SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Alighieri who wrote (13655)2/28/2010 5:54:46 PM
From: skinowski1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
Uh? It doesn't work that way. Medicare is administered directly without private insurance involvement.

You didn't know that? Medicare does not pay anything directly to the providers. They have contracts with local private insurance companies who receive the funds from Medicare and then actually run the program locally, receiving and paying claims, handling appeals, etc. I googled for info - here is a link which will help you find out which private company is the Medicare carrier in your location:

acr.org

Your point about Medicare covering older people is a valid one. Probably, covering younger people would be less expensive. However, recall that all the nations with presumably superior (and less expensive) healthcare systems must deal with similar issues, like ageing population etc. So, apparently this does not explain the discrepancy in costs.

After watching the scene, as well as being a participant for over 30 years, I submit that excessive costs in our healthcare are related to overregulation, excessive complexity, and to the prevailing culture of defensive medicine.

From what I see, the reform bill submitted by the Dems may address the complexity issue - but at the cost of more controls. The fact that it will sharply increase the powers of the political classes (of both parties) should also be a serious concern.