comfortable with, too (fooling around with gunpowder by the pound and primers by the thousand, for example). I am not at all interested in taking material counterparty risk when I pay up for a guarantee. You prefer a cheaper/riskier alternative that may or may not turn out to be a religious Ponzi scheme? Have at it, but don't say you were not warned.
Obviously, you have a serious need to keep banging on the keyboard with absolutely no idea about WTF you are speaking of. I'll cover it as slowly as possible, and hopefully you can take a breather and pay attention. First the rational folks here are discussing a cost sharing plan for a very limited audience, not, as you created in your mind, some big new scam. Second, this type of cost sharing has a long history of success in many religious communities, be they Christians in general, or smaller specific groups. Third, a very small number of these programs were grandfathered into the ACA based on the fact that they have a decades long history of legitimate performance.
All your stupid shit about this being a Ponzi scheme, there being zero transparency, mumbo-jumbo, decisions that I have made, and a whole host of other assumptions, are just that. They are based on your desire to attack something you know fuck- all about. I researched it, and given my situation, decided that it was not in MY best interest. Others have used the program with great success for many years. Get over yourself and let go. I only jumped into to this thread to address the fact that it was becoming tainted with inflammatory bullshit from a small handful that have no idea what they are talking about, and haven't let that fact stop them in the least. You then decide to become a poster child for this behavior. Why?
Actually, I cut my teeth on insurer statutory statements so I understand very, very well what I am talking about. It appears you do not.
Since you persist in making this personal and I have said what I want to, I will leave you to stew in your own filth. I hope your mumbo-jumbo works out.
