Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (215674)	1/31/2007 1:00:07 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The reason I need to stop responding to you on this topic is that you show no ability to analysis the components of the health care system and make reasonable arguments for which portions Medicare addresses and how well it does address those issues. Fundamentally medicare is a monopoly insurance company covering a certain segment of the population. As such, it's goal is not health care either, rather it is an actuarial method of handling risk and payments for medical care for this specific group. It accomplishes these goals using well known insurance methods for risk and budgeting purposes, obtains payments from all wage earning Americans in order to cover the insurance premiums a different group (largely non-wage earners, hence the payment is largely a wealth transfer system), and has monopoly power in determining what it will cover and what price it will pay. You cannot simply expand such a system. At the bare minimum, you radically change the relationship of where the money comes from (wage earners) vs. who receives coverage (largely non-wage earners now). Looking specifically at your list: Medicare costs versus private insurance I don't see anyway of comparing them unless you have the same coverage group (both mandatory) and the same prices paid out for service. - Private insurance's goal isn't health care, it's high premiums coupled with denial of claims which translates into denial of care Every private business is about turning a profit while pursuing some aspect of commerce. In a competitive environment, customer choice results in productive companies. Monopolies result in incompetent companies. Dell's goal isn't to provide you with the best computer either, it's goal is to make the most profit selling computers. You just don't get it. 45% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills How can anyone go bankrupt if they had a reasonable insurance policy? - 47 million uninsured which is a drag on the entire economy as well as being immoral Some of them are driving new cars rather than buying insurance. How do you deal with stupidity? Some of them cannot afford the cost of reasonable insurance premiums. For them I have no problem with the state having a wealth transfer mechanism. But the source of payment, the wealth transfer mechanism, has nothing to do with the insurance function. They are best left independent IMO. If you can make a good argument for why this is not the case, I'm happy to listen. Everyone could have coverage TOMORROW Well, tomorrow is nonsense, but within a reasonably short time I would agree. Again, this has zero to do with a monopoly system. It can be handled just fine with private insurers, mandatory coverage, and a wealth transfer mechanism.