--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> <snip>
> > So the best solution is to turn the health whole mess to a boobish
> > coniving administration and a corrupt, hostage-held congress, 
> > overseen by an emerging  Supreme Court that may overturn or highly 
> > restrict Roe.V Wade, restrict stem cell research, etc? I'm missng 
> > something here.
> 
> I don't think anyone is predicting it could happen
> under the current administration.  If it were ever
> to get to the turning-over stage, it would be because
> the administration had become less boobish and the
> Congress less corrupt to start with.  And the Supreme
> Court doesn't "oversee" anything; it's purely
> reactive.

Sorry if my wording was imprecise. I am sure you get my intent (though
I think "overseen" that is reatively sets the boundaries is a
reasoable descriptor. 

 
> Aside from the fact that the administration and
> Congress have refused to fund it adequately, the
> Veterans Administration shows that government-run
> health care *can* function well in this country.

Sorry, lots of horror stories there too. My experience and
observations is that gov't run programs generally are less efficient
and innovative than those provided by the competitive market private
sector, and provide far less consumer choice. A problem with current
health care is that it an entrenched system with run amuck with
dominating influences on congress and the administration. Shifting
more health care programs to the government simple increases the power
of the entrenched entities, increasing  costs even more, while
reducing consumer choice and innovation.

What will drive health care costs down is more competition between
providers and increased information and choice among consumers --
while providing a viable form of universal coverage.

This could be done overnight -- though a 5 year phase-in would be less
disruptive.

- provide a $4000 or so tax credit per capita that can be claimed via
the tax system with the submission of private health care insurance
receipts. 

- fund this via an elimination of the mortgage interest tax deduction
for homes assessed above $50,000. (Tax incentives for all but the
lowest homeowner strata is not needed to spur "homeownership" -- the
only economic/social justification for such incentives.

- Mandate health insure providers who, want to participate in this
tax-credit funding, provide wide-scale pooling for group coverage, and
provide "best in class" cost caps for common procedures, similar to
those used in some health insurance options.

- Allow health care consumers to use foreign providers, and include 
travel as part of the covered expenses. 

- Publish, and provide on-line, easily comparable data between
providers of costs, coverage options, consumer and physican-peer
evaluations, and detailed finacial statements and performance measures.

For "consumers" tax payers, costs will shift -- many will realize
similar after tax disposible income levels compared to the present. 
Many tax drivers will be reduced including funding emergency rooms
(esssentially a major component of existing  public funded medical,   
international competitiveness will improve (as corporate halth care
costs, a huge part of corporate costs, are reduced), national economic
productivty will increase as health improves improve,  particularly
for the currently uninsured (reduced sick days, reduced disabilites,
etc), salaries will rise to compensate employees for their reduced
benefits package (no or less corporate funded healthcare), home prices
will decrease as incentives move out of housing sector, etc. 

I prefer something along the lines of the above -- a competitive,
market-driven, pro-consumer choice system -- to another bloated,
stogy, bureaucratic, one-choice, goverment health care program. Your
tastes may vary.





 







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to