|
-
Hood Rich
 Originally Posted by jAQUAN
@FL
1) Yes, I am describing collusion. Who enforces that law on 1,300 companies?
The DOJ and the FTC.
And this supports my point about the feasibility of such collusion. If all 1300 companies are competing against each other, how realistic is it that all 1300 organizations would be able to or would at the same time be interested in a collusion conspiracy? Remember that collusion doesn't work if a few or even one undercuts everyone else because they would just get a windfall of market share from the rest.
 Originally Posted by jAQUAN
2) Agreed, but ultimately it's the employer who makes the choice. The employee is usually left with choosing among 3 levels of co-pay directly related to the type of care, most of which do not cover major procedures or things like mental health. Employers who have a bottom line to worry about are arguably going to choose the cheapest broadest plan (which are carefully constructed to sell a specific model much like apple computers). But we're not talking about choice, we're talking about abuse of power in order to create the illusion of choice.
I agree that the employer provided health care model also prevents competition. That's why my position includes removing the subsidies that encourage it and using that money to fund a voucher for every US citizen. That would be an avalanche of competition over night.
 Originally Posted by jAQUAN
3) That may pertain to altruist pharmaceutical companies and health care prevent- er I mean providers, but my last point focused directly on doctor/patient relations. I'm not sure how the approved practitioner lists are assembled for a given plan but the average holder is certainly not free to choose any doctor or hospital they want so what does market share really reflect if ultimately public and private practices are only competing to get on the most lists? I doubt that providers are adding to those lists practices who intend on submitting the needed amount of care for each and every patient. A private practice is heavily dependent on reimbursement from providers and after the honeymoon is over, few are going to bite the hand that feeds them.
Being able to choose any doctor is a desirable feature that people are willing to pay for. We opted to pay a higher deductable in order to have a PPO plan that let's us choose from many more doctors than the cheaper HMO would have.
So, people who choose their plans as I would like to see all people doing, already have the option between cheaper+limited doctors or pay more+more doctor options.
Last edited by FlashLackey; 09-30-2009 at 05:24 PM.
"We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|