Quote:
Originally Posted by fmichael
Putting aside how certain issue's of women's rights are dealt with in the House bill, there is [strike: only ] one key - but fatal - flaw in what I have heard will be in the final Senate bill at least (and may be in the House version, dunno) and that is that people with mandated employer sponsored insurance will be inellible to participate in the public plan, no matter how bad their coverage is.
With that, the insurance industry has innoculated itself from any competition from the public plan, where the public plan could have been quite competitive by, among other things, saving on the 30% of revenue that we're told goes into stringing people out on their claims. Does anyone know off hand whether this provision is in the final House bill?
Finally, for a nice discusion on the economics of paying for this, check out a story that ran in Monday's NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/he...0cost.html?hpw Apparently, the great hope lies in the concept of "bundling," which, to the best of my understanding, is what Kaiser Permanente was and is built on. And unlike a lot of for-profit HMOs, Kaiser's care is pretty good.
Mike |
Kaiser is a nightmare and wouldn't wish that coverage on an enemy. Kaiser is the inventor of the HMO which is how not to cover someone in short order. You have to use their doctors and hospitals. The US is now heading into third world status with it's pathetic, fragmented way it delivers healthcare. In order for me not to ramble, there are two industries that can collude and fix prices, health insurance companies and major league baseball. The insurance companies have managed to divide this nation at the expense of millions of Americans well being. Just keep in mind a congressman or woman will never go without their government provided coverage ever. No pre-existing condition can never apply to them.