Wednesday, July 11, 2012
"Business Week" hearts mandatesPeter Coy has an interesting piece on the practical reality of mandates in insurance, The Case for Way More Mandates Bloomberg Businessweek 07/05/2012:
Insurance mandates, far from being unique to Obamacare, are all around us. States require drivers to carry liability insurance. Your state government also provides you with—and charges you for—insurance against losing your job. The federal government mandates flood insurance for anyone living in a flood plain who has a federally insured mortgage. Social Security is mandatory insurance against a penniless old age, and the premiums are deducted from your paycheck, whether you like it or not. “This is part of our fabric,” says Ann O’Leary, director of the Children and Families Program at the Center for the Next Generation, a San Francisco think tank.A single-payer system, "Medicare for all", for example, would be preferable to the ACA system ("Obamacare").
But my problem with the individual mandates in the ACA is not that they exist. If we're going to have a private-insurance based system, having mandates to make sure people are covered - along with penalties/taxes to make sure wanna-be free riders pay their fair share - we need a public option, a buy-into-Medicare option to provide price and quality competition for the private insurers. If the private options provide better value and service, they will continue to win customers. But if the public option provides better service and value, that's great. If the insurance companies lose business because they can't compete with a public option, it will be because the public option proves itself to be the best way to provide health insurance.
Another thing I like about Coy's article is that he calls Social Security what Social Security supporters should call it all the time, insurance. Social Security is a social insurance system. It's not an investment vehicle or even a retirement system proper, although the severe deterioration of private pensions - another major value of the private sector in the US - has made Social Security the primary source of retirement for many.
Enemies of Social Security have worked hard to re-brand Social Security as an "entitlement" (which in RepublicanSpeak means "something black people use") and to make phony comparisons of potential "returns" on Social Security to returns on an investment account. The latter comparisons become less frequent in times of stock market alarms. But in good times are bad, it's a plainly false comparison. Social Security is insurance, not an investment.
Tags: health care reform
| +Save/Share | |
Links to this post:
No subject for immortal verse
That we who lived by honest dreams
Defend the bad against the worse."
-- Cecil Day-Lewis from Where Are The War Poets?
[Tip: Point cursor to any comment to see title of post being discussed.]
SEARCH THIS SITE
News & Media Links