Charlie, if the skiing is good, don’t tarry over this response. That health Insurance is not health insurance is apparent, and I completely agree with the premises of your original post. There is enough evidence that Medical insurance, and so called Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO’s), exist to make money for themselves and their stockholders.
Unfortunately, you presented no solutions to the problems. We are left with (1) do nothing (nobodies favorite); (2) increased regulation of Insurance companies and HMOs (gasp, there goes the market place); (3) pure market place, out of pocket expenses (big $$ will not like that); (4) single pay, Universal, government supported; (5) combination of (2) and (4)…
P. Ami, I urge to explore the links I posted above, specifically those that explore single pay, government sponsored health care. Pick Sweden, Germany, France and see if your fears of “national health service is not the sort of solution that leads to choice, freedom or competition” is valid.
Guaranteed in none of the countries mentioned above would you be paying 500 dollars for an ultra sound ordered by a physician. You would have your choice of doctor, you would have your choice of hospital, your “insurance” would be valid as you moved around the country, you would remain covered, with the exactly the same benefits as everybody else if you changed jobs, or lost your job. There is no such thing as “pre-existing conditions”, and your family history, DNA profile, does not invalidate your participation, or force you to pay at a higher rate.
“Most of us think that market conditions, when left to themselves, do a better job of keeping companies effective and prudent then governments. Precisely why I am repeating some of my previous links:
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/impressive_coverage_at_the_la.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/opinion/18mon1.html?em&ex=1203483600&en=9cabea39bba83519&ei=5087%0A
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02E4D8173FF93BA15751C0A96E9C8B63&scp=5&sq=robert+pear&st=nyt
