Comments (8) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   tpenna said, 3 months ago

   Spot on, Toles!

2. 

   believecommonsense said, 3 months ago

   in addition, for profit insurers continue decreasing the numbers of people inside the ambulance in this toon and increasing the numbers of people falling off the ledge …. at least some of these people will end up on Medicaid, thus increasing the costs to taxpayers while increasing insurers’ own profits … others will end up in ERs with uncompensated care given by medical facilities … the clear winner in all this is the for-profit insurer

   this is not a sustainable system

3. 

   motivemagus said, 3 months ago

   Interesting poll analysis on 538.com. If you frame the question in a less biased manner, the vast majority of Americans support a nonprofit insurance option supported by the government.

4. 

   ynnek58 said, 3 months ago

   motivemagus
   It is all how you word it. Even stingy ole me would probably go for a non-profit private co-op of some kind. I think it does a couple of things. It removes the (right or wrong) worry of the government taking over the healthcare portion of the economy that a lot of people have, and it removes the huge profits that others see with the insurance companies. It still doesn’t address the charging structure of doctors and hospital, sensible tort reform, or where the money to insure 47M people is going to come from, but it should be out there, if for no other reason than to put pressure on the for-profits to remain competitive. Additionally, if they are as successful as some predict, they could actually supplant the for-profits.

   BCS
   Even with the ‘new’ Obama plan, aren’t we just talking about subsidizing the poor with some kind of insurance plan? Won’t that just transfer more money to the hands of your arch-nemesis the insurance company?

   Also, none of this addresses the root cause of so much of our health care which is people’s behavior. Somehow, we’ve got to address that.

5. 

   believecommonsense said, 3 months ago

   ynnek, there are many who agree that simply subsidizing premiums for low-income folks, and those who the insurers decline to insure, will end up being a boon for private insurers. see this story:

   http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/healthcare/la-na-healthcare-insurers24-2009aug24,0,6925890.story

   what isn’t clear yet is what kind of health insurance reform will be approved (if any). it should include 1) people can’t be turn down for pre-existing conditions and insurers can’t refuse to pay for care for pre-existing conditions for months or years; 2) insurers should not be able to retroactively “rescind” politics as they do now, if consumers generally have 72 hours to cancel policies they sign, insurers should have the same amount of time, no more; 3) insurers shouldn’t be able to double premiums when an insured person actually uses their policy, insurers have always had the ability to create larger risk pools, they don’t because they make more profit without doing it.

   I would also like to seem some reform for providers who routinely charge private pay patients 200, 300, 400 percent or more than they charge those with insurance.

   Addressing people’s behavior and its effect on health is only part of a long-range solution, IMHO. When our environment causes certain types of cancer (as has been found in some cases), is not the fault of the sick. I think there is a lot we don’t know …. for instance, why is autism increasing? I think we don’t definitely know the answer to that question yet.

6. 

   Anthony 2816 said, 3 months ago

   I’m willing to bet that those without health insurance who get their primary health care from emergency rooms (who are required to treat them) are also pretty happy with the present system.

7. 

   Gary Kleppe said, 3 months ago

   Anthony, I’m willing to bet that you’ve never talked with such a person and don’t know what you’re talking about.

8. 

   Anthony 2816 said, 3 months ago

   You lose. What do I win?