But Obama and Congress are sluggishly working on a plan that is supposed to save us all from this excessively expensive necessity. No, what I meant to say is that they are working on a way to just screw us some more.
Everything I've read about this healthcare plan is just not what America needs. I don't really care about the higher taxes for the rich--they have enough to go around anyway. But those tax dollars will go to help the uninsured--it won't help people like Jia and me who get health insurance through work. None of the plans I've read about will help those who actually have to pay the excessive fees through work.
There is a simple solution that every politician seems to have overlooked. Reform the legal system to cut down on costs to healthcare providers. Here's how it works now: there are numerous malpractice lawsuits brought against insurers, hospitals, and doctors every year, but only a few of the cases are successful. Still, the insurers, hospitals, and doctors have to pay the legal fees for cases in which they are found to not be at fault. Quite a few of these cases are also frivolous. But healthcare providers still have to pay for the defense. If the legal system were reformed to so that if a lawsuit is unsuccessful the plaintiff would have to pay the defense's legal fees, it would reduce the cost of malpractice insurance, and the savings would then be passed on to the people paying for health insurance. This would also relieve the burden of frivolous lawsuits clogging the court system.
This is by no means the solution to all the healthcare problems in America--there are plenty of other problems that need to be addressed (i.e. greedy CEOs at insurance companies jacking up the premiums to fill their bloated wallets). However, this is an important first step toward improving the quality of life in America.
I'm confident that politicians will never listen to such a sensible argument. They'd rather listen to lobbyists and screw up our future.
1 comment:
Holy smokes! $470 a month!! That truly is outrageous .... and unacceptable. You're right, Patient First might be cheaper - pay as you go ....
A comment though on the lawsuit thing .... this is what happens sometimes .... person uses doctor who may or may not screw up ..... person usually doesn't sue the doctor, they get $ back from their insurer and it is the insurer who sues (screws) the doctor ....
The insurer has attorneys on staff so it is no extra $ for them to sue or even threaten to sue ....
Doctor turns it over to his liability insurance company .... and they have lawyers on staff as well .... all these lawyers threaten and yell at each other and eventually $ change hands ....
And then the liability insurance for the doctors goes up to cover it and they then charge more (to the health insurance companies) to cover that .... and around around around around we go ....
I do agree .... fixing this circle-jerk would definitely reduce cost of the entire system .... but getting someone to take this on is a huge undertaking ... it is soooo ingrained in the business model.
And I hate saying this next part ... our economic model that allows us to buy stock of these insurance companies (and health providers) forces them to make money in order to "satisfy the stockholder" .... they could get sued by their stockholders for poor management if they did not try and "acquire" as many dollars as possible ....
My defeatist attitude says we're gonna fix the IRS before this gets fixed .... (sorry to be so negative)
Post a Comment