3 ms·

It's not that they can't, more that they don't want to, because that gives them leverage on their employees. Look at the recent GM strike : not happy ? We're cu

by ajnin 7y ago

It's not that they can't, more that they don't want to, because that gives them leverage on their employees. Look at the recent GM strike : not happy ? We're cutting your health insurance. They reversed it ultimately but I bet it'll make people think twice next time they're thinking about going on a strike. And you know what is even more efficient than market-based health insurance and pensions ? Socialist state-level monopolies. Yep, costs in Europe are about half of what they are in the US. Turns out governments are not more inefficient than companies, especially very large ones.

stephen_g 7y ago
We have basically 'Medicare for all' in Australia. Works well. We spend way less as a proportion of GDP than the US on healthcare and the hospitals in the big cities (where they send people for anything serious) are world class. Most things like GPs, physiotherapists, etc. are private but the Medicare system pays for something like 60% to 100% of the bill depending on various factors. You won't usually pay more than $30 for a standard GP consult, for example. Crazily, the private insurers (it's optional) are trying to push for tax breaks to employers if they pay for private health insurance for their employees (more like the US system but basically unheard of here), despite the fact that the private system is already heavily subsidised (big rebate on private health insurance and also tax benefits for moderate and high income earners), and despite the fact that our public system is more efficient (according to studies), so we'd actually be better off just investing that cash in the public system (because of underfunding there are waiting lists for a lot of elective surgery). But the private insurance industry is generally struggling because they've been raising premiums and reducing service (more exclusions and bigger excesses) and our public system is good.

by ajnin 7y ago

stephen_g 7y ago

We have basically 'Medicare for all' in Australia. Works well. We spend way less as a proportion of GDP than the US on healthcare and the hospitals in the big cities (where they send people for anything serious) are world class. Most things like GPs, physiotherapists, etc. are private but the Medicare system pays for something like 60% to 100% of the bill depending on various factors. You won't usually pay more than $30 for a standard GP consult, for example. Crazily, the private insurers (it's optional) are trying to push for tax breaks to employers if they pay for private health insurance for their employees (more like the US system but basically unheard of here), despite the fact that the private system is already heavily subsidised (big rebate on private health insurance and also tax benefits for moderate and high income earners), and despite the fact that our public system is more efficient (according to studies), so we'd actually be better off just investing that cash in the public system (because of underfunding there are waiting lists for a lot of elective surgery). But the private insurance industry is generally struggling because they've been raising premiums and reducing service (more exclusions and bigger excesses) and our public system is good.