4 ms·

Just like how employer provided medical insurance sounds good on the surface It doesn't even sound good on the surface. it gave employers an incentive to lobb

Just like how employer provided medical insurance sounds good on the surface It doesn't even sound good on the surface. it gave employers an incentive to lobby against socialized medicine I continue to be baffled at the common assumption that the only two possible sources of health insurance are employers or the government.

ygjb 3y ago
Do you have a viable suggestion for an alternative provider?
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  Car insurance model. You go buy your own in a competitive marketplace.
- kbelder 3y ago
  The person themselves? Certainly better than the employer, and some argue that it would be better than the government.
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  Many other OECD states feature private insurance that's (at least largely) not employer-provided. Private coverage may be the main coverage for a large proportion, or even majority, of the population. How does it differ from the US? 1) Less emphasis on or no norm of employers providing healthcare (and this may not be encouraged through tax law, leaving little reason to do it versus just paying more money) 2) These are often more tightly-regulated than in the US—coverage minimums (we kinda have these now, in the US, sort of, so that's nice), disallowing for-profit insurance, et c. 3) There's often a government fallback plan 4) AFAIK every single other OECD state leverages price controls in some fashion, whether de facto or de jure (usually de jure, in the countries with strong private insurance markets), which affects everything, including the price of private health insurance.
  - ethbr0 3y ago
    ACA definitely moved us closer to that model. The biggest misses were providing a government fallback plan (aka Medicare-if-no-other, which I don't think is part of it?) and regulating negotiations between providers and payers (so as to avoid payer combination into a few large companies, who can then get the best prices from payers).
  - lumb63 3y ago
    I feel like a broken record, as I’m always saying what you’re saying when people discuss health insurance. Most folks want to trash public health care under the quick quip of “that’s socialism” or trash “privatized health care” with the current employer-provided system as a proxy for “privatized health care”. People get so caught up defending “their side”, that they forget the objective is to get a better health care system. IMO, a huge number of the problems that exist with US health care (non-portability between jobs, people stuck with plans ill-suited to their needs, lack of access to affordable health care) could be easily addressed by a ban on employer-provided healthcare with a provision to ensure the costs are forwarded to the workers as monetary compensation. Workers can go choose a plan that works for them.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  Two forms that are widely used right now (ie hundreds of millions of people covered): - Private personal insurance (You pay the premium and that's it) - Guild insurance (Same as above, but these companies only insure people within a specific industry)
- jimmygrapes 3y ago
  One example is Medi-Share (https://www.medishare.com https://www.medishare.com). I'm sure plenty people will find some reason to hate it due to the explicitly Christian theme and I'm sure there are some downsides I am not aware of. I do not use it myself, but I know several people who do, and they have used it to cover their bills. To a person, they are quite pleased with the cost and idea behind it. I haven't dug into it, but I find no issue on the surface. Maybe they refuse to cover sex change surgery or something and that makes them Literally The Worst, I don't know. The idea of "everyone puts in a bit and when someone needs help they take some out" is the basis of insurance as a concept, and it seems to work if there's just a little bit of gatekeeping. ACA and coverage of preexisting conditions under the insurance model really fucked things up imo. Not that preexisting conditions shouldn't be cared for, but as an entirely separate model.

ygjb 3y ago

Do you have a viable suggestion for an alternative provider?

SoftTalker 3y ago
Car insurance model. You go buy your own in a competitive marketplace.
kbelder 3y ago
The person themselves? Certainly better than the employer, and some argue that it would be better than the government.
yamtaddle 3y ago
Many other OECD states feature private insurance that's (at least largely) not employer-provided. Private coverage may be the main coverage for a large proportion, or even majority, of the population. How does it differ from the US? 1) Less emphasis on or no norm of employers providing healthcare (and this may not be encouraged through tax law, leaving little reason to do it versus just paying more money) 2) These are often more tightly-regulated than in the US—coverage minimums (we kinda have these now, in the US, sort of, so that's nice), disallowing for-profit insurance, et c. 3) There's often a government fallback plan 4) AFAIK every single other OECD state leverages price controls in some fashion, whether de facto or de jure (usually de jure, in the countries with strong private insurance markets), which affects everything, including the price of private health insurance.
- ethbr0 3y ago
  ACA definitely moved us closer to that model. The biggest misses were providing a government fallback plan (aka Medicare-if-no-other, which I don't think is part of it?) and regulating negotiations between providers and payers (so as to avoid payer combination into a few large companies, who can then get the best prices from payers).
- lumb63 3y ago
  I feel like a broken record, as I’m always saying what you’re saying when people discuss health insurance. Most folks want to trash public health care under the quick quip of “that’s socialism” or trash “privatized health care” with the current employer-provided system as a proxy for “privatized health care”. People get so caught up defending “their side”, that they forget the objective is to get a better health care system. IMO, a huge number of the problems that exist with US health care (non-portability between jobs, people stuck with plans ill-suited to their needs, lack of access to affordable health care) could be easily addressed by a ban on employer-provided healthcare with a provision to ensure the costs are forwarded to the workers as monetary compensation. Workers can go choose a plan that works for them.
carlosjobim 3y ago
Two forms that are widely used right now (ie hundreds of millions of people covered): - Private personal insurance (You pay the premium and that's it) - Guild insurance (Same as above, but these companies only insure people within a specific industry)
jimmygrapes 3y ago
One example is Medi-Share (https://www.medishare.com https://www.medishare.com). I'm sure plenty people will find some reason to hate it due to the explicitly Christian theme and I'm sure there are some downsides I am not aware of. I do not use it myself, but I know several people who do, and they have used it to cover their bills. To a person, they are quite pleased with the cost and idea behind it. I haven't dug into it, but I find no issue on the surface. Maybe they refuse to cover sex change surgery or something and that makes them Literally The Worst, I don't know. The idea of "everyone puts in a bit and when someone needs help they take some out" is the basis of insurance as a concept, and it seems to work if there's just a little bit of gatekeeping. ACA and coverage of preexisting conditions under the insurance model really fucked things up imo. Not that preexisting conditions shouldn't be cared for, but as an entirely separate model.