To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Respectfully disagree.
The “end points” of this reform, as I see them, are:
1. Eliminate or greatly reduce the number of uninsured
2. Increase people’s job mobility by breaking the link between insurance and employment
I would say that both are worthy goals.
I would also point out, that health cost reduction, while often mentioned as one of the goals of this reform, is indeed hard to find anywhere in the proposed measures. However, “systemic problems” you listed play only a secondary role in raising that cost. The primary reason our healthcare is twice more expensive than in other developed countries is simply the quantity of medical procedures and medical equipment used in the US, which is way beyond the point of diminishing return. There is some hope that increased competition for individual policy holders might nudge the industry toward more cost-effective plans, but this will be a very gentle nudge.
Finally, on public option: I’m not aware of any example, where the government was able to successfully compete against private business on a level playing field. At best, the public option will become another loss-making monster like USPS or Amtrak. At worst, the government will start squeezing out private competition in the name of the greater good.