ERD50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
RE: vouchers for ins:
Yes, but I was envisioning that that voucher system would also include provisions that the ins co could not drop you or raise your rates (no underwriting) - in return, they get a larger market. All they need to do is provide better service than the public option. If they don't, they loose business. Lots of business.
Agreed. And if there is a public option, I sure hope that a $5,000 deductible (as an example) is available. That is what I would prefer, yet that is not an option with my retiree plan.
I think that in order to keep any public option "customer driven", there must be competition from private companies. Who is going to keep the public option in line (recall my analogy to public schools w/o a voucher system)?
heh-heh-heh - in the back of my mind I was kinda wondering if there were regulations on the towing companies, but I didn't have time to google it. Thanks for challenging me on that. I should have picked another example
But along those lines, transparency is often preferable to regulation. If it was known that Hospital X charges an average of $250,000 for a specific time-critical procedure, and Hospital Z charges an average of $150,000 for that same procedure and has better results, wouldn't a voucher system drive the multiple payers to Hospital Z when possible, and start questioning Hospital Y on their practices (which Hospital Y should already be doing to improve business)?
-ERD50
But it wouldn't because the insurance company still has a powerful financial incentive to shed unprofitable customers, raise their rates, deny claims, or withhold service in other ways ("please hold while your insurance representitive serves more profitable customers").
Yes, but I was envisioning that that voucher system would also include provisions that the ins co could not drop you or raise your rates (no underwriting) - in return, they get a larger market. All they need to do is provide better service than the public option. If they don't, they loose business. Lots of business.
BTW, there is no reason "single payer" insurance can't also have high deductibles and be "customer driven" with respect to suppliers.
Agreed. And if there is a public option, I sure hope that a $5,000 deductible (as an example) is available. That is what I would prefer, yet that is not an option with my retiree plan.
I think that in order to keep any public option "customer driven", there must be competition from private companies. Who is going to keep the public option in line (recall my analogy to public schools w/o a voucher system)?
A couple of comments here . . .
Point two, I strongly suspect that most places have pricing regulations on tow truck operators because of just the kind of abuse you mention. Imagine doing that for the entire medical profession.
heh-heh-heh - in the back of my mind I was kinda wondering if there were regulations on the towing companies, but I didn't have time to google it. Thanks for challenging me on that. I should have picked another example
But along those lines, transparency is often preferable to regulation. If it was known that Hospital X charges an average of $250,000 for a specific time-critical procedure, and Hospital Z charges an average of $150,000 for that same procedure and has better results, wouldn't a voucher system drive the multiple payers to Hospital Z when possible, and start questioning Hospital Y on their practices (which Hospital Y should already be doing to improve business)?
-ERD50