Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Open.com Navigation
Take one or more of OPEN Forum's Crash Courses on topics like Leadership, Search Engine Marketing, Facebook and more.
Learn more* * * * *
About the Author: Dawn Rivers Baker, an award-winning small business journalist, regularly reports and analyzes small business policy and research as the Publisher of the MicroEnterprise Journal, where the nation’s business meets microbusiness. She also publishes the Journal Blog.
Oh, I don't mind if you sneer. It's not MY theory! LOL The bottom line is that reformers are trying to construct a system that rewards wellness rather than rewarding the treatment of illness, if you can appreciate the difference. As for healthy people paying for sick people, that's happening anyway. But it WOULD be more cost effective for us all to be paying to be healthy rather than paying to have our various illnesses treated - again, if you can appreciate the difference. The biggest problem to begin with is that insurance is a poor choice of a financial product to pay for medical care, since insurance is designed to increase in costs as you file more and more claims. But, people resist big changes (witness the current craziness), so they're trying to preserve the insurance part.
I apologize if my tone seems a bit sneering and rude. I don't mean any disrespect and I note you clearly say "that's the theory."... Paul
That thinking strikes me as more than a little arrogant. Let me see if I get this right: Govt forces insurers to insure the sick so they will force members to be healthy. What's next? The insurers organizing pickets around McDonalds? Do you really believe insurers are going to make a dent in having Americans give up their pizza and cheeseburgers? We're an overweight nation with something like 20 or 30% obesity and insurers are going to tell people to get healthy?? No, what's going to happen, im my humble opinion, is simply the redistribution of costs from the insurer right over to the healthy people: insurance rates are going to go up because they will be spending tens of billions more they otherwise wouldn't have spent. The people who take care of themselves will foot the bill. While I'm not entirely sure this is a bad thing, I just wish Americans would realize that someone is going to pay for this coverage and it's them. And if Americans are ok with that, great, let's increase covera
The thinking b ehind reform is that insurers, no longer able to deny coverage to anybody, will have to find another way to avoid paying out claims. If they have to insure the healthy and the sick, then it pays them to work at keeping everybody healthy (i.e., preventive care, preserving wellness rather than treating sickness). Whether this will actually work to bring down costs is, of course, unknown. Like I said, that's the theory (in case you were wondering). I'm not sure what'll happen when it's put into practice.
Anita - The thing I struggle with is the pre-existing condition. In financial services an analogy is making a loan: Banks aren't forced to make loans to individuals or businesses with "pre-existing conditions" or said another way: not credit-worthy. The bank says "no" or often, they price for risk. The riskier the customer, the higher the rate, shorter the term, etc. Personally, I'd like to think we should cover these people but where does such coverage start and stop? Who makes that decision? And based on whatever that answer, it's clear to me there is a new cost that insurance will bear to provide service and those costs will be born by the other members (us) in the system. So I think it's more than disingenuous to declare that costs will come down when insurers, unlike banks, will be asked to bear new risks they otherwise wouldn't underwrite. Again, I'd like to see us have a solution like you, but adding significant costs to a bankrupt nation is something I struggle mightily with. P
Some elements of the current system simply MUST change: denials of coverage after the fact; pre-existing condition exclusions (don't we all have pre-existing conditions? -- seems like that's a human condition); uncontrolled costs; not being able to get coverage.
It would not be difficult to imagine a system that is worse than the one we have now! It is both the Medicare & Medicaid that some expect to extract $500B in waste and fraud, and the European & Canadian systems most Americans DO NOT WANT! It is a huge jump from a failing Medicare & Medicaid System to a full Nationalized System and it is not a road to which we should create a pathway to!
Think you're paying too much in business taxes? Learn more about some possible deductions with our latest crash course.
Javascript is currently disabled. Please enable javascript for the optimal OPEN Forum experience.
Dawn Rivers Baker 2 years 8 months and 12 days ago
Unless said reformers can figure out a way to cause this thing called health insurance to behavior like something other than insurance, I don't really see how anything at all that they do will bring down costs EXCEPT for people to become healthier, thus filing fewer claims.