Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Healthcare: yet another post.

Scary stories here about the US health insurance industry revoking policies for truly bizarre reasons. Yet another mark in favour of a government insurance "monopoly".

And, if a reason in favour of expanding government insurance is needed (and isn't it obvious by now?), here the Toronto Star discusses the problems associated with not granting universal access to dental care.

On a funny (funny-odd, not funny-haha) note, though, the CSM is reporting that US businesses want out of the healthcare game. I'm certainly not surprised: employer-based health insurance is, economically, one of the most inefficient schemes ever devised, so a bottom-line mentality should endorse getting out of it ASAP. However, what's disturbing is that there is some sort of push building towards an individually-based insurance scheme, rather than a public scheme. This would be an even worse nightmare, although it would indeed put the corporations' immediate fears to bed, as the insurance industry, by its nature, preys on the vulnerable and offers inadequate (if not offensive) "coverage" to those who are economically less well-off.

That's not a euphemism for the poor, incidentally. Anyone but the richest of the rich is exploited by the insurance industry: the difference is whether the insurers ask nicely before screwing you.

No comments: