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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (3307)	12/17/2007 9:05:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

What am I missing? Perhaps our difference is that I'm responding about what they do, the functions they perform, and now you're talking about what good they do, which is not the same thing. Let me start by saying that I don't like the insurance companies any more than you do. I'm on record as saying that our system would be healthier if employers had not started the health insurance benefit. But they do perform functions that need to be part of any system. They pay bills, for example. Pretty obvious function. Someone needs to do it. They assemble benefit packages, defining what is and isn't covered. Likewise, obvious and necessary unless you're going to have the patient responsible for paying for chosen treatments himself. And in the process, they reflect/set societal standards for what is "reasonable and customary." I don't know if you would characterize those functions as a "good," but they are necessary. Yes, they could be performed by some other player(s). But insurance companies perform them now. Any replacement system would have to assign those functions to some entity.