“National health insurance:” why not just insure the poor, and let everyone else keep the plans they have?
October 27th, 2010
Question by American citizen and taxpayer: “National health insurance:” why not just insure the poor, and let everyone else keep the plans they have?
I have issues with the idea of government-run health insurance. I really don’t have a definitive position – I am still trying to learn more.
But one of many questions I have is this: assuming for the moment that the government will institute a program “to make sure all Americans have health insurance,” can’t this goal be accomplished without going to a “single payer” system? Why can’t the people relatively happy with the status quo keep the insurance they have? And if Medicaid or another program needs expansion, just address unmet needs in that or a similar program?
I’m sure I’m missing something here. Maybe there are great advantage to a complete government overhaul of the system. But it could also be that wrongheaded government regulations have distorted the market and caused (or worsened) the problems we already have!
Any knowledgable opinions or information would be helpful. thanks.
Best answer:
Answer by Sweetpea
The poor are already able to get health care.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
Tags: 