Healthcare vs. car insurance
I was going through some web sites this morning, and this sentence jumped out at me: If healthcare reform passes, conservatives are planning to mount a constitutional challenge to the individual mandate on the grounds that the federal government doesn't have the right to force you to buy a product from a private corporation.
For those of you wondering, the writer was Kevin Drum and the source in Mother Jones. Yes, it's liberal. Yes, it has a bias - what media outlet today doesn't?
Back to health care reform. Or conservatives challenging health care reform because the government doesn't have the right to force you to buy a product from a private corporation. Two words for conservatives: Car insurance.
You read that right. Car insurance. I don't know about you, but I buy mine from a private entity. And I am legally obligated to have insurance if I want to drive a car.
Last time I checked (which was literally two seconds ago), the auto insurance industry hasn't collapsed. In fact, we have lots of insurers out there spending money trying to get you to switch to their products.
And guess what? "Overall customer satisfaction with auto insurance companies is up significantly in 2009, driven primarily by low premiums, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2009 National Auto Insurance StudySM released today."
What?! That's right folks, people are happier with their car insurance and it costs them less now.
Nuff said.
For those of you wondering, the writer was Kevin Drum and the source in Mother Jones. Yes, it's liberal. Yes, it has a bias - what media outlet today doesn't?
Back to health care reform. Or conservatives challenging health care reform because the government doesn't have the right to force you to buy a product from a private corporation. Two words for conservatives: Car insurance.
You read that right. Car insurance. I don't know about you, but I buy mine from a private entity. And I am legally obligated to have insurance if I want to drive a car.
Last time I checked (which was literally two seconds ago), the auto insurance industry hasn't collapsed. In fact, we have lots of insurers out there spending money trying to get you to switch to their products.
And guess what? "Overall customer satisfaction with auto insurance companies is up significantly in 2009, driven primarily by low premiums, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2009 National Auto Insurance StudySM released today."
What?! That's right folks, people are happier with their car insurance and it costs them less now.
Nuff said.
Posted by Anna at 1/15/2010 9:14 AM 
Categories: Health
Tags: car insurance healthcare reform constitutional challenge auto insurance private insurers
Categories: Health
Tags: car insurance healthcare reform constitutional challenge auto insurance private insurers
While I too have become rather disgusted with the Republican party in recent years (they are a party with NO principles anymore...Bush pretty much made sure of that), I have to agree with them on this one issue (hey, even stopped clocks are right twice per day...).
Your argument about car insurance isn't quite relevant because:
1. Car insurance only applies to people who own a car and drive it on public roads. If you walk, use public transit, or never leave your own property out in the country, you have no obligation to buy insurance.
2. In contrast, the Dems proposal to require health insurance applies to everyone. It's basically a tax in which the government is in bed with a private business. Not to be dramatic, but it's a mild form of fascism, or at least corporatism. Not a good precedent!
Personally, I view full UK-style socialization a lesser of two evils, if those are our only two choices. At least the UK model is honest about what it is. The US proposal tries to pass this off as "free market" when it is really quite the opposite.
Of course, I'd rather see a REAL free market in health care with NO tax writeoffs or subsidies that mask the true cost. But that's never going to happen, alas.
Reply to this
Hmm, too bad about my car insurance argument. I still like it, though. Points out that we've done something similar and it's worked well.
Actually, I would prefer a UK-based system as well. I lived in Australia years ago and was very impressed by their healthcare system. All children are covered - for everything. It cost less per capita than our system - and contrary to the scary comments being made - no one waited in line to see their doctor or have surgery. As an economist, can you answer what the financial fall out would be switching from private to public system?
Reply to this