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: Lane3 who wrote (4036)	1/19/2008 12:04:57 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

what triggers a socialist instinct in a proclaimed capitalist mindset. It was the coalescing of two observations. It began about 9-10 months ago when my former employer, Merrill Lynch, started talking up EU based companies, suggesting investors overweight their portfolios with European stocks. One reason was the relative lower burden of corporate health care costs vis-a-vis the US. In reading further I discovered that every member of the EU has some kind of single-payer system. I was surprised. I had thought it was just those 'kooks' in Canada and England with inefficient systems where people could die waiting for a appointment. But my interest was piqued because rising health care costs in this country was frequently discussed on TV. After researching further, I discovered that our health care system actually is the oddball. Every major economy has some variation of a government single-payer system. And further reading left me with the impression that these systems actually work quite efficiently and produce excellent results, statistically speaking. At this point my mind was simply opened. I still saw no real reasons to argue we should consider changing our current system. What changed me one day was kind of an 'aha' experience. It occurred to me that our present system is adversarial in its structure. And I thought is that what we should even want with regard to healthcare? I began to think about how our system doesn't really operate on the capitalist mechanisms of competition and innovation, not fully at least. I mean how much difference is there really between Aetna and Blue Cross? And there really are very few barriers to continued inflation in health care costs. Consumers are pretty captive it seems to me. But the main thing for me is what I see as the inherent adversarial structure. Insurers are like any other capitalist corporation. They strive to get the highest price they can at one end while delivering a product, i.e. a package of benefits, that costs them as little as possible. It's not a moral or fairness issue. It just is what it is, and we can't expect a capitalist health care system to function any differently. As a result, there's a built in incentive to deny or shave claims...to restrict the number and the type of tests or treatments, etc. There's a built in incentive to fudge a little, over-promise, misrepresent, change the rules in mid-game, etc. etc..... all the downsides of capitalism. The difference is that the stakes are too high. If my insurer won't fully cover damage to my roof, for example, it's not the end of the world. But if I find out, in the middle of a catastophic illness such as cancer, that I'm not as fully covered as I thought I was, that could be devastating. Not to mention that a healthy workforce is critical to the efficient functioning of business. So two things flipped me into the ranks of socialists, LOL. One is that our expensive health care system is making our corporations less competitive in the world. The other is that health care is too precious and important to be left in the hands of a capitalist structure, IMO. One is a pragmatic observation. The other is a philosophical observation. So I'm simply now someone who is open to a different approach with regard to US healthcare. I'd like to see honest debate on the issue. I'd like to see compare and contrast proposals using valid numbers. I'd like to see experts design a proposed system that is uniquely American and strives to mitigate the damage that would be done to insurers. Decimating an entire industry is not something to be taken lightly, even though I was flippant about 'those people go find other jobs'. Maybe this post will more or less answer your very fair question. Also, some of my back posts addressed some of these same issues.