4 ms·

Without the bargaining power of large groups of employees, how will reasonable costs and levels of service be maintained? It's well established that people on

Without the bargaining power of large groups of employees, how will reasonable costs and levels of service be maintained? It's well established that people on their own without insurance get charged much higher rates than people with insurance get charged for the same procedures at the same hospitals. Presumably the same effects apply to individuals trying to obtain a price for insurance versus an employer bargaining for a group of employees.

brc 11y ago
Seems to work ok in many places around the world and in different products within the us. You don't need 'group buying' for auto or home insurance, or car or home purchases. In fact group buying probably hinders the ability to get the right product/person match. Of all the problems to solve, it seems pretty easy. Even if that just means groupon for benefits.
- rspeer 11y ago
  I'll bite. Where are these "many places around the world" that have your desired laissez-faire approach to health care? Are you talking about places like India or what? Also, I would hate to see a health care system as badly managed as Groupon.
  - brc 11y ago
    I live in Australia. I have private health insurance. It's an old policy from when I was employed with a package. The policy costs no more than when it was part of that package. That's maybe because the policy is priced based on me (age mostly) rather than the employer. I'm not 100% sure why there's no real difference between employer based policies and personal policies. Anyway point is the problem is solve able.
    - rspeer 11y ago
      I'm just getting this from Wikipedia, but: "Health care in Australia is universal. The federal government pays a large percentage of the cost of services in public hospitals." I would happily have Australia's solution in the US. It would go much farther than Obamacare.
gedy 11y ago
My group policy cost more (~60%) working at a corporation than my paying for it on my own - because they are averaging costs for everyone.
- mbreese 11y ago
  Are you sure you're making an apples to apples comparison?

brc 11y ago

Seems to work ok in many places around the world and in different products within the us. You don't need 'group buying' for auto or home insurance, or car or home purchases. In fact group buying probably hinders the ability to get the right product/person match. Of all the problems to solve, it seems pretty easy. Even if that just means groupon for benefits.

rspeer 11y ago
I'll bite. Where are these "many places around the world" that have your desired laissez-faire approach to health care? Are you talking about places like India or what? Also, I would hate to see a health care system as badly managed as Groupon.
- brc 11y ago
  I live in Australia. I have private health insurance. It's an old policy from when I was employed with a package. The policy costs no more than when it was part of that package. That's maybe because the policy is priced based on me (age mostly) rather than the employer. I'm not 100% sure why there's no real difference between employer based policies and personal policies. Anyway point is the problem is solve able.
  - rspeer 11y ago
    I'm just getting this from Wikipedia, but: "Health care in Australia is universal. The federal government pays a large percentage of the cost of services in public hospitals." I would happily have Australia's solution in the US. It would go much farther than Obamacare.

gedy 11y ago

My group policy cost more (~60%) working at a corporation than my paying for it on my own - because they are averaging costs for everyone.

mbreese 11y ago
Are you sure you're making an apples to apples comparison?