Dave Johnson Loc: Grand Rapids, Michigan

In light of recent posts I thought I'd like to stir a bit of discussion about Health Care Insurance. This is not about "Obama Care." I propose a hypothetical scenario for your consideration. This is not likely to occur but just for fun tell me what you like and don't like. There are only two rules: Civility, and Reason. The question is: "What would happen if everyone buys and maintains their own insurance. No employer involvement at all."

I believe insurance companies would be more competitive because they would be selling a product to the public. They would have to look for ways to be more efficient. An example might be standardized forms.

Consumers would have to be more savvy and more informed about coverage options so that you can get the most value for your premium payment.

It would be necessary to pay higher wages but employers would have staff and money freed up for investment, presumably expanding employment opportunities.
I know it's kind of a day dream but what do you think?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Without getting too deeply into this most insurance is standardized as it is regulated by the insurance commission of each state within each state much of the insurance is standardized. I hold an unused insurance license which is to say that I studied enough about it to get an adjusters license a few years back but never actually worked in the field.

There are no easy answers to the healthcare problems that our country faces, the price of care is nonsensical as a 2 day visit to a hospital can cost in the 10's of thousands of dollars so there is definitely a problem. My ex-wife was a registered nurse and years ago patient care was more about documentation than it was about actual patient care... some say that is because of tort actions. But one thing that could increase competition would be standardization among the different states and allowing insurance to be sold across state lines. I am not so sure how effective that would be at reducing the price, but in reducing the monopoly powers granted to a handful of providers in different states sure could not hurt.

Dr. Carson's ideas about health savings accounts is also an interesting idea, allow tax credits to seed health savings accounts so that individuals could pay for their care out of those accounts that would be allowed to be passed on to future generations. The effect would be a more judicious review by patients as they spent healthcare dollars as they would be spending money from their own account rather than the money of their employer or an insurance company.

Those are just a few thoughts, healthcare insurance is clearly not my area of expertise.

Dave Johnson Loc: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Nor mine I just wonder if conceptually personal insurance isn't a better idea.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

It would greatly increase the cost of insurance. My employer, Los Angeles Unified School District, has about 35,000 teachers. That gives the district a strong negotiating position each year with insurers when setting rates. My cost would skyrocket if I had to go on the open market and obtain insurance.

And not all employers would spend money on investment. And why would they hire more? If doing this doesn't increase demand for their product or service, which it wouldn't, why would they increase their costs? It would have no benefit for them.

I think the only answer is Medicare for everyone. We already pay for Medicare, why not increase our costs somewhat and cover everyone with a single-payer program? The $800/month my employer currently pays for my private insurance could go to covering me in a single payer program. We would greatly reduce the cost of insurance, since private insurers would be shut out.

Dave Johnson Loc: Grand Rapids, Michigan

I actually thought about including that scenario in the post but i thought it would get messy. I also thought about no insurance for anyone. Pay as you go.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

C'mon, you can't be serious with that. What happens to the unemployed? What happens when a catastrophic illness or injury occurs? I obviously don't know you, but do you have the financial means to be able to afford millions of dollars for prolonged cancer treatment? I know I sure don't.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

Single payer system seems to be the answer. The right will yell socialized medicine, but then again they yell don't touch my medicare!

Dave Johnson Loc: Grand Rapids, Michigan

tschmath, No I'm definitely not backing a plan for no insurance, This is purely a mental exercise. With no insurance I believe doctors would leave the profession in droves, unable to maintain facilities and staff. I'm pretty sure prices for services would come down :)

Personally I'd like to see a single payer basic system, pretty much expand medicare to cover the basic needs of everyone. "Premiums" would be levied as a tax, much like Social Security. Optional enhanced coverage could be purchased by those who wish to. One thing I would like to see that even the conservatives would have to agree with is no employer participation. Leave the businesses to do their business, leave the consumer to purchase what they want. This is just my opinion and to be honest my opinion could be changed with a well reasoned argument.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

The only problem I have with your solution is that currently employers pay into medicare just as employees do. Are you suggesting they no longer are obligated to do that?

Another thought: with single payer, there should be no additional need for coverage. Doing that would create a two-tiered system of health delivery, with the haves and have nots. I believe everyone is entitled to the same health care, regardless of income.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

It certainly is an interesting idea. But it would have to be accompanied by some basic insurance reform to prevent the abuses that the ACA is attempting to address (kicking you out when you get sick, pre-existing conditions, etc).

I think taking the cost of insurance away from private employers (something they brought on themselves during the wage-price controls during WWII) would certainly make us more competitive in the global marketplace.

Of course, as another poster noted, there would have to be some provision for the unemployed, those facing catastrophic illness,
etc., so government would have to have some constructive role unless we choose to live in a society that would be a dog-eat-dog world of unbridled capitalism. Poor people dying in the streets in large numbers does not contribute to a stable system.

ttlthor Loc: Grapevine, Texas

I'm in partial agreement with tschmath. Large buying power does have a way of procuring better pricing, i.e. Wal-Mart. I think the only way an individual could secure any kind of decent pricing would be through a consumer co-op. I've always felt the ACA was an unnecessary waste of time and money. It was pretty much brought about to insure a relatively small per centage of the population that did not have employer supplied coverage or could not afford it on their own. The ACA sounds noble on the surface, but as Ted Cruz says, it's a train wreak in actual practice. I believe resources would be better placed in eliminating the fraud and corruption in Medicare and expanding it where required. But, let's face it. Any system run by the gov't is, in my humble opinion, doomed to fail. Too many rules, too many chiefs, and too much bull sh*t.

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

Ole sarg, you still amaze me. YOU are the one guy at the party that always throws a turd in the swimming pool. The people who "yell" "don't touch my Medicare" do so because They Paid For It. I repeat: They Paid For It!
Perhaps you've never been employed in the private sector, ole sarg, but those who have, had Medicare premiums deducted from their paychecks, just like Social Security...get it?

william48 Loc: New Philadelphia,Ohio

There are a growing number of doctors that are not accepting any kind of insurance. You pay cash.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

Single payer would be just like Medicare. Same idea, same deduction, but you would obviously be paying more than you do now for Medicare because it would be for a longer time. Instead of your current private insurance premium or your employer's, that money would go to a Medicare plan for your whole life. Sounds like a great deal to me.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

I don't believe that. I know Sharon Angle proposed we pay with chickens, but I would like to see evidence of your claim.