> Cam wrote: >> Because with Medicare there are infinite plans and infinite private >> companies to run them. And with Medicare Advantage (part c), they can >> do so based on the amount of risk they want to accept. > > Do you see this scaling out to the entire US population? >
Bluntly, I don't know. It a VERY complicated system (<- the whole system, not just "Medicare"), and I could think of a zillion things that need to fixed with the system that could lower costs. But theoretically I guess it could. If you focus on the "payer" right now you have: 1.) Gov't (Medicare, Medicaid) 2.) Employers (self-insured) 3.) Insurance companies (fully insured) "Plan administrators" are ALL private companies no matter the payer, including Medicare/Medicaid. So the gov't could offer some basic benefits to all Americans (at the payer level) without changing anything in "the system". This would raise costs for the gov't simply because they'd have to process more claims and have their own program admin costs. But it should lower, maybe drastically, costs for employers and insurers because some, much, or most of the risk would be taken away. But if we really want to take cost out of the system we need to lower admin costs and that can only be done through standardization and automation. I would also say through consumer-driven models (working on the patient-provider level) where you put more money into the consumers hands and allow them to make choices thus lowering costs on the provider side (e.g., plastic surgery). wow, this is complicated. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:288656 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
