Log In | Register
The premise that a national health insurance option is flawed at the most basic level and quite simply unrealistic. For starters, simply changing who pays the bills, either a private health insurance company or the federal government, does not alter the cost of services. If company A wants to be cheaper than company B, they've got to do things differently. That is either doing things more efficiently (which the government has NEVER done) or cutting costs else where, either in the quantity or quality of services provided, or simply dictating what a service is worth. The latter of which, is a dangerous road to travel. To cut expenses and reduce costs, if it cant be done in the area of efficiency (and i don't think the government can) you've HAVE to cut quality, or quantity. I once heard in a sales pitch that you can have quality, quantity or value in any transaction but you can only pick two, you can't have all three. So where is it going to be? A cut in services? Shortcuts on quality? Most likely not, neither the right or left would allow it, but then it stands to reason if all other elements remain the same, so would the cost.
I don't have health insurance. the anual costs of my doctor visits cost me less than a couple weeks pay.There in lies the problem with our current system. Health insurance was never originally designed to pay for such trivial things like routine maintenence but we use it to pay for evrey routine check up, and every little illness.Imagine how much your car insurance would be if it covered every routine expense of owning your car. Insurance, for anything else you buy it for, is designed to help cover what MIGHT happen, not what WILL happen, like ear infections and strep throat. When I lived in AZ I carried health insurance for hopitalization only which cost me about a third of a regular plan and I paid for my routine visits out of pocket. Now in MN, I can't even get a 'hospital' only plan because insurance plans by law have minimum requirements for what they have to cover. However, in the last six years including annual check ups, I have paid about $1200 in total healthcare expenses. I would have paid that in premiums in only 4 months.
Its also widely known that people on public healthplans often pick the most convienient and most expensive fors of doctor visits... the ER, for routine visits shifting the burden of the cost to the rest of us. A typical visit to my regular doctor costs me just under $200, I can expect to pay three times that for an ER visit. Now we have these things called 'Minute Clinics' locally where I can get a quick diagnosis for ear infection or strep throat for half the cost of a regular visit.
I have no problems helping those who cannot help themselves but the idea that healthcare costs can be lowered without changing the fundamental way we use it is quite honestly unreasonable. I don't claim to be an expert on this but I can't seem to make it make sense and even the congressional Democrats are saying it's too expensive as the White House has it planned.
I don't think any rational person doubts that healthcare needs reform, but government healthcare is not the answer.
