The Greg // On the economics of Health Care:

Jun 12 2:38 pm

FYI: I represent a large health insurance provider which is why I’ve been apprehensive about sharing my personal views on health coverage. That being said, I’ve also been privy to internal documents and studies on the cost of health care, as well as to internal discussions on the need for better coverage for the uninsured and underinsured.

For me, the “economic” argument against a public option on health care doesn’t resonate very well. It might be because I don’t enjoy putting a cost on human lives, or it might be because my mother just lost her job and she will no longer be covered under a health plan once COBRA expires and she needs to have her shoulder replaced in October. Or it might be because for most of my short life, I qualified as one of those who had health care, but was greatly under-insured. Or maybe it’s because I have an uninsured older sister who is busy putting herself through nursing school, working at the local gas station, and raising two children.

However, when you look at the “economics” of health care, the case can clearly be made as to why coverage of more Americans is desperately needed. We already pay for their health care via Medicaid and higher premiums we pay to cover the uninsured’s visits to the emergency rooms. So, we have a situation where we have incredibly unhealthy people not paying into the system, unable to pay for preventative care, and sucking up portions of our taxes and premiums in the most inefficient way possible.

So, what should we do? According to some, nothing. I still don’t understand the economic argument against having the government pooling together the largest group of people it possibly can, and providing coverage. In the long run, it will save our economy. Healthier people are more productive, show up to work more often, and are less of a drain on public resources.

Will this lead to “socialized” medicine? I don’t know, but my hunch is that it probably won’t. We’re America and we like to keep our things uniquely American, and I tend to agree with Ezra Klein’s argument that what we eventually will have will be a combination of a capitalist market and a government pool.

Do I care if this leads to socialized medicine? Not really. I care much less about the profit of a health insurer than I do about my mother living past 60 (or my sister past 35), or worrying that members of my family might have to declare bankruptcy over something like, you know, living or dying. If this were a typical marketplace (such as broadband deployment, or access to blu-ray DVD players), I most certainly would be against government intrusion. However, this is an atypical marketplace: this is people’s lives we’re talking about.

Besides, who do you trust more to help administer health insurance: a bureaucrat or an insurance employee with a monetary incentive to deny coverage?

I’m not ignoring anything. I’m also not towing a party line. I’m radically wanting to enjoy my family for as long as I possibly can.

YES. We need to reshape the way we as a nation see ourselves. Opponents of healthcare reform are the same people who talk about how much they love America, yet have no problem seeing their fellow citizens struggling for basic healthcare needs. Its time they start walking the walk instead of just talking the talk. The opponents of healthcare reform will throw out a lot of reasons for their position, but the fact of the matter is that these people are lucky enough to already have great health insurance, and don’t want to have to pay to have the same benefits they already have for free. We are all Americans and we are all in this together. The sooner we stop being so selfish and admit that healthcare is a goddamn mess and needs to change, the better off we will be as a nation. I promise you that.