Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
Another perspective, however, is that those who have insurance subsidize the uninsured by paying higher costs for services, and hence higher insurance rates, to make up for ER visits and unpaid medical bills by the uninsured. Another thing is the the unions provide high value health care coverage at a lower costs through the operation of labor/management health care trusts that have just a fraction of the overhead of insurance companies because they are not run for a profit and they don't pay advertising expenses and commissions. The result of taxation would likely result in the diminution of benefits for members of organizations who have maintained benefits efficiently, and who have fought long and hard to obtain that level of protection.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
Point taken. The system is so entrenched that it's going nowhere. I know it smacks of socialism (eegads), but I think a taxpayer funded single payer system is the right way to go. The trouble is that there are winners and losers for any such huge change (and I'd likely be a loser).
BTW, I don't fault the unions at all for their stance on this, but our "system" is such a hodge-podge of inefficiency that radical surgery may be the only truly effective option. There are, however, too many entrenched interests for radical surgery to even be contemplated. So, we'll just tinker around the edges.