Posted on 04/06/2005 9:56:44 AM PDT by RebelBanker
I think that would be a slippery slope. Instead, the government should and must reform medicare, medicaid and welfare as well as workers comp. In order to do this we must first have tort reform, something that the pols are unwilling to do. Tort reform is something i'd like mandated.
no, the solution is to simply place some regulatory floor on what private companies provide. we must keep the health care system private, and to do that, private companies cannot be allowed to simply walk away.
the government would also be inept at, for example, developing auto safety technology. but cars are safer today because government regulation provided safety standards, private companies met those standards, and as a result cars are safer then they were 20 years ago.
government regulates things through private parties all the time - and as with the auto safety and auto emissions examples, it works just fine. perfectly logical.
I agree with all your points.
But we must acknowledge how the health care system is funded today for people outside the government run programs. Its a combination of private $$$s plus a benefit provided as a consequence of employment (from most companies). If we throw that system away by letting corporations walk, its going to go all government, not all private as some here are dreaming about.
So the only way to keep the health care system private is via government intervention?
Do you truly not see the flaw in your so-called reasoning?
the auto companies, left to their own devices, would never have done anything about auto emissions. its the same analogy.
if we allow the private sector to continue to march down the road of slowly eliminating health benefits as a consequence of employment (which is happening now), the system is going to go "all government". I guarantee it.
The camel is fully loaded. You cannot stop them.
the government would also be inept at, for example, developing auto safety technology.
They are inept - they are paid to be so.
but cars are safer today because government regulation provided safety standards, private companies met those standards, and as a result cars are safer then they were 20 years ago.
A better, cheaper, and faster approach would have been to offer incentives to improve safety instead of mandating a one-size-fits-all standard.
government regulates things through private parties all the time - and as with the auto safety and auto emissions examples, it works just fine. perfectly logical.
It's still wrong. It's not logical. And it doesn't work fine very often (see OSHA, environmental impact laws, emissions regulations, unintended consequences). A perfect counterexample is the recent attempt to raise the EPA CAFE standards while ignoring the laws of physics.
You need to buy a clue here.
We're not abandoning the current system; you, and your BS mandates, are pushing it over the edge.
Well, what this will do is either 1) have Walmart slow expansion in the state, 2) Walmart to keep raise increases lower to compensate for the health care costs, 3) have a bunch of contracting companies start, perhaps owned fully or partially by Walmart, that contract employees to Walmart. So WMT Employment Services LLC of Annapolis can be founded. This company would be, say, 49% owned by Walmart. Then this company would agree to provide employees to say 30 Walmart stores, each with 300 employees. These would not be Walmart employees. Only the managers would be Walmart employees. This company would be responsbile for hiring, processing payroll, schedule arranging, etc.
You cannot stop capital from flowing from where it is poorly utilized to where it is fully utilitized. Ever.
the system is going to go "all government". I guarantee it.
That will kill it completely. I guarantee it.
This has already been explained to you multiple times on this thread. If government programs are the problem - get rid of them. Don't further regulate the private sector, because you're merely treating the symptom.
Furthermore, your assertion that healthcare will be either funded by business or government is a false choice. Ten years from now, the most likely scenario is that individuals will choose their own coverage. There will be no provider network restrictions, consumers will have access to information regarding various market competitors, and they will use MSA's to manage risk (insurance will be used only for catastrophic problems).
The argument you're advancing assumes status quo, but you need to look past the current paradigm (excuse the buzzword). The healthcare market is very likely to undergo dramatic change within the next decade; embrace it instead of using government's big stick to further complicate this industry.
Liberalism is a sad thing to watch in action. These folks are so woefully incompetent when it comes to basic economic theory, it's no wonder they advance nonsensical proposals.
It does get depressing at times. I tend think most of these squishy, feelgood "conservatives" label themselves so only because of their views on abortion or their antipathy towards the abject idiocy of the Democrat Party.
I am not quarrelling with the fact the the purely government run systems like medicaid need reforms.
I am talking about what is happening to the private system - what is happening to employer provided (in whole or in part) plans. you are worrying about further regulating them, and what I am telling you is that if current trends continue - there won't be anything to regulate, corporations are shedding these plans. For retiree medical, they are often shedding it in one big swoop - wake up one morning, its gone. For current employees, they are boiling the frog slowly by passing along higher co-pays each year, until it eventually reaches the point where you pay for it yourself and the company pays next to nothing.
When a private sector worker reaches the point where they are paying through taxes for medicaid, medicare, and the medical plans of government and municipal employees - and then have to pay for their own plans because there employer is pushing them off it as a company benefit - then at that point, those private sector employees are going to throw in the towel and will be ready for a single payer government plan (those that haven't already transitioned to medicaid, which is happening at the bottom end of the scale such as with these walmart workers).
yes, it will kill it. that's why I want to keep the system private. But you won't be able to sustain the private system without corporate $$$s flowing into employee benefit plans.
Corporations don't pay for those benefits, their customers do. And their customers are tired of it.
"Frankly, if some fly-by-night insurance company that operated out of a trailer were to set up shop, and offer an el-cheapo policy that would give me the butt-covering I needed to set up an HSA, I'd give them a serious look, even though I know they'd never pay out a dime."
Thats a good business idea honestly.
"There's got to be SOME way to get the ambulance-chasers off the system."
I believe the Republicans are going to get tort reform through soon. It maybe adds 5% or more to the cost of healthcare.. which doesn't sound huge but we are talking almost 100 billion dollars a year.. That we could use to train Pa's.
"You're right about PA's, that's the only kind of "health professional" (besides an opthamologist) that I've seen in the last five or so years."
Right now there is only about 5% as many PA's as doctors. In the future we have to move to PA's outnumbering doctors at least 2 to 1. The doctors handling the more difficult problems, and managing multiple PA's.
The PA is the biggest step in the right direction in healthcare, in 50 years imo. Now its a matter of expanding it and the quicker the better.
"Furthermore, your assertion that healthcare will be either funded by business or government is a false choice. Ten years from now, the most likely scenario is that individuals will choose their own coverage. There will be no provider network restrictions, consumers will have access to information regarding various market competitors, and they will use MSA's to manage risk (insurance will be used only for catastrophic problems)."
I agree with you.. this is why I support William Frist for the next president. We need reforms of our system, aka breaking down all the myriad of rules, to allow this kind of progression. He is already talking about that.
Another I like is making all health spending a tax write off. So you dont' have to go through the corporation, adding a hugh and inefficient level of bureaucracy to avoid the tax hit.
they are? those customers also pay for their insane executive compensation packages. are they tired of paying for that too? or is that OK for the customers to pay for, is it only wages and benefits are people "tired" of paying?
this is the same logic that fosters illegal immigration. are people really "tired" of paying a couple of extra bucks for their meal at a restaurant, forcing the business to hire low wage illegals to keep prices down? I'd gladly pay $2 more for my meal and stop the hiring of illegals. how about you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.