Before you all go crazy on me and say that my last post was essentially single-payer, let me be clear. It's a modified single payer plan. It's expanding the Medicare system only to those who do not have insurance, cannot get insurance, or lose their insurance. And it provides an employer option to purchase healthcare at a rate that won't bankrupt him.
Under this proposal, once a persons situation changes and they are either able to obtain healthcare through their emplyer or are able to afford either the government's or private insurers, then they must do so. And, the same scenario would apply to employers. All of it would be sliding scale oriented up to the level charged by private insurers.
Both the government and private insurance would pay the same for tests, procedures, etc. which would bring costs, and premiums down. This proposal really answers all of the issues. It provides insurance to those who don't have it, those who can't afford it now, employers who are struggling to provide it, and would establish lower costs and fees. Isn't that what the bill is for anyway?
But having said that, what the hell is wrong with a single-payer system anyway? Can anyone provide me with a non-hysterical, cogent argument? I'll be here waiting.
HamsterPrez
No comments:
Post a Comment