bbauska
It is a cost/quality issue. You get what you pay for
.
Actually you don't always. At least not in the US.
From Commonwealth study on health care:
It’s fairly well accepted that the U.S. is the most expensive healthcare system in the world, but many continue to falsely assume that we pay more for healthcare because we get better health (or better health outcomes). The evidence, however, clearly doesn’t support that view.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/20 ... 80ecb91b96bbauska
Why did the government mandate what insurance coverage I get to choose between
Because there were all kinds of nearly worthless insurance offerings available before the ACA. And people, being lousy at evaluating both risk and the complicated offerings of insurance often found themselves buying crappy policies that offered little when needed.
Its the same reason there are laws against predatory lending, and consumer protections in some financial services.
Its why standards are brought in to protect consumers of all kinds of products. Like automobile safety.... There is a terribly uneven relationship between the sellers and the buyers .
I think you assume that if people had a choice between Medicaid and private insurance that you would end up with two tier healthcare.
That really depends upon the actual offerings.
If Medicaid was offered for all medical services that were necessary and available at the same tax rate as without ... then you'd probably find well over 90% of people would move to Medicaid. If they save $1400 monthly or more, why wouldn't they?
You assume that Doctors would not move to serve Medicaid because they could make more money from private insurers. That may not be entirely true since private insurers deny insurance claims at a very high rate and are difficult to deal with ...(it costs practices a lot of money to collect).
And if the market of privately insured people shrinks quickly to under 10% of the total ...practices will be competing for a much smaller pool of patients.
There is no question but that opening up medicare to all would put a strain on the system. Demand would increase as those who previously suffered without seeking care, now could. The solution is better managed and organized system learning from the best practices in the UK, Sweden and Switzerland... And the health outcomes would improve....
When the profit motive is taken out of the insurance equation, and when the high cost of managing relationships with dozens of insurance companies is eliminated, there's more money to provide quality. and when people seek health care early on, instead of trying to avoid the costs, outcomes improve...