Of course I know that Medicare is government run. I merely used its expansion as a way to insure the uninsured without having any unintended effects on the health insurance employers pay for. I doubt that there would be a big fight when we are talking about people that currently are not buying products from the insurance companies. If this is an enigma to you, perhaps it is not I that am "out of it." If Sweden is so wonderful, please tell me, do the myriad of small businesses there not strive to make money? Your earlier posts indicated that you have a problem with businesses trying to make as much money as they can. Odd, because that is what businesses are supposed to do. Larger businesses do it because they have a duty to their shareholders, etc.
I don't know how it works everywhere, but in NC the state insurance commission has to approve all rate increases. The insurance companies have to justify by accounting any rate increase they request. I don't know what margin of profit they are allowed. Maybe some of the legal experts can chime in here, but it is my understanding that Blue Cross Blue Shield is not a true insurance company... and they dominate the health insurance marketplace in my state. I've never been appointed with them but it is my understanding that they do not have to operate by the same set of rules that other true insurance companies do.
There are obvious flaws with a $2,500 deductible health care plan for people making about $10/hr (or $300-$400 a week). The goal of health care isn't to discourage people from getting health care. That may help with short-term costs but could be a disaster down the line. The goal of sound health care is to help people get the care they NEED to be healthy and productive members of society. Having that will create more efficiencies for companies such as Whole Foods (lower turnover, less sick pay, better interactions with from their workers to their customers). Frankly, it's awesome that Whole Foods even offers it's employees a health plan, a lot of retailers don't. But that doesn't mean it's plan is the best. When you are making 20k a year, $2,500 is cost prohibitive...they will never use that insurance policy...essentially, they really only have castasthropic coverage....and who knows how sound that policy is when put into practice. The challenge remains unanswered - how do you provide the right level of care? You don't want to discourage people from getting preventive care or delaying treatment for things that can get worse and cost more, and yet you don't want to run tests or have people coming in for every minor ache and pain. Tough line to walk.
Just a few comments from me: I can't say I disagree with this. The concept is similar to having a government option, though: more competition leads to lower prices. And there it is. The whole reason he wrote this article. It's basically a subversive advertisement for his own chain of stores, declaring how awesome he treats his workers and how awesome the food at Whole Foods will make you feel. It's weird that anyone actually views this as something different.
Once I realized that Trader Joe's is owned and operated by Aldi, I had to put Trader Joe's on my banned list.
Assuming the catastrophic coverage was 100%, and they covered 1-2 preventive visits per year, would the plan then work in your eyes?
What's a preventive visit? If you are a 40 year old who has developed high blood pressure, you could see a doctor and be put on Lipitor for example. Is that a preventive visit? It's preventing more advance heart disease which will cost a whole lot more. But if you have signs of advance heart disease, you will need a whole lot more than 1-2 visits to a doctor a year to monitor the disease. What about women who need mammograms? Is that a preventive visit? And if you get sick with some sort of infection? Or break your ankle? Is that a preventive visit? No, I don't think it works. Honestly, I don't think you have tons of people abusing the medical system, just a few. I am not convinced there is a big savings there. What might make a lot more sense for the insurance company and Whole foods is to have an independent on-site doctor there who focuses just on employee health and serves as the primary care physician for all of that store. These folks are poor, they can't afford the same level of deductibles and such as the rest of us. If the gov't were to cover 90% of that deductible then maybe it could work, but essentially that's a public option.
Those susceptible to embarassment might have already sold when they found out Mackey was trying to drive down the price of an acquisition target by badmouthing it on a bbs under an assumed identity.
