|
|
I agree with Schiff that we'd be better off with insurance being out of the hands of employers. That is the biggest thing that I want to see from reform. Without that occurring I will likely not be a fan of the reform that we initially get.
I do worry that the more that the public resists reform the less reform we will get resulting in a far less effective reform. Small steps only yield restricted benefits.
Many moderate to conservative proposals for reform only offer a short-term aids that will have to be manipulated every couple of years because costs will still be rolling out of control.
I do want to see that system blown up & restructured. A minor shift will not produce a noticable difference & will not raise quality of life.
I disagree with Schiff that the government is the cause of the 10-20% yearly increases in costs.
Government may be involved but not as much as the nature of Corporatism.
I don't believe that costs would go down much due to interstate competition. First off the costs of living will not change so I would always pay more than someone in a more rural area. It costs more to live where I live, costs for healthcare providers are still going to be the same. Secondly, heads of the insurance industry would not allow companies to significantly lower the costs of premiums because that would be a really bad long-term approach & would lower overall profits industrywide. It is naive to think that those large insurance companies would not work together to crush those that tried to undercut them. They would exert extreme power to do so. Every industry works under certain guidelines across the board to ensure success.
Doctors do the same thing. They do not undercut each other very much as most procedures have a going rate & shopping around is not very advantageous. I do believe that MD's would advertise their costs much more often if they actually offered a greatly reduced service.
|