Here's very interesting article on why health insurance costs so much in some places in the USA. The Cost Conundrum.
Here one reporter goes to McAllen, Texas, which has one the most expensive rates for health insurance in the country and tries to grasp why it happens to be that way.
I hear there is a renewed push among Democratic Senators to get the Public Option passed using reconciliation. I hope that initiative works.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteThe issue seems to be that overdoing the doctoring is the main cause of runaway prices. The doctors appear to be gouging the system.
If that's the case, I would think a Public Option would make the issue worse. Making the pool of money larger to cover gouging, without actually addressing the gouging itself first and foremost, appears to me to be counterproductive. The article even said,
"Universal coverage won’t be feasible unless we can control costs."
I don't see an easy government fix for what appears to be mainly ethical, and partly educational, problem.
The doctors are gouging because they can and because of CYA. Hidalgo county already has tort reform, so fear of lawsuits isn't the main issue there. Perhaps I'm wrong, but if the issue is ethical, no government program can truly fix it because government enforces external controls and the problem is internal. For example, rationing:
"Policymakers have worried that doing so would require rationing, which the public would never go along with."
People are seen as $$ (by some doctors, not all), and that's an ethical issue.
And the problem isn't just pursuit of profits, "evil capitalism", and all that. The blend of Capitalism and Socialism is creating a monster. The market cannot self-regulate when there is an artificial pool of cash available. This is not an issue of Capitalism because this is not a Capitalist situation - it's a hybrid situation. Greed can run rampant because the pool of tax-payers will foot the bill, whereas in a real Capitalistic system there would be no pool and patients could walk away, crippling places like Renaissance Hospital, or in a real Socialist system there would be stricter control or rationing. Either way is better than the hybrid.
These certain kind of doctors that see only $$ can hide behind a lot of fine sounding excuses like fear of lawsuits or providing the best care, but the issue is of the heart. Doctors are supposed to be fabulously wealthy. The drive to make a buck at the pool of cash is strong. We could address this in two ways - one is education, the other is good old fashioned humility and faith.
What do you get when you take God out of medicine?
Look around you.
aHWA said:
ReplyDelete"If that's the case, I would think a Public Option would make the issue worse."
And there is not a thing the US government can do to make the system efficient except to allow families to buy across state lines. That in itself will never happen.
You see the health care issue is not about helping people, it is about controlling the population. Study the premise in which the Soviet Union was founded on and the actual implementation of its constitution. A stark difference in intention vs. reality.
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."
— Nikita Khrushchev
"And there is not a thing the US government can do to make the system efficient except to allow families to buy across state lines" -PT
ReplyDeleteI've thought a lot about this, and I mostly agree with you.
I'd say I completely agree, but RF's article has me thinking about education. Perhaps one other thing would be to use their clout with colleges to really encourage educating the doctors on responsible health care.
BUT!
Two other things you say I do completely agree with:
"You see the health care issue is not about helping people, it is about controlling the population."
And
"That in itself will never happen."