GM Faces potential BK

[CA renter]

[quote=Ash Housewares]Free markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.

Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.

With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.

Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise. [/quote]

Agree with this, Ash.

Additionally, “free markets” work best when dealing with things that are not a basic necessity. It’s too easy to manipulate and monopolize a system when there is a finite resource that’s provides a basic necessity. People become captive consumers, and are forced to pay whatever the monopoly decides for them.

IMHO, a free market requires both the supply side and the demand side to work with full transparency and free will. Otherwise, it does not work.

[gandalf]

Consumers play a limited role in the transaction. They don’t negotiate price. Decisions about care, diagnosis, treatment, prescriptions, etc. — these are handled primarily by the doctor. Selection of doctor, referrals, etc. are controlled by the terms of coverage. And coverage is negotiated by employers and their agents, on behalf of their employees, with coverage ‘bundled’ in with salary and other aspects of the overall position. Healthcare is not even close to a free market.

I think I’m in favor of a patient-pays approach for routine matters, backed up by government provided universal coverage for catastrophic matters above a certain level. If government handles catastrophic, there is no need for insurers. A change like this would transform the economics of the field and result in enormous savings. Routine expenses could be funded from some sort of healthcare savings accounts.

Also, intellectual property in this country is a scam, and current practices should be gutted. The US taxpayer pays for the majority of medical research in this country through grants to Universities and the like. Big Pharma enters the process downstream and is a recipient of major taxpayer subsidies in this respect. Pharma’s ‘rights’ in the resulting medicines should be reduced and competition encouraged through the support for generics and imports.

[gandalf]

Consumers play a limited role in the transaction. They don’t negotiate price. Decisions about care, diagnosis, treatment, prescriptions, etc. — these are handled primarily by the doctor. Selection of doctor, referrals, etc. are controlled by the terms of coverage. And coverage is negotiated by employers and their agents, on behalf of their employees, with coverage ‘bundled’ in with salary and other aspects of the overall position. Healthcare is not even close to a free market.

I think I’m in favor of a patient-pays approach for routine matters, backed up by government provided universal coverage for catastrophic matters above a certain level. If government handles catastrophic, there is no need for insurers. A change like this would transform the economics of the field and result in enormous savings. Routine expenses could be funded from some sort of healthcare savings accounts.

Also, intellectual property in this country is a scam, and current practices should be gutted. The US taxpayer pays for the majority of medical research in this country through grants to Universities and the like. Big Pharma enters the process downstream and is a recipient of major taxpayer subsidies in this respect. Pharma’s ‘rights’ in the resulting medicines should be reduced and competition encouraged through the support for generics and imports.

[gandalf]

Consumers play a limited role in the transaction. They don’t negotiate price. Decisions about care, diagnosis, treatment, prescriptions, etc. — these are handled primarily by the doctor. Selection of doctor, referrals, etc. are controlled by the terms of coverage. And coverage is negotiated by employers and their agents, on behalf of their employees, with coverage ‘bundled’ in with salary and other aspects of the overall position. Healthcare is not even close to a free market.

I think I’m in favor of a patient-pays approach for routine matters, backed up by government provided universal coverage for catastrophic matters above a certain level. If government handles catastrophic, there is no need for insurers. A change like this would transform the economics of the field and result in enormous savings. Routine expenses could be funded from some sort of healthcare savings accounts.

Also, intellectual property in this country is a scam, and current practices should be gutted. The US taxpayer pays for the majority of medical research in this country through grants to Universities and the like. Big Pharma enters the process downstream and is a recipient of major taxpayer subsidies in this respect. Pharma’s ‘rights’ in the resulting medicines should be reduced and competition encouraged through the support for generics and imports.

[gandalf]

Consumers play a limited role in the transaction. They don’t negotiate price. Decisions about care, diagnosis, treatment, prescriptions, etc. — these are handled primarily by the doctor. Selection of doctor, referrals, etc. are controlled by the terms of coverage. And coverage is negotiated by employers and their agents, on behalf of their employees, with coverage ‘bundled’ in with salary and other aspects of the overall position. Healthcare is not even close to a free market.

I think I’m in favor of a patient-pays approach for routine matters, backed up by government provided universal coverage for catastrophic matters above a certain level. If government handles catastrophic, there is no need for insurers. A change like this would transform the economics of the field and result in enormous savings. Routine expenses could be funded from some sort of healthcare savings accounts.

Also, intellectual property in this country is a scam, and current practices should be gutted. The US taxpayer pays for the majority of medical research in this country through grants to Universities and the like. Big Pharma enters the process downstream and is a recipient of major taxpayer subsidies in this respect. Pharma’s ‘rights’ in the resulting medicines should be reduced and competition encouraged through the support for generics and imports.

[gandalf]

Consumers play a limited role in the transaction. They don’t negotiate price. Decisions about care, diagnosis, treatment, prescriptions, etc. — these are handled primarily by the doctor. Selection of doctor, referrals, etc. are controlled by the terms of coverage. And coverage is negotiated by employers and their agents, on behalf of their employees, with coverage ‘bundled’ in with salary and other aspects of the overall position. Healthcare is not even close to a free market.

I think I’m in favor of a patient-pays approach for routine matters, backed up by government provided universal coverage for catastrophic matters above a certain level. If government handles catastrophic, there is no need for insurers. A change like this would transform the economics of the field and result in enormous savings. Routine expenses could be funded from some sort of healthcare savings accounts.

Also, intellectual property in this country is a scam, and current practices should be gutted. The US taxpayer pays for the majority of medical research in this country through grants to Universities and the like. Big Pharma enters the process downstream and is a recipient of major taxpayer subsidies in this respect. Pharma’s ‘rights’ in the resulting medicines should be reduced and competition encouraged through the support for generics and imports.

[CardiffBaseball]

Barnaby I am not suggesting GM would ask the Govt. for this, I am merely wondering out loud. I was only using the GM situation as one possibility of how one my ram it down our throats. We’ve done a lot of things here in the last year that I never though we’d do. So I thought maybe they could repackage systemic crisis arguments from the cacsh injections in such a way as to sell socialized medicine to the electorate. I actually didn’t mean to make a direct suggestion regarding GM.

[CardiffBaseball]

Barnaby I am not suggesting GM would ask the Govt. for this, I am merely wondering out loud. I was only using the GM situation as one possibility of how one my ram it down our throats. We’ve done a lot of things here in the last year that I never though we’d do. So I thought maybe they could repackage systemic crisis arguments from the cacsh injections in such a way as to sell socialized medicine to the electorate. I actually didn’t mean to make a direct suggestion regarding GM.

[CardiffBaseball]

Barnaby I am not suggesting GM would ask the Govt. for this, I am merely wondering out loud. I was only using the GM situation as one possibility of how one my ram it down our throats. We’ve done a lot of things here in the last year that I never though we’d do. So I thought maybe they could repackage systemic crisis arguments from the cacsh injections in such a way as to sell socialized medicine to the electorate. I actually didn’t mean to make a direct suggestion regarding GM.

[CardiffBaseball]

Barnaby I am not suggesting GM would ask the Govt. for this, I am merely wondering out loud. I was only using the GM situation as one possibility of how one my ram it down our throats. We’ve done a lot of things here in the last year that I never though we’d do. So I thought maybe they could repackage systemic crisis arguments from the cacsh injections in such a way as to sell socialized medicine to the electorate. I actually didn’t mean to make a direct suggestion regarding GM.

[CardiffBaseball]

Barnaby I am not suggesting GM would ask the Govt. for this, I am merely wondering out loud. I was only using the GM situation as one possibility of how one my ram it down our throats. We’ve done a lot of things here in the last year that I never though we’d do. So I thought maybe they could repackage systemic crisis arguments from the cacsh injections in such a way as to sell socialized medicine to the electorate. I actually didn’t mean to make a direct suggestion regarding GM.

[Coronita]

Healthcare….One thing where we *could* start is a portable healthcare savings type account. Some of these health care plans offered by employers provide a “account” of dollars you accumulate that can be used toward healthcare. You don’t spend it, it rollsover into an account. You spend it if you need healthcare, based on negotated rates with care providers. The problem is that these plans never carry over if you leave your employer and go to the next. It would be beneficial if healthcare plans can be self-selected/self directed, and employers simply pay into the plan. my opinion. Of course, then you run the risk of people “not saving for a health care plan”, as you see the case for a lot of people without retirement planning.

[Coronita]

Healthcare….One thing where we *could* start is a portable healthcare savings type account. Some of these health care plans offered by employers provide a “account” of dollars you accumulate that can be used toward healthcare. You don’t spend it, it rollsover into an account. You spend it if you need healthcare, based on negotated rates with care providers. The problem is that these plans never carry over if you leave your employer and go to the next. It would be beneficial if healthcare plans can be self-selected/self directed, and employers simply pay into the plan. my opinion. Of course, then you run the risk of people “not saving for a health care plan”, as you see the case for a lot of people without retirement planning.

[Coronita]

Healthcare….One thing where we *could* start is a portable healthcare savings type account. Some of these health care plans offered by employers provide a “account” of dollars you accumulate that can be used toward healthcare. You don’t spend it, it rollsover into an account. You spend it if you need healthcare, based on negotated rates with care providers. The problem is that these plans never carry over if you leave your employer and go to the next. It would be beneficial if healthcare plans can be self-selected/self directed, and employers simply pay into the plan. my opinion. Of course, then you run the risk of people “not saving for a health care plan”, as you see the case for a lot of people without retirement planning.

[Coronita]

Healthcare….One thing where we *could* start is a portable healthcare savings type account. Some of these health care plans offered by employers provide a “account” of dollars you accumulate that can be used toward healthcare. You don’t spend it, it rollsover into an account. You spend it if you need healthcare, based on negotated rates with care providers. The problem is that these plans never carry over if you leave your employer and go to the next. It would be beneficial if healthcare plans can be self-selected/self directed, and employers simply pay into the plan. my opinion. Of course, then you run the risk of people “not saving for a health care plan”, as you see the case for a lot of people without retirement planning.

[Author]

Posts