Musings of Maaia – Justin

A few random thoughts on health care reform (and an apology for the “tossed-off” nature of this post):

1. Everybody agrees that the health insurance companies are making much too much money, are making life too difficult for doctors, and also they hinder patients from getting the care they need. (For example, I pay $7000 per year for coverage for me and my family, even though I, a former cancer patient who always needs regular check-ups and flu shots and stuff, only uses a small percentage of that money on a yearly basis. If they are making money off of me, then they are making even more money off of someone with no medical history. Also, I would use even less of that money if I were paying my expenses out-of-pocket, since the prices would be cheaper. The prices for doctor services are high because it’s a bartering game between the doctor and the insurance company. If the doctor says “$100″, the ins. co. says “no. only $75″ So, the next time the doctor bills for that service, he says “$125″ and the insurance company says “no, only $95″. Finally, you have the situations like my flu shot. I got one, and my insurance company refused to pay for it. I had to write a letter that said “I am a former cancer patient. My oncologist told me I need to get a flu shot every year. You can either pay the $40 for the flu shot, or you can pay the $1000 when I get hospitalized with the flu because I no longer have a spleen to help me fight infection. Please direct any further correspondence to my lawyer.” Of course, once they read this, they paid it. But should I have to defend myself like that?

2. People who have satisfactory coverage don’t mind reform, except that they are worried that it will affect their good coverage.

3. Many people have no coverage or they have terribly expensive coverage. These people would like to see reform…

4. However, the proposed ways to fix these problems of no coverage and expensive coverage are being ridiculously and almost violently opposed. The problem with expense has been linked to the lack of competition (since most people don’t have a choice of companies, but have to go with the one or two companies their employer offers. The reason for this system is that, in the old days, the employer was able to get better and cheaper coverage by working out a deal with the insurance company, saying that they would only offer this one plan to their employees if the plan would cost x amount of dollars). To fix this competition problem, the government either has to step-in and tell employers they can’t “hook-up” with insurance companies any more, or the government has to step-in and create an affordable health care plan that employees (like me) could buy if they don’t like the options offered by the employer.
Opponents are calling this a “big-government” take-over and saying that it is the government overstepping its bounds. But for some reason they don’t seem to have that same outrage for the insurance companies, who are making money like crazy off of the health of people. These opponents are going so far as to label this “Socialism” or “communism,” which shows how ignorant and stupid they are, and that they don’t even know what those words mean. Come on! Health Insurance companies themselves are “socialist,” for God’s sake! We all pay the same amount and then we each take what we need for our health care. THAT IS SOCIALISM! No…wait…that is not how our system works. That is true socialism, and it might actually work!. Our health insurance system does not work. It is “we all pay the same amount, we are allowed to take 75% of what we need, and the rest goes to making some asshole CEO rich.”

5. Another solution, that is already being used in Massachusetts, is to issue tax money to people who have insurance but can’t really afford to pay for it. (I benefit from this one). This method is actually socialist, but the state of Massachusetts claims that it is better for everyone to have insurance, even if it has to be subsidized by tax-money, because it means that everyone will be healthier and will use the emergency room less (see #6 below), which will cost tax-payers less in the end. Apparently, people who don’t have insurance use the emergency room when they need a doctor, and this is expensive. Then, they can’t afford to pay, and so it costs tax payers even more money. So, Massachusetts wants everyone to have insurance and will even help people pay for it because it means everyone will be healthier and it will cost less in the end.

6. In the wake of plans like the Massachusetts one, which requires everyone to buy insurance, or else pay a fine, there are many people who believe you shouldn’t have to have coverage if you don’t want it. Apparently, it is our right not to have to have coverage if we don’t want it. I kind of agree with this in theory (because some days I would just like to put my $7000 in a bank and just use it when I need it), but in practice it doesn’t make sense. The people who complain about this are the same ones who go to the emergency when they have a virus because they don’t have insurance to go see a regular doctor. Also, the $7000 sounds like a lot of money, but not compared to the $100,000 it costs for some crazy surgery you might need. And, the $7000 I pay would only be like $4000 if the government were allowed to step in and put an end to all this nonsense.

7.  That being said, I am, at heart, wary of big government. But I am more wary of big business. At least I get to vote for or against the people who are screwing me in big government.  To the others, all I have to throw is this lousy blog-post.