The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

Morrigoon · 05-01-2008, 09:57 AM

The health coverage thing is always a two-edged sword for me. On one hand, wouldn't it be great if I never had to worry about the cost of a procedure and could just go to the doctor whenever. On the other hand - HMOs suck bad enough, how much worse would it be if the government were in charge? When you have politicians deciding how much doctors make, how on earth can you expect us to get decent care.

I think the compromise would perhaps be that the government provide a certain minimal level of coverage (much like medicare) to everyone, and set up an arrangement where individual insurers compete for the business of improvements upon that coverage. There would need to be a financial incentive of some type for doctors who exclusively (or a minimum percentage that comprises the majority of their patient pool) serve the government-insured. But then doctors who wish to could accept people with increased coverage (in other words, the government plan would be like an HMO, and privately insurance would be the upgrade to a PPO).

The whole thing still scares me.

SacTown Chronic · 05-01-2008, 10:00 AM

I kind of like that rough outline of a plan you have there, Morrigoon. A solid crust of socialism with a tasty capitalist topping!

Strangler Lewis · 05-01-2008, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

When you have politicians deciding how much doctors make, how on earth can you expect us to get decent care.

The same way you get it when insurance companies decide how much doctors make. Hopefully, you run into a doctor who is committed to providing it. Plus, if Sicko is any indication, the doctors in socialized systems are doing fine.

The politicians also decide how much public sector lawyers make on both the prosecution and defense side. The laws still get enforced. People get defended. I've had a number of clients who have bought into the myth that their public defender had to have been incompetent, so the family pooled money they couldn't afford to hire a private attorney that took their money and did nothing.

05-01-2008, 09:57 AM	#1
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	The health coverage thing is always a two-edged sword for me. On one hand, wouldn't it be great if I never had to worry about the cost of a procedure and could just go to the doctor whenever. On the other hand - HMOs suck bad enough, how much worse would it be if the government were in charge? When you have politicians deciding how much doctors make, how on earth can you expect us to get decent care. I think the compromise would perhaps be that the government provide a certain minimal level of coverage (much like medicare) to everyone, and set up an arrangement where individual insurers compete for the business of improvements upon that coverage. There would need to be a financial incentive of some type for doctors who exclusively (or a minimum percentage that comprises the majority of their patient pool) serve the government-insured. But then doctors who wish to could accept people with increased coverage (in other words, the government plan would be like an HMO, and privately insurance would be the upgrade to a PPO). The whole thing still scares me. __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes

05-01-2008, 10:00 AM	#2
SacTown Chronic the myth of the dream Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,217	I kind of like that rough outline of a plan you have there, Morrigoon. A solid crust of socialism with a tasty capitalist topping! __________________ Is it the fingers, or the brain that you're teaching a lesson?
	Submit to Quotes