See "Stop Trusting the Health Insurance Crooks", Allison Kilkenny, Huffington Post, 2009-08-05
I found it uncomfortable to watch all of the Congressional testimony included in this article. How many cases like this happen and how often? My guess is too many and too often.
At least we get to elect the bosses of government bureaucrats. We can't say the same about the bosses of corporate bureaucrats.
Showing posts with label public option. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public option. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Monday, August 03, 2009
Health care may not be terminally ill but some of the terminally ill have no health care
Terry Larkin, an insurance consultant, wrote an opinion piece that appears in today's Star Tribune's business section and will be available for a few days for free, "Health care system is not terminally ill".
He used two examples to prove that we have the "finest health care in the world".
First, he wrote that people from all over the world come to the U.S. to get medical care. As one commenter wrote, it is the rich who come to places like Mayo for specialized health care. Larkin ignored what kind of care the not so rich receive in those countries. Using the same argument, we could say that Mayo has the finest health care in the U.S. because people from all over the country go there. What about the health care for people who can't afford to travel to Rochester or for people whose health insurance doesn't provide for out of system care?
Second, Larkin wrote about the care that Sen. Ted Kennedy received for his latest illness. He enumerated the choices that Kennedy had, including a 4 to 2 decision against Kennedy having a certain procedure. Kennedy went with the 2 and had the procedure. Larkin claimed the "public option" wouldn't allow us ordinary mortals to make that choice.
Larkin ignored two important issues. One, Kennedy is a multi-millionaire and can afford to pay for such choices. Two, do the insurance companies that Larkin consults with allow their policy holders to make such choices?
Even if these insurance companies do allow such choices, would the current health care bills disallow such choices? He forgets that the "public option" is just that, an option. Unfortunately, some current insurance policies don't allow many options, a corporate bureaucracy sees to that.
He used two examples to prove that we have the "finest health care in the world".
First, he wrote that people from all over the world come to the U.S. to get medical care. As one commenter wrote, it is the rich who come to places like Mayo for specialized health care. Larkin ignored what kind of care the not so rich receive in those countries. Using the same argument, we could say that Mayo has the finest health care in the U.S. because people from all over the country go there. What about the health care for people who can't afford to travel to Rochester or for people whose health insurance doesn't provide for out of system care?
Second, Larkin wrote about the care that Sen. Ted Kennedy received for his latest illness. He enumerated the choices that Kennedy had, including a 4 to 2 decision against Kennedy having a certain procedure. Kennedy went with the 2 and had the procedure. Larkin claimed the "public option" wouldn't allow us ordinary mortals to make that choice.
Larkin ignored two important issues. One, Kennedy is a multi-millionaire and can afford to pay for such choices. Two, do the insurance companies that Larkin consults with allow their policy holders to make such choices?
Even if these insurance companies do allow such choices, would the current health care bills disallow such choices? He forgets that the "public option" is just that, an option. Unfortunately, some current insurance policies don't allow many options, a corporate bureaucracy sees to that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)