Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Health Insurance is Like Car Insurance

Obama is wrong on health care. In his effort to win the youth vote and industry support, he is selling car insurance, when he should be selling affordable medical care and health insurance.

Health insurance is like car insurance except that:

--The insured unit will be insured until it is destroyed.
--It will not be replaced by a newer, safer model after a period of years.
--Virtually every subscriber will need to file a claim at some point.
--There is no limit to the amount of damage and cost of repairs.

One of the basic motivators that an insurance salesman must use is fear. Notice the word "garnish" that Obama supporters use to scare themselves. Government taxes and fees are really not garnishment so much as taxes and fees for services that the government provides better than private companies. Evolution has proven that health insurance is one of those services.

Insurance companies add no value to the health care system. All they do is pay or refuse to pay health care providers. They profit more by kicking the health care can down the road in two senses:

-- they don't want us to realize that they are wasteful and unnecessary so they are lobbying against any hint of single-payer, and
-- they'd rather have a dead subscriber than a long suffering one, so they don't pay for preventive care and routine tests if they can avoid it.

In contrast, the US auto insurance companies have been instrumental in saving lives and dollars by fostering improvements in highways, laws and vehicles. They, unlike the health insurers, prefer safe drivers to dead ones.  Not because they are nice, but because it increases their profits.

Bottom line: The Edwards/Clinton plan could lead to a single-payer system. Obama has already conceded that the health insurance companies will be involved in designing the new system. His approach and his fear tactics are not progressive or liberal. They simply buy off the opposition, as the Republicans have been doing for years. This works for them because they are the opposition.

Barak's idea that everyone should have a place at the table is laudable and can be effective in many ways, as it has been in the past. But he shouldn't have tunnel vision. That approach isn't universally effective. If an industry is making a problem worse by its very existence, as with private health insurance, it doesn't need to be involved in designing a solution.


Comments (4)

avatar

I think you make a slight mistake in your analysis. Insurance companies don't add versus a government sponsored plan. They do add value over nothing, though.

The basic idea of insurance is pooled risk, which does add value. They also can negotiate with doctors, hospitals to control costs (unfortunately they don't do this on your behalf, they do it for their own profit margins.)Also, if you take out pre-existing conditions, health, and make premiums based simply on age, age and sex, or age, sex, and local, underwriting and actuarial fees can be stripped to nothing. Along with associated accounting fees (the costs of accounting for medical plans, especially post-retirement medical plans is substantial)

In the end, the debate about mandates versus no mandates is pretty silly, since their is so little data available other than to cite theory.

Neither candidate believes that the insurance industry can be taken out of the equations, though I believe you'll have a better shot at it by making them come to the table in public to answer to their critics in public.

I also believe that setting up a system to provide insurance is a necessary first step to establish its effectiveness. Their are a lot of independent 'experts' that say their ideas for cutting costs are very aggressive; thus, before mandating shouldn't we make sure the infrastructure and costs are settled before committing to something that will have an questionable effect on so many facets of our society? No one has discussed supply, do we have the doctors to cover everyone?

No it is not.
You can make an argument that driving on the publicly financed roadways is a privilege granted by society and so society has a right to impose requirements like skill testing and insurance.
My living on this earth is not a privilege for your social planners to give or take away for reasons of your own. And because it is not a privilege but a right you have no place demanding I insure my life or health. Period.
You do have a right to say that if I choose not to insure and can't afford care that emergency rooms, like doctors, can and should turn me away.
And I would encourage you to do just that. I see no problem with allowing adults to die who choose not to insure.
But don't try to force me into your health care system. I want nothing to do with it.

I'll tell you JTHB, I'm sure the same arguments were made against social security. The issue here is are we going to act like a society, or like a loose affiliation of Lockeian mental substances? The reality is we are a society. We are all interconnected. There are things we, as a society, can't afford to let people opt out of. Letting people die was tried during the Industrial Revolution, when relentless pursuit of so-called self-regulating markets almost destroyed the social fabric. We turned that corner in the 30s. Get over it.

You're right. Framing the right of every person to good health care as an insurance issue runs the discussion off the moral/ethical track. It wasn't enough to sustain the Bush attack on social Security, but unfortunately the majority of people still think of social security as insurance too.

FDR had a perfect storm of events and the right people in power to get Social Security passed. LBJ was in a similar situation with Medicare. It looks like the VA has a healthy squall at his moment. It's going to be tough sledding for anyone who works for true health care reform in the US for the foreseeable future.

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Claire Wilcox



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address