Why is 'competition' so vital to proper health care reform.
Competition as an agent for improving consumer choice relies on the search for a 'good deal'. This search requires serious brainwork & time (that's just to make the lcd/plasma decision). However, short of hypochondriacs, what Joe thinks about medicine? There's not much Youtube following of bypass surgery footage.
If not consumers, who is thinking about medicine? In our present system, it's doctors & insurance companies. To what end?
To the betterment of Wall Street, as your insurance executive devotes himself to praying for the health of patients, he can't help but notice how being on bended knee puts him at eye level with your wallet.
And when his corporate mandate requires that he place the interest of the shareholder above patient, he's likely to see lightening that wallet as a good treatment for arthritic knees.
Given the lack of interest in medical studies by the general public, it's of no surprise that all of the 'interested' parties are thinking in terms of making a buck - rather than delivering maximum 'bang for the buck'. Even the insurance industry, which is basically limited to taking a % of total health care revenues (<10%), can only make more by seeing medical costs expand.</p>
Hey doc, put away that drill!
As marketers say, people don't buy drills but rather holes. Drills, holes? Any visit to the dentist surely makes one appreciate the beneficial effects of preventive medicine. This same concept would likely be welcomed by patients everywhere: people want to pay for good health, not health services like drilling, prodding, and bending over to cough.
Unfortunately, our system current relies on 'fee for service', not 'fee for good health'. So doctors and insurance execs are rewarded only for doctor visits.
'Fee for service' means the bottom line grows only as the line to the doctor office grows.
Of course, while our economy would be better off with less health care burden, few will sit down Friday evening to contemplate the fiscal benefit of public option 'competition'. Healthcare finance is as much fun as watching someone count beans.
The better way to think of competition is what it can bring Average Joe: less visits to the doctor.
Wouldn't it be better if people could just pay for good teeth, not an hour of drilling. In effect, you'd be paying the dentist to find ways to not perform that drilling service. That means less 'fee for service' which means 'less fees' overall.
Somehow, the health care debate has gotten wrapped up in the idea that people actually want to visit their doctor.
People are warned that 'you won't be able to visit the doctor when you want'. As if anyone other than hypochondriacs would really care!
In fact, most people will gladly wait to visit the doctor. They don't like the prodding/poking/coughing that makes up our 'fee for service' system.
Unfortunately, Americans haven't been told that 'competition' means finding ways to give consumers choices that involve less poking/prodding/coughing and more 21st century medicine that takes less of doctors and patients time.
But can we trust government to actually deliver on the promise of 'fee for good health'?
The N1N1 crisis is a perfect example of why citizens are better off when the government is involved in making health care decisions and then delivering the spoonful of medicine. Interestingly enough, it was Communist China which led the world in vaccinating it's people.
Simply put, it's easier to deliver a quality health care service when you're interested more in better end results for the patient, rather than a better end result for the stockholder.
What about the 'moral hazard' of government competing with the private sector?
The federal government 'competes' with numerous sectors and industries including: private toll roads (transportation), military contractors (defense), stockbrokers (social security), UPS/Fedex (parcel).
In 'competing' with these private parties, the gov't ensures a basic level of service and sometimes even a higher level of service. Healthcare with a true public option will be no different, as evidenced by most of the rest of the world.
So in the end, the public option comes down to making lives simpler - and better. No more studying insurance documents, planning careers around insurance coverage, and generally bending over to the 'fee for service' system.
Make my doctor worry about giving me the best health care for my dollar, not me!