The article exact from CATO
Insulation vs. InsuranceAnd also
Real insurance would pay for treatments that are unavoidable, prohibitively expensive, or for illnesses that occur relatively rarely. Instead, insulation reimburses even relatively low-cost services, such as a test for strep throat or a new pair of eyeglasses. Insulation pays for treatment even if it is commonplace or discretionary. ---
What is Wrong with Insulation?
The problem with insulation is that it is not a sustainable form of health care finance. Individuals, employers, and government are all under stress.---
Insulation leads people to over-consume health care services. Americans make extravagant use of services that have high costs and low benefits. Many studies that compare groups with similar conditions show that those with the largest levels of health care spending fare no better in terms of outcomes than those that spend less.
Insulation is also inefficient because of the large taxes that it requires. Payroll taxes support Medicare. Income taxes support Medicaid. Moreover, income tax rates are higher than they would be otherwise, because employer-provided health insurance is a deductible expense for companies but is not taxable income to employees. Taken together, higher payroll and income taxes to support insulation discourage work and thrift, leading to what economists call a “deadweight loss” to the economy.--
How Would We Get There Culturally?
Ultimately, I think we are headed for a collision of cultural values. We prefer insulation to real insurance. We expect services to be readily available, without the supply limitations or waiting lists that exist in countries where government is responsible for more health care funding. And yet we are growing increasingly concerned over the expansion of health care spending that takes place in a system that lacks constraints on either supply or demand.
Real health insurance may not be popular now. But when Americans see that the providers of insulation, including Medicare, have to turn to the rationing of health care services in order to meet budgetary constraints, real health insurance may start to look like a good alternative.
"true but misleading statements about health care that politicians and pundits love to use to frighten the public."
The root is rotten at the first place! Systems are wrong! What is new? It says, as politicians and policy makers are manipulation and miss interpretation for their own gain. As majority of public don’t know the whole systems so rotten that which eating up their life eventually freeze off whole system. Hands of few scumbags don’t care what is right what is wrong “give what people want!” people are stupid so they can’t figure out anyway! I want to win this election! Or I want to filled my term in office! Don’t kidding yourself sing-song for wrong-right that is crap Ok! Why go for hard road there is easy way! Just flow follows everyone! As they are saying. Okey… okey… When I signed up my” insulations” yes not “insurance” I just find out the difference, how I know? The booklet says “insurance” so I believed it is insurance. It is covers up everything what I want in an emergency, easy quick signed pays up every months, but lucky me, in my excellent health – genetic endowment as well as I take care of my own system ( hard to explained), basically you have to receptive yourself or tune into…, so I just pay my insulation for nothing as I hardly use it. I go some specialists which they are not covered by insulation or insurance anyway in Australian.
