Would universal health care in the United States destroy the health insurance industry?

No. If socialized medicine - aka, universal health care, is put in place in the US, the same thing will happen that happens in the UK and Canada - people who CAN afford private insurance and private doctors (better, faster treatment) will have it, and people who can't, get the government healthcare.

Which is ALMOST like what we have right now, except the quality of government healthcare will be lower.

No universal health care would not destroy the health insurancee industry. It would destroy the agent system for health insurance. You would have nobody to buffer you from the insurance companies that can be ruthless. Universal Health care would also destroy the quality of care in this country. I have seen that system at work in Canada. It is great for people that do not have the gumption or forethought to purchase health insuranc. Anything is better than nothing. So people that were never going to purchase health insurance in the first place it would be great. For people who currently have health insurance it would be devastating in the quality of care decline. http://www.lvhealthins.com

Probably not. First, there will most likely STILL be private insurance offered because UHC results in rationed care and goes bankrupt. There are always long waiting lines and all kinds of procedures that are NOT covered. Therefore, there would be plenty of room for private insurance. In fact, in France, which has been misrepresented as some great system, more than 80% of the people have PRIVATE INSURANCE THROUGH THEIR EMPLOYERS.
Hmmmmmmmmm!

The much lauded French system raises some questions as well. From their Embassy site (ambafrance-us.org) they state that 96 percent of the population receives free or 100 percent reimbursed health care. They state the system is part of their Social Security and is funded from workerâ€™s salaries (60 percent), â€œindirect taxes on alcohol and tobacco and by direct contribution paid by all revenue proportional to income, including retirement pensions and capital revenues.â€ They state that it appears that health insurance pays less to its doctors in France than in other European countries, but that 80 percent of the public have supplemental health insurance, typically from their employers. If theyâ€™re providing so well for the needs of the public, why is there a need for â€œsupplementalâ€ health insurance for the majority of the public and what about the additional cost that imposes? The site states that the poorest have free universal health care, funded by taxes. Long-term illness sufferers are to be reimbursed for their treatments. They do have private clinics, as well as public hospitals, and not-for-profit healthcare. In fact, â€œprivate medical care in France is particularly active in treating more than 50% of surgeries and more than 60% of cancer cases.â€

Private insurance, which the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) site said in a 2004 report, was held by 92 percent of the French, helps to cover both vision and dental care which are not well covered under the government system. â€œThe public system is facing chronic deficits and recent cost containment policies have not proved very successful.â€ The government is interested in having more of the tab picked up by private insurance (Buchmueller & Couffinhall, â€œPrivate Health Insurance in France,â€ 2004, oecd.org).

Secondly, just as with Medicare and Medicaid, the government will want the plans "run" through the government--at least initially. You can rest assured we'll be charged excessively for this "administration" of services.

Eventually, as we go broke and there is no medical innovation, those folks might become "government employees" or something else that will cost us plenty anyway.

So much better to go with a sensible plan:
http://www.booklocker.com/books/3068.html

No, they'll find a way to make money.

They just won't be making the obscene profits that they were used too.

I'd certainly like to think so. It won't, though; this country would never go completely socialized with its medical system, so there still be a large, privatized aspect to health care, allowing insurance companies across the country to rake in their gambling money.

I think universal health care would allow those who cant afford or choose not to afford health care coverage. But I think most people would want more options and coverages than that plan would afford. I think it may actually spark the health care industry and drive it down a different path.

Personally, I don't think I would like to have universal healthcare. It's not all that it is cracked up to be. I think instead, for the people who cannot obtain health insurance through their jobs, they should be able to get a tax credit every year to contribute to health care premiums. The health insurance industry would be fine. Once a crook always a crook. They would just have to be a little more creative in their methods of ripping people off!

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment:

Archive: Forum -Forum -Finance - Links - 1 - 2 - RSS - All RSS Feeds
The Causes and the Results. 0.004
Copyright (c) 2011 Financial Crisis Monday, May 28, 2012 - Terms of use - Privacy Policy