« Robber Baron Redux | Main | Playing the Violin »

October 05, 2010

Comments

Corruption in the United States is different than what you see in third world countries. Instead of having to grease the palm of the guy behind the counter at the DMV to get your drivers license issued, or bribe the cop to let you go after he stopped you for no reason (tho' I'm sure this probably happens somewhere in the U.S.), our corruption is at the highest levels of the federal government, in the halls of congress and in the executive branch contracting and rule-making processes.

Good times.

Folks over 65 are generally insured on the public dime via Medicare.

Folks who are truly indigent, and folks with a variety of truly expensive chronic illnesses, are insured on the public dime via Medicaid.

So, a lot of the difficult-to-manage and expensive folks are not even in the mix.

If private insurers can't make a living insuring the rest of us without cherry-picking and/or kicking folks to the curb when they actually get sick, then maybe it's just not economically viable to provide health insurance for profit.

The purpose of HCR is not to deliver the populace to private industries in a manner to their liking. The purpose of HCR is to facilitate access to health care.

annoint

anoint

/petpeeve

Fixed Slarti. Thanks for the edit help.

"The health reform law did not deliver the uninsured in the way that insurers wanted," said veteran healthcare analyst Sheryl Skolnick, senior vice president at CRT Capital Group.

That really is priceless.

"The health reform law did not deliver the uninsured in the way that insurers wanted,"

Render unto United Health Care that which is United Health Care's.

Some GOP/T Party candidates openly campaign on abolishing Medicaid/Medicare/VC/Social Security in favor of 'free market solutions' (or even no solution at all). Others do so behind a curtain of euphemisms. And the depressing thing is, they are not laughed (or hunted) out of town.

For some reason, the whole discussion of robber barons and healthcare always has me thinking of Rick Scott.

Not sure where I'm going with that, other than I'm leaning heavily toward voting for his opponent.

I'm leaning heavily toward voting for his opponent.

...whose great-grandfather and great-great-uncle, it turns out, were very close.

The real opportunity here is for the Democrats to highlight who the health insurers are supporting and make the case that repeal of the health reform bill or defunding it only serves to support the agenda of these insurers while underserving the population. The question is whether the Democrats will demonstrate the level of aggressiveness to highlight this news. So far, they have been too passive in the promotional front.

Health care reform has been a nightmare for everyone. "Child only" policies are not available and who can blame the insurers for pulling them.

November is going to be a very interesting month.

Health care reform has been a nightmare for everyone

liar.

Health care reform has been a nightmare for everyone

liar.

Seconded. That's a lie.

"Child only" policies are not available and who can blame the insurers for pulling them.

Me. I blame them.

If private insurers can't make a living at insuring the population that remains after the elderly and the indigent have been taken out of the mix by Medicare and Medicaid, then we should recognize that as a market failure and respond appropriately.

And "respond appropriately" does not, in my mind, consist of writing them great big checks.

Things that are necessary but not economic should be addressed by the public sector. I don't really give a crap if it's by the feds, the states, the counties, or your neighborhood block association. But I don't see the value in having people go without health insurance to preserve the "right" of private insurers to make big piles of money.

They can straighten up and fly right, or get out.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad