FYI, the comments to this article are VERY nsfw. Weirdly.
-XC
-XC PS - There is no benefit to getting it right first or last, it's just a cost that gets passed on at some point to the taxpayer.
- Really? Possibly the largest government program since social security might increase costs...
That's basically my point. Under the current system, costs are spiraling out of control. The system we have is a failure. So, if Obamacare fails to contain costs, nothing much has changed. I'm not sure why conservatives work so hard to protect employer-provided healthcare. It's such a huge hurdle for small business. Say that I start hiring people for Hubski, one first order of business is to figure out how to cover their healthcare needs; and, God forbid anyone of them gets a chronic health condition and sends my premiums through the roof... I have serious doubts that Obama's private provider mandate will control costs. IMO the insurance companies will likely just get their cake and eat it too. That's why they are all onboard with his plan. Healthcare is something where people can't much control for their need. Which is a silly thing to build a competitve market on. Personally, I don't care if my money goes to Uncle Sam or Cigna, I only care what my ROI is. Currently, Cigna takes a hell of a lot, and wants more for less with every passing year. I don't want to abolish private insurance, but I bet a public option would change the playing field. It wouldn't be the best care, but it would be an option for those with few.
My personal bent is that the smallest amount of regulation provides the widest landscape for innovation. Witness the speed of innovation for consumer electronics versus medical devices, for example. If they were dismantling regulations and market interference and devolving it to the states I'd be a lot happier. Oh, and check the profit margin for Cigna versus, say, Apple or Starbucks. They're working awful hard for that money. -XC