Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why not allow foreign health insurers to enter our market as a vehicle to further drive down costs?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:47 AM
Original message
Why not allow foreign health insurers to enter our market as a vehicle to further drive down costs?
It's all about competition and the free markets, right?

Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands have been held out as example of places where a public/private insurance synergy has worked successfully. So let's allow insurers from those countries, who already have a track record, into our health insurance marketplace. They have proven that they are able to provide a less expensive product with equal or better outcomes in their countries.

I don't see this as being any different than the automobile market, especially since the "uniquely American model" of healthcare treats it as a commodity rather than a right. American insurance companies need to meet the international challenge or die as a result. They will probably discover to their chagrin that the European companies do not siphon off excessive amounts of profits to their upper executives while they allow consumers to die for lack of treatment. Quel Horreur!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. Man the battle stations. K Street will hire thousands of new lobbyists
just at your suggestion. Nothing will get between big insurance and its obscene profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. OUCH! I LIKE it! PLEASE don't think outside "the box"! ;-) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
3. It's not quite the same
Yes - in the UK the NHS runs alongside the private insurers and they use each other's facilities. The original private insurer here was AMI - think so anyway and that is/was an American Company anyway.

The backup use of private insurers here differs from the USA. The attraction for some is better hospital accomodation and faster treatment on occassions. Not sure exactly what the situation is elsewhere in Europe but in some of the countries private insurers are simply not allowed to make a profit as far as I'm aware - just breakeven.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. The UK and NHS is kind of its own thing
No one anywhere as part of this discussion ( as far as I am aware)is talking about setting up anything like the NHS in the UK, so the comparison just isn't there. I guess our VA hospital system would be the closest thing we have in the US to the NHS. But most confine the discussion to Single PAYER, not Single PROVIDER.

I was speaking specifically of the countries I have heard cited for having private insurers that are highly regulated by their countries - Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands.

The US just does not have the guts or morality to regulate health insurance like other countries do. Profit is more important than the welfare (both physical and fiscal) of the populace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
5. Germany: 92% or more are covered by the 'public option'.
Approximately 92% of the population is covered by a 'Statutory Health Insurance' plan, which provides a standardized level of coverage through any one of approximately 1100 public or private sickness funds. Standard insurance is funded by a combination of employee contributions, employer contributions and government subsidies on a scale determined by income level. Higher income workers sometimes choose to pay a tax and opt out of the standard plan, in favor of 'private' insurance. The latter's premiums are not linked to income level but instead to health status.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care#Germany

The public option has one standardized level of coverage and is funded by 'mandates' on employers, employees, and government subsidies determined by income levels. There is no 'individual mandate' that puts the burden solely on the individual to purchase private insurance.

Almost everyone is in the 'public' option but it seems that despite all the whining here in our kleptocratic freemarket dystopia, public and private insurance plans coexist within this framework and have since 1883.

The German model would be a good starting point for a system here that was not 'single payer' but did provide excellent universal care with normal costs and room for private insurance companies (that are not simply raping captured consumers for every dollar they can extract) to continue to exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Sounds good to me in almost all regards. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
6. I see no evidence of any private insurance system in Sweden,
All the links I have indicate that Sweden has a single payer universal system funded by taxes collected at the local level as determined by regional entities called "county councils".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Article from the Canadian Medical Association Journal about Sweden's growing private sector
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/179/2/129
Public–private health care delivery becoming the norm in Sweden
Christopher Mason
Stockholm, Sweden
**********************************************************************************************************************************

You are correct about the increasing private sector in Sweden is coming from private providers, not private insurance, so I do stand corrected.

I had read that Sweden was country that was exploring alternatives to strictly public health and was adding a private component which I misinterpreted to mean insurance, not care. Silly me, I should have known the Swedes would be focused on care itself and not insurance.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fla_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
9. Why not just start our own?
Why hasn't some very well connected person, or group of like minded people formed an insurance company to compete? If profits are what is jacking up the prices, surely a company based on reasonable profits could, if not corner the market, compete to a point where the others had to cut profits or loose business.

What could be better than "Wal-marting" their asses into bankruptcy? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. I have to think that the intial capitalization of any insurance provider would be
pretty steep, almost insurmountable. It is true that a vacuum exists and you would expect someone to rush in to fill the void, but notice how no one has?

There are lots of crap "I can't Believe It's Not Health Insurance" schemes out there that prey on individuals and small businesses - because you always want to get your health insurance from a handlettered sign on a telephone pole!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fla_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I find it hard to believe
that there isn't enough capital in the progressive movement to make it happen. I'm not talking about everyone here sending in $5 to get it up and running,(who would buy insurance from DUI anyway, maybe if we had a better name... :shrug: ) but surely there are enough like minded people with the funds to get it going. Walmart started as one small store. People didn't go to sleep one day and the next morning FedEx trucks were all over the highway. Hell, set up one company, in one state, and point to it as a perfect example. I can see the ad now...

Hi, I'm Michael Moore*, after filming the documentary, Sicko, I looked for a company that had the right idea about how insurance should be run. I found that company, PHI, Progressive Health Insurance (have a classy symbol on the screen). These are not some out of touch suits, but a company built on the idea that people should never take a back seat to profits. So, it you're like me, sick to death of seeing people sick to death, why not give them a call at 1-555-GET-WELL

*Not sure if he would invest/endorse the company.. but it would be a powerful gesture if he did.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeCanWorkItOut Donating Member (182 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
11. And while we're at it, we could add some competition for hospitals and doctors.
The problem is that it's not just the insurance companies causing the excess costs.
It's also the profits of hospitals, doctors, imaging centers, pharmaceutical companies,
all of whom benefit from various monopoly powers.

About the salaries, the British Medical Journal was commenting on that
recently(2007):
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/334/7587/236/FIG2

Another reason their costs are lower is, I believe, because they're
much less obese: longer vacations and better lifestyles help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. We also have no means to compare and contrast costs by different providers.
What does hospital x charge for a tylenol? What about Y?

What does a mammogram cost at one clinic as opposed to another?



We are just told what hospital to report to and standby for the bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
14. Can I buy into Canadian healthcare?
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 03:54 PM by Hawkowl
Excellent idea! In fact, I wonder if Canada can force the issue via NAFTA?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC