anton wrote:Insurance companies exist to make money. Period. They will game the system to the fullest extent that society will allow.
Pharmaceutical companies exist to make money. Period. They will game the system to the fullest extent that society will allow.
Malpractice attorneys exist to make money. Period. They will game the system to the fullest extent that society will allow.
Physicians exist to cure disease.
As for the last statement; doctors also expect to turn a profit. Since when should their services be free or more accessible via government force? If the government feels it needs more "access" to doctors, it should stop limiting their capabilities to provide services and numbers within the market. That is common sense; why the restraint against common sense?
There is just one wee-bit of a problem involved with the above "health care system". The whole thing has to filter its way through the government at many levels so political social engineers can tinker with the market in order to legislate in favor of uncompetitive policies levied against favored/un-favored competitors within a specific market, as well as mandate policies levied against/for entire sectors within the "system" in order to provide revenues on behalf of specific sectors located within said politicians districts. Basically, these scenarios artificially pit places like Madison against Howard WI (Howard is outside of Green Bay. A lot of big "insurers" are located there, while actual innovators and providers are located in Madison. "Insurers" tend to have more sway within the government, because they need the government). All of the above entities are not allowed to interact with each other openly in order to satisfy their self interests amongst themselves, minus the social tinkering. Unfortunately, this will never go away, most people hate the idea of open markets for healthcare because they believe the government will shield them against risk. This is false, but IÃ¢??m sure some interests will continue to push this scare.
Things are the way they are. This country will never see a "universal delivery system"; which is a good thing because that system spits in the face of meritocracy, which is the single most important aspect of American culture.
I'm fairly sure the country will gravitate towards a proposed system in California; which is mandatory "insurance for all" in order to eventually formulate a nation wide risk pool against catastrophic loss. This will finally put a clamp down on "insurers" who basically don't pay out when one of their customers gets hurt in a big and expensive way. Currently in these cases, "insurers" are better off not paying for these types of situations. Instead they pass them off onto the legal system in order to play the legal hold out game.
It's time "insurers" get back to being "insurers" not private healthcare rationing entities.