Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kiwiexpat
My guess is that the solution will be primarily a market solution with some public sector tinkering at the margins.

It's the "tinkering" that worries me. Never has the government been content to just tinker. Sooner or later, it forces its way in and takes over everything, to the detriment of all involved.

Yes, demand does drive the cost, but so does corruption, the overuse of technology, excessive lawsuits, antiquated and overstaffed billing practices, slothful, unhealthy lifestyles, and the cost of covering the uninsured.

Corruption? Where? And surely you don't think corruption of all things is going to be REDUCED if the government gets involved??!! Overuse of technology? That does seem to be a problem, one that is being addressed by the HMO model. Antiquated billing? I can't say I know much about that, but it seems to me that modern computerized recordkeeping would invalidate much of that.

As to lifestyles, unless the government regulates everyone's behavior, certain lifestyles are going to be riskier than others. One of the purposes of insurance is to collectivize the risk. It seems to do that well.

And the cost of insuring the uninsured will be borne either in the private or the public sector, the only difference being that a public-sector "solution" will also fund innumerable parasites and fellow travelers.

Health care is best left to the free market, imaginary "crisis" or not.

32 posted on 11/26/2004 1:51:13 PM PST by IronJack (R)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: IronJack

I don't where you are getting the idea that I'm advocating a public sector solution to the problem of out-of-control healthcare costs. I'm not.

Corruption? Over billing/jacked-up prices is endemic in the healthcare industry. Hospitals regularly over charge Medicare and private insurance providers for one thing.

The billing system in the healthcare industry is out of date - there's too much bureaucracy, its over staffed, and it's technology is out of date. You're right - an update in technology is part of the cure. But there's so much time spent figuring out who pays for what...

In my experience, government only forces its way in (and then stays in) when there is market failure. To avoid this, the healthcare industry and those who advocate free-market solutions to health care better put their collective heads together and apply the correct market and legal solutions to the cost issue and the unisured issue before its too late. Bush is probably on the right track with tort reform, medical savings accounts, and tax credits to the unisured poor who can't afford health insurance.

Lastly, the health care insurance industry needs to do a better job in penalizing insurance users who increase costs by engaging in at-risk behaviors and by rewarding low risk clients. I recently read that the cost of smoking to the health care system per packet of cigarettes is $40. Obesity is another risk. If people want to keep on smoking and don't do anything about the fact that they weigh 400 pounts that's their business, but why the hell should I end up paying for their stupidity?


34 posted on 11/26/2004 3:01:43 PM PST by kiwiexpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson