Krugman and the "Swiss Plan"
C.Tudor
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=1&em
"Of course, those who insist that we must have a single-payer system �
Medicare for all � won�t accept any plan that tries, instead, to cajole
and coerce private health insurers into covering everyone. But while
many reformers, myself included, would prefer a single-payer system if
we were starting from scratch, international experience shows that it�s
not the only way to go. Several European countries, including
Switzerland and the Netherlands, have managed to achieve universal
coverage with a mainly private insurance system.
"And right here in America, we have the example of the Massachusetts
health reform, many of whose features are echoed in the Baucus plan. The
Massachusetts system, introduced three years ago, has many problems. But
as a new report from the Urban Institute puts it, it �has accomplished
much of what it set out to do: Nearly all adults in the state have
health insurance.� If we could accomplish the same thing for the nation
as a whole, even with a less than ideal plan, it would be a vast
improvement over what we have now."
----------
Krugman is correct in stating that Switzerland and Holland have
universal coverage with only public insurance companies, but once again
he neglects to inform that these two nations control and regulate the
insurance industry and the health care industry like utilities. He also
lauds the Massachusetts Plan, but neglects to point out that the
Massachusetts Plan is neither able to control the cost of health care
nor offer health coverage to the uninsured at a truly *affordable* rate.
Even if the Baucus bill is changed in the ways that Krugman suggests,
it will still result in hundreds of billions of dollars annually poured
into the pockets of the insurance industry and it will still not be
*affordable* to the lower middle class.
"An 'affordable' Health Care Public Option would be $1,000 to $1,200
annually.
If no truly 'affordable' public option, then no Obama 2012."
Anyone can make their opinion known:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
edi...@netpath.net
nation WITHOUT any border with a Third World
neighbor, WITHOUT de facto open immigration, WITHOUT a high percent of
its residents being illegal aliens from a
Third World nation, and WITHOUT the "Swiss plan" legally exempting
illegal aliens from requirements to buy health
insurance or pay fines the way Baucus version of Obamacare does. The
"Swiss plan" also only works in the context
of a nation whose economy isn't a basket case like ours.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/ is
the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!
Billary/2009
The border states should create a 5% consumption tax that applies to
everyone in every bodega. And use the money to pay for the illegal's
health care. Because you know Obamacare is coming and we can't stop
it. But at least they (border states) can find a way to make the
illegals pay for it.
5182 Dead, 315 since 1/20/09
> The "Swiss plan" only works in the demographics of Switzerland - a
> nation WITHOUT any border with a Third World neighbor, WITHOUT de facto
> open immigration, WITHOUT a high percent of its residents being illegal
> aliens from a Third World nation, and WITHOUT the "Swiss plan" legally
> exempting illegal aliens from requirements to buy health insurance or
> pay fines the way Baucus version of Obamacare does. The "Swiss plan"
> also only works in the context of a nation whose economy isn't a basket
> case like ours.
Canada's works, despite sharing a 4,500 mile border with a third world
nation.
Billary/2009
Canada requires proof of citizenship in the form of a national ID card
fucking stupid Zepp.