Collect Experiences. Not Things. :')

October 07, 2009

Interesting Public Option Debate

In my mind, a single pay healthcare provider would without a doubt mean lower quality and the rationing of healthcare. But if the public option was in place as an alternative to private insurance, how bad is that?

It'd be like the University System in the U.S. If you have the means and want to attend a small private University with a lower student to faculty ratio and more resources available, then that's your choice. If you don't have the means, state school are available. You get the same degree, except state schools are larger institutions and with less one-on-one service. Having attended both, there is difference. You basically you get what you pay for.

If the public option was approved, a government subside would be required, and undoubtedly have lower care standards, longer waits, end of life counseling, etc. But for some, that's all they can afford. Others could still choose private insurance. The dilemma for the private healthcare providers, however, is: how much will the government subside the public option?

My conclusion: I pseudo support the public option, because I want Obama to succeed. If W. Bush was promoting the public option, I'd be against! I loath that guy.

Alternatively, l'd hate it if there was no public option, and everybody was require to purchase health insurance. That would be a huge boon to the private insurance companies. Private insurance companies are salivating over this possibility, and dumping big money to kill the public option and require everybody purchase health insurance.

Lastly, the GOP guy in the video has a point. People who overeat, don't exercise and smoke should pay more health insurance premiums, similar to risk-rated car insurance. However, there'd have to be some clause that differentiates if being overweight is genetic or self-induced. I firmly believe some people are genetically disposed being overweight.

Almost lastly, what's irritating is the Iraq War has cost a little under $700 billion to date, instead those funds could have funded the majority of the $900 billion healthcare reform.

No comments: