3 ms·
> is the provider's way of saying "reduces the income I am accustomed to.". The "provider" is not a single person. So to reduce the income of the organization,
by ars 8y ago
> is the provider's way of saying "reduces the income I am accustomed to.".
The "provider" is not a single person. So to reduce the income of the organization, you have to fire people or reduce their salary.
I think you are thinking you can reduce their profits, but you can't. Instead if you feel they are charging to much, that directly translates into lost jobs or lower pay.
It might be necessary, but just as long as you know what you are advocating.
Can you imagine a politician running on a platform of firing healthcare workers?
- gizmo686 8y agoWe have politicians running on a platform of abolishing insurance companies. That is as close to a platform of fireing people as you can get.
- ars 8y agoThat's true, but that's not the same as firing Dr's or Nurses. From https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-industry-overview https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-industry... it seems insurance companies add about 20% to the cost of healthcare. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/sep/20/bernie-s/comparing-administrative-costs-private-insurance-a/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/sep... says 12%. The same article says Medicare is 2% with the assistance of industry groups, but would cost more without them. So, abolishing insurance companies would save maybe 5%. That's not zero, but it's not exactly a lot, and would not come close to what's needed.
- cheerlessbog 8y agoThey would run on a platform of "pay less for Healthcare" and concern for Healthcare Jobs would not play a major role in the debate, if history is a guide.