RXS676

First of all, my post was intended to be a general discussion along the lines of what the original poster proposed. Not every argument was inteded to be a refutation of a specific argument made by "FighterHayabusa." However, I will respond to a few specifics of the most recent post:

I agree, it isn't a fact, and I fully understand that none of the current proposals will themselves set up a single-payer system. But there are many in Washington, and the president has said so much himself, who do favor a single payer system. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything, and I agree there are many problems in the current system. But I think it is fair to say that current proposals could have some effects that will increase calls for a single-payer system in the future.

There are no proposals being considered that would not allow a business to drop health insurance coverage. You may be thinking of the proposals being considered to require companies who do not provide coverage to pay a fee or tax. But there's nothing to prevent any company of any size from dropping coverage in any of the bills currently being considered. And by the way, additional fees and taxes on small business, especially during a recession, could result in more businesses going under, or having more layoffs, which will increase the number of uninsured who will have to buy coverage on their own.

Fine, you didn't make the claim. Regardless, the possibility exists. A major claim that was made by the president was that if you were happy with your current plan, you would be able to keep it. These are precisely the questions that should be asked and satisfactorily answered by our lawmakers. "I'm sure they thought of this" and "I don't care so I'm not going to look it up" are precisely the attitudes that I fear the most.

Forget the rhetorical devices like "slippery slope." All I'm saying is that more people without group coverage who have to buy insurance on their own, whether they buy coverage through a public plan or not, will lead to more calls for more government involvement in the future.

Again, this was part of a general discussion, not a specific response any claim you had made. Nevertheless, the only reason Medicare and Medicaid haven't killed private insurance is that they are limited to the elderly and the poor, who probably couldn't afford to buy coverage from a private company anyway. If a similar option were offered to the entire population, it would be a different situation.

That's why I said "unless." There are many different proposals that Congress in considering, and that argument relates to that specific hypothetical only.

You're correct, they are hypothetical. I can't predict the future. But I think we need to consider the possible consequences of potential legislation like this, and I think hypothetical scenarios are a perfectly reasonable way to raise questions that should be answered. I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "Wait a minute... what about this? What if this happens?" and expect a clear answer before supporting any kind of reform.

Since this is an airline pilot forum, I think any discussion on healthcare would be "non-professional." In my case, however, I am a CPA and a registered actuary who worked for several years in the healthcare economics department of a Fortune-200 insurance company. My department directly supported the pricing and provider-negotiation functions. I have also had several hospitals and hospital systems as clients, and I am intimately familiar with their finances, cost structure, and the details of how they are paid by Medicare/Medicaid versus private insurance. Currently I work in the finance department of a major hospital system, one of the largest in a major metropolitan area. When it comes to health insurance, and how healthcare is paid for, particular by Medicare and Medicaid, I am far from a "non-professional."

For the record, I admit that single-payer is not inevitable. I admit that no current proprosals in the US will establish single-payer.

However, Canada, the UK, Spain and Italy are all single-payer (i.e. no insurance, government pays for healthcare directly), and Germany and Canada are effectively single-payer (there is insurance but the government provides it). So I think it is fair to say that most universal healthcare systems in the industrialized, Western world ARE single payer.

And it is clear that there is significant support among the president and many in Congress for single-payer, if in principle only and not yet in any specific bill or current proposal.