Solving the wrong health care problem
This is just maddening stuff. Hillary Clinton has decided that she knows best about what you should purchase for yourself, and if you disagree, she'll just take your money anyway.
If these people can afford insurance, but choose not to purchase it, isn't that their right? And if they become sick, and don't have insurance, why shouldn't they be billed for it? True, even short hospitalizations can run into tens of thousands of dollars. But people can finance cars for that amount, and houses for much more. And it still might work out cheaper than paying exorbitant premiums every month.
The problem with health care is that it is expected to cost $20 per visit (those pesky premiums are withheld from wages so we don't even feel it!) When faced with the prospect of paying more for real services rendered, we are quick to try to find somebody else who will foot the bill. It's human nature. But government was invented because nature is a state of war. It was implemented in this country to make sure people kept their own things, not to redistribute them amongst neighbors.
No, the real problem with health care is not those pesky folks who don't want to buy insurance even though they can afford it. It's that nobody knows what it costs, and somebody else usually pays anyway. What would Lasik cost if it were covered by insurance? Would it really be just a few hundred per eye? When consumers are offered real choices in providers, procedures, and medicines, and can weigh costs and benefits for themselves, costs will come down.
Tapping the government checkbook is no way to make health care less expensive. But I don't think that's Clinton's aim. Her aim is the costs become more invisible, so that it looks like nobody pays anything. After all, it will be the rich who will bear most of the cost, and they can afford it, can't they?
Clinton further noted that "there are a number of mechanisms" that could be used, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."There is a tendency in this country to confuse health insurance with health care. Strangely, health care has been around millennia, while health insurance is a relatively recent invention. How did anyone get health care without insurance? Well, they paid for it. Or they didn't get it. We certainly don't want to revisit a world where the poor cannot see a doctor. But have we gone so far as to say that you can't get health care without insurance, or if you do, the state must pick up the tab?
As the Associated Press notes, "Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms."
If these people can afford insurance, but choose not to purchase it, isn't that their right? And if they become sick, and don't have insurance, why shouldn't they be billed for it? True, even short hospitalizations can run into tens of thousands of dollars. But people can finance cars for that amount, and houses for much more. And it still might work out cheaper than paying exorbitant premiums every month.
The problem with health care is that it is expected to cost $20 per visit (those pesky premiums are withheld from wages so we don't even feel it!) When faced with the prospect of paying more for real services rendered, we are quick to try to find somebody else who will foot the bill. It's human nature. But government was invented because nature is a state of war. It was implemented in this country to make sure people kept their own things, not to redistribute them amongst neighbors.
No, the real problem with health care is not those pesky folks who don't want to buy insurance even though they can afford it. It's that nobody knows what it costs, and somebody else usually pays anyway. What would Lasik cost if it were covered by insurance? Would it really be just a few hundred per eye? When consumers are offered real choices in providers, procedures, and medicines, and can weigh costs and benefits for themselves, costs will come down.
Tapping the government checkbook is no way to make health care less expensive. But I don't think that's Clinton's aim. Her aim is the costs become more invisible, so that it looks like nobody pays anything. After all, it will be the rich who will bear most of the cost, and they can afford it, can't they?
Comments