Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 25, 2010 11:39:08 GMT -8
I've been watching the medical summit on TV. Here are some of my observations. . .
There has been much discussion about health care reform. (Or is it health care insurance reform?) Here is a particularly interesting question that came up on TV today. Critics say that ObamaCare will result in higher insurance premiums. Not to worry, says Obama. We will cap insurance premiums through legislation.
What would be the result of that? Well, I posted on the issue of health spending control vs health cost control a while back (http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/78899997.html). Simply stated, if the Feds tell insurance companies what they can charge, those companies will be forced to reimburse providers at a lower, perhaps much lower, rate. Furthermore, insurance companies will no doubt be forced to establish rules that limit access to health care.
That's called rationing. I suspect that the current administration realizes all too well that what they are proposing will cause more rationing. There is a difference between what they want and what has existed in the UK since their government run health care system was begun in the late 1940s. That difference is this; in the UK, everybody knows whom to blame for the shortcomings of the British national health . . . the government. With the system proposed by the Obama administration, I guess the insurance companies will continue to be demonized.
(Sen. Rockefeller just said that the health insurance companies are "a rapacious industry that does what it wants." He criticized insurance companies for being motivated by a desire to make money. Yep, that's what the man said! A Rockefeller criticizing businesses for wanting to make money! That's rich!)
AzWm
There has been much discussion about health care reform. (Or is it health care insurance reform?) Here is a particularly interesting question that came up on TV today. Critics say that ObamaCare will result in higher insurance premiums. Not to worry, says Obama. We will cap insurance premiums through legislation.
What would be the result of that? Well, I posted on the issue of health spending control vs health cost control a while back (http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/78899997.html). Simply stated, if the Feds tell insurance companies what they can charge, those companies will be forced to reimburse providers at a lower, perhaps much lower, rate. Furthermore, insurance companies will no doubt be forced to establish rules that limit access to health care.
That's called rationing. I suspect that the current administration realizes all too well that what they are proposing will cause more rationing. There is a difference between what they want and what has existed in the UK since their government run health care system was begun in the late 1940s. That difference is this; in the UK, everybody knows whom to blame for the shortcomings of the British national health . . . the government. With the system proposed by the Obama administration, I guess the insurance companies will continue to be demonized.
(Sen. Rockefeller just said that the health insurance companies are "a rapacious industry that does what it wants." He criticized insurance companies for being motivated by a desire to make money. Yep, that's what the man said! A Rockefeller criticizing businesses for wanting to make money! That's rich!)
AzWm