For the past few months, one of the big topics across the US has been health care reform. Embedded in this discussion has been how to insure the greatest number of people at the least amount of cost. One issue that I haven't seen discussed at all is why is insurance part of the health care equation to begin with?
Every person is born and every person dies. Between these two points on the spectrum, every single one of us will become sick or injured at one time or another. About the only way a person could avoid either is if he or she lived inside a bubble and they still might end up going crazy (i.e., they might need some mental health intervention). So, the question of a person needing health care is not an if, but a when.
Since preventive and maintenance health care is needed, in one form or another, by every person who walks the face of the earth, why isn't it treated as a right? We don't have insurance policies for free speech!! I've never heard of anyone paying a monthly or yearly premium to insure that she or he can speak their mind. I certainly haven't taken out an insurance policy to insure that I can type whatever I might on this blog. So, why should I need insurance for my health?
In a democracy or republic, one of the central responsibilities of the state is to craft laws and policies to protect people's rights. Here, in the US, the government doesn't outsource the protection of the freedom of religion to outside companies. No, it is handled by the US Congress and the various state legislatures.
So, why are outside companies put in charge of protecting our right of health? In a capitalist system, the whole point of any company is to generate profits and we've seen easily that this aim often conflicts with the health rights of the people. Insurance companies routinely deny needed procedures, exclude pre-existing conditions and kick people off their plan if they get too sick and/or their needs become too costly.
While we all like to rant and rave when insurance companies behave in this manner, the system dictates that they do so! The chief way any company can sustain a healthy profit margin is to hold down costs and sick people cost a pretty penny!! If an insurance company simply allowed every test, procedure, operation and what not to move forward with little or no scrutinizing, said company would soon be out of business and their customers would be out a lot of money with no coverage to boot!
Consequently, these health care insurance companies are behaving in a manner that helps to insure their own economic survival.
So, from my perspective, the problem IS NOT how insurance companies manage their business; it's the fact that insurance companies are allowed to be players in the health care industry at all. As Bill Maher has stated several times, not everything in this world needs to generate a profit and health care should be one of those things.
Every person is born and every person dies. Between these two points on the spectrum, every single one of us will become sick or injured at one time or another. About the only way a person could avoid either is if he or she lived inside a bubble and they still might end up going crazy (i.e., they might need some mental health intervention). So, the question of a person needing health care is not an if, but a when.
Since preventive and maintenance health care is needed, in one form or another, by every person who walks the face of the earth, why isn't it treated as a right? We don't have insurance policies for free speech!! I've never heard of anyone paying a monthly or yearly premium to insure that she or he can speak their mind. I certainly haven't taken out an insurance policy to insure that I can type whatever I might on this blog. So, why should I need insurance for my health?
In a democracy or republic, one of the central responsibilities of the state is to craft laws and policies to protect people's rights. Here, in the US, the government doesn't outsource the protection of the freedom of religion to outside companies. No, it is handled by the US Congress and the various state legislatures.
So, why are outside companies put in charge of protecting our right of health? In a capitalist system, the whole point of any company is to generate profits and we've seen easily that this aim often conflicts with the health rights of the people. Insurance companies routinely deny needed procedures, exclude pre-existing conditions and kick people off their plan if they get too sick and/or their needs become too costly.
While we all like to rant and rave when insurance companies behave in this manner, the system dictates that they do so! The chief way any company can sustain a healthy profit margin is to hold down costs and sick people cost a pretty penny!! If an insurance company simply allowed every test, procedure, operation and what not to move forward with little or no scrutinizing, said company would soon be out of business and their customers would be out a lot of money with no coverage to boot!
Consequently, these health care insurance companies are behaving in a manner that helps to insure their own economic survival.
So, from my perspective, the problem IS NOT how insurance companies manage their business; it's the fact that insurance companies are allowed to be players in the health care industry at all. As Bill Maher has stated several times, not everything in this world needs to generate a profit and health care should be one of those things.
You said it well and I think when Obama said it would be too disruptive to go to single payer, it was to the stock market he was referring. Basically we could make insurance be non-profit. Several states do that and the overhead is 10%. The insurance companies aren't satisfied with less than 31%. Where does that go? What does our health problems or fear of health problems actually fund?
ReplyDeleteRain,
ReplyDeleteI don't care what we call it or the specifics of the arrangements. I just think we need a system in which, if a person is sick or injured, you just go to the doctor and hand them your card (like what happens to me when I go to a medical professional and hand them my Medicaid card).
exactly! why go through insurance at all? what is the purpose of health insurance other than to raise the cost of healthcare and make the insurance companies rich?
ReplyDeletemy mom has lupus and my dad lost his job, so for half a year they didn't have insurance and no one would let my mom onto their insurance plan! she had to pay over $500 per month in prescription meds alone.
btw, i agree with the core concepts of most of your political posts... this kind of perplexes me, since you are a self proclaimed socialist and i'm rather libertarian, if anything. i don't find myself agreeing with marx on most counts, yet i seem to agree with what you post most of the time.
ReplyDeleteIktomi,
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to your mom illustrates to me how unethical our current setup is. Having to shell out $500 for meds per month is downright vulgar!
BTW, maybe you're a socialist and you don't know it! :D Modern socialism and Marxism don't necessarily go hand in hand. Many of today's Democratic Socialists are more in line with folks like Gene Debs, Norman Thomas & Michael Harrington.
Heck, Bill Maher promotes himself as a Lib, but many Libs consider him a Democratic Socialist.
Did you just make up "our right to health?" What is it? Does every American get protected by this right? Or does it depend on one's income?
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteIt's more than simply an American right, it's a human right. In the US, if we're going to protect free speech, doesn't it make sense to protect the mouth, brain and body of the person speaking?
TRT,
ReplyDeletei did not know that libertarianism and socialism were any kind of compatible! but apparently there's something called "libertarian socialism"... does it sound like you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism