Seems to me that employer-paid medical insurance (called “hospitalization insurance” as I recall) started in WW2 … again due to wage controls imposed by the Federal government.
You have illustrated a basic principle we shouldn’t forget – not all of us wear the same size shoes. We aren’t all the same age, weight, height and sex. We don’t all have the same job.
Yeah, you can pretty much assume that they are staying afloat if they don’t have any bankrupcy notices hitting the news. If they are expanding, then at least they are attractive enough for investors, though they can always get in over their heads if their projections are wrong. If you see it closing, you can no they are losing money, and have no hope to make it up in the future.
And if they go broke and close down, that will be of no benefit to anyone. Those who have an ingrained dislike of “big hospital chains” ought to remember that.
Don’t Medical Savings Accounts give us choice?
Indeed they do. But “single payer” systems do not. They turn all the decision-making authority over to the “single payer” under the Golden Rule – who has the gold, makes the rules.
Indeed they do. But our friends on the other side of the aisle want us to believe that we are too dumb to figure out what to do with that choice. We need the gov’ment to help us.
When I was running for Congress, I would often share a podium with a lady who was running in the Democratic primary for the Senate nomination. Since she was running for the Senate, protocol always gave her the first speech – and she would rant and rave about the medicare drug card plan, “**SEVENTY-EIGHT **choices!! That’s too many choices!!”
It is easy for those with good jobs to say that this method is effectual or that method is. Any method must find a way to pay for the under-insured and those who make very little or no money. Medicaid and Medicare might work, where they not capped so that wealthy peoples contribution is maxed out.
Well, many hospitals do 10% or more free care. It may seem like a little percent to you, but to them, the cost is enormous, especially when you consider non-profits like Catholic hospitals.
Which is why I say it’s a bad idea to design a health care system for a tiny fraction of the people. We have this pernicious idea that hospitals are somehow “bad.” So we punish them by making pay for health care for the poor. Naturally, for them to stay in business, they pass on the costs to other patents. which is an unfair burden on those who have to pay extra. At the time when they most need their money to pay for their own health care, they have to pay extra.
It’s called a pyramid scheme, and if anyone but the government were doing it, they’d be put in prison for it.
At the very beginning of this thread, I said “someone has to pay.”
As opposed to taxing everyone, squandering the taxes on bureaucracy and paperwork, and letting them die anyway?
What assistance are you talking about?
I’d much rather see more generous 401Ks – I put the max into my 401K and it paid off very well.
Interestingly enough, after all the hoorah about how tobacco companies cost healthcare systems money, there is some evidence that they actually save healthcare money. Smokers die faster, and cost less.As an employee of the insurance industry…I just found out yesterday at a lunch with some fellow coworkers who sell health coverage to companies…that 70% of the diseases and claims are due to lifestyle choices. So–at my company, we are going to run an experiment globally…it will take effort upon that of top top mgmt, but to see if changing lifestyle (smoking cessation programs, weight watchers on site, giving people incentives for watching what they eat and drink, etc…) leads to lower claims.
Yes, some diseases are hereditary…but, 70% are directly related to how lead our lives…and don’t take care of ourselves, as a whole…as a society.
I’ll have to make sure to remember to post back here after the verdict is in with how we do.
the MSA you mention, with ‘provisions’ for the poor, which I take to mean government gives them a certain amount of money to begin with and a tax-free portion of their wages goes into the account thereafter.
The Government guarentees a certain portion. It works like this – imagine based on a certain person’s tax return, he is expected to be able to contribute $1,000. The government guarentees the other $2,000.
from a small claims standpoint however (small claims meaning claims that add up slowly) …smokers can have more throat illnesses, flus, colds, etc…along the way than their non smoking counterparts. again, medical stats not insurance stats. but, let’s face it…smoking is by far not the only problem out there when it comes to escalating claims and rising health insurance prices…the obesity rate in this country soars far above the rest of the world…and it’s unreal how many diseases are linked to that… even being 40 lbs overweight can impact one’s health. i know that when i don’t work out, i feel pretty lousy, as opposed to when i try to be consistent.
