Unfortunately you point out exactly why government-run programs squeeze out private insurance. If I run a company, and pay higher premiums for a higher level of care— why should I continue? Cancel the insurance and let the government cover them.
These discussions also gloss over the data-gathering and learning that goes on with treatment programs. “Healthcare reform” will greatly slow progress in treatment protocols and new drug development....
hh
“Unfortunately you point out exactly why government-run programs squeeze out private insurance. If I run a company, and pay higher premiums for a higher level of care— why should I continue? Cancel the insurance and let the government cover them.”
Not always. In fact, Singer gives several examples of where private and public funded insurance co-exist peacefully. They only are at war when the state insists upon universal, ie, everyone gets the same level of care.
Currently, the democrat leadership is forcing a war between private and public plans in that they insist that the private plans be indentical to the public plans in order to qualify as a certified plan.
There is something in Singer’s idea that government can provide a limited level of health care to all and allow private insurance coverage of every thing else that could appeal to conservatives. After all, most conservatives believe that the root cause of most ills in the present system could be solved by having the recipient of the care pay for the insurance directly. This usually involves making individual health care tax deductible placing it on a level field with employee paid insurance.
Of course another plan that might appeal to conservatives is the opposite of Singers, ie, government provide only catastrophic care and the invidual pay directly for other health care.