Do people really understand what's being proposed here for health care? Probably not. Basically, the whole idea is to create a public option to provide the kind of pricing pressure that has a chance of controlling costs, and can still provide increased coverage to all Americans. I think everyone would approve of the ends in mind.
Clearly, the objection half of America has to this health care proposal is in the means. The government or "public" option just sounds too socialistic. Too much government. But people don't realize that in reality, we have these kinds of situations everywhere. What is being proposed for medicine already exists today in other areas of our economy, and are not considered the end of capitalism. There are very few, if any instances of our economy where public works are the only game in town. And many of the utilities may be private, but are heavily regulated by the government. Even most governmental agencies contract work through private businesses.
"But private companies can always run their business better..." you may say? Not necessarily. Let's look at some areas where public and private compete...
Fire Department--I'm so glad that there are private fire department companies. If my house was burning down, I'd like to be able to know which firefighters cost how much, so that I don't waste my hard earned taxpayer money on the most expensive firefighters, when a far more reasonable team could do the job, for less. Perhaps while my house is burning down, I could call a few firefighter companies, compare prices, and then choose the best one to put out the smoldering ashes left of what was once my home. Wait, there AREN'T any real private fire departments? What a shocker...
Police/Defense-- Blackwater could be seen as "competition" for the US Army. Certainly they can police the streets of Iraq more effectively for less dough, right? If they can't, then certainly Halliburton and their spin off--Kellogg Brown and Root, could do the job without inefficiency or taxpayer waste, right? Er...maybe that's not such a good example...
Mail--But what about the post office? It competes with FedEx and UPS. And the government controlled pricing power of the USPS has simply put FedEx and UPS out of business, hasn't it? Well, maybe not, but we're getting warm...
Education--Ah, education. There's private and public schools. And if people want their kids to get a parochial, or top-flight secular education, they can spend the additional cash to send their kids to private schools. If they can't afford such a luxury, their kids can go to public schools. Ah, now we're getting closer to the right comparison...
"So? Public schools are a mess..." you may say? That may be true in some circumstances. But funding for education has been severely lacking in recent years, and there are proposals on the table now to use school vouchers and magnet schools to help to address some of these issues. Ahhh...the free market at work...
So...let's take the school analogy and apply it to health care...giving people the option of going to whatever doctor they want, but having the government provide the voucher to pay for it and set the rates...
You know what that sounds like? The current Congressional proposal.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Here's the problem. By creating a public option, we're subsidizing healthcare for those that don't have it. We're creatnig unfair competition for the Health Insurance Companies. These companies already compete in a free market with each other. Competition is what controls the price.
2 points.
1) Health Insurance Companies are not jacking up their prices because of corporate greed. Prices have gone up because we are a litigious society, and doctors are continually sued for obscene amounts of money. If you want to fix the healthcare system... create some laws holding lawyers accountable for frivolous lawsuits.
2) As a taxpayer, my kids go to public school. I choose the area I live which determines the public school my kids go to. So your government run comparrison is not really a good analogy, as we would have only one healthcare system. But... let's set that aside and continue here... If I choose to pay to have my kids go to Private School, (we'll assume that the education is better) are you to suggest that if I pay more for private insurance, I could move to the front of the line at the Emergency Room? I think that would raise some serious objections.
I'd disagree with you wholeheartedly that these companies compete in a free market, for individuals. They compete with each other for company group policy coverage.
Personally, I have about 3 choices, all of which had increases in premiums of over 10% in each of the past 5 years.
And I have TWO members of my family with pre-existing conditions. To the person posting that everyone should get their own healthcare, try getting a policy with a child with a pre-existing condition? Or a spouse who has had cancer?
Have we all forgotten why we need reform here in the first place? I'm not suggesting the bill is perfect, but if you want to amend the bill, do so. Doing nothing is NO help to anyone, and hurts EVERYONE. As far as I'm concerned, the choice of barrelling over the cliff or the uncertainty of turning, for fear there's a wall there, is an easy one to someone like me. I'll take my chances with the wall, rather than certain death from the cliff...
Post a Comment