Related Posts
Conversation Starter
Hello Verizon fellows, In Deloitte, there's a facility to claim a certain reimbursement for purchasing mobile devices through their portal or something. Similarly, do VDSI employees have any discounts or reimbursement for purchasing devices through Verizon? If so, kindly let me know how to check it out. Thanks in advance.
More Posts
Cleared Accenture Skill interview by answering almost all the questions and received congratulatory mail for HR round and submitting all documents. Then after a week received a call from HR saying that due to some technical issue, the skills round will happen again and an online assessment was set up. In the assessment, questions which were not directly related to the profile were asked and then a rejection mail was received. Does this happen a lot?
Anyone else get shafted on promotions?
Rising Star
What is scaring you this spooky season?
Pro
Enthusiast
Additional Posts in Consulting
Looking for some book recommendations :)
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Yes it’s a good idea. Untying insurance from employment is desperately needed. Public option will be more expensive as private insurers will just use it as an excuse to offload everyone high risk to the public one.
Fundamentally, insurance lowers costs to individuals by spreading risk across as large a group as possible. At the most basic level you miss the opportunity to spread the risk out to its maximum size. On top of that, you won’t get the savings from consolidating administrative costs to a single entity and you miss out of leverage for negotiating prices with healthcare providers.
After that it depends a little more on implementation. Due to the increased competition, the private insurers would respond by raising prices and seeking to limit higher risk individuals, relegating them to the public option. If you treat the public option like a state run enterprise (i.e. funded by premiums instead of taxes) and don’t untether insurance from employment, you can potentially get the scenario where the private plans continue to raise prices, but the employee subsidy still keeps most people on them, and the public option essentially becomes a very expensive high risk pool, since it won’t be able to deny people. Then it would either need to fund by increasing premiums (potentially losing the savings of a public option) or by federal subsidies.
You can go with the other method where everyone is automatically enrolled in a public option that everyone pays for if they don’t get in private insurance. But this would essentially just put private insurers into an expensive death spiral until they collapse, or it would create a two tiered system where some healthcare providers only accept the expensive private option and everyone on the public option is stuck with fewer options and worse service. Better to rip off the band aid and enact single payer healthcare.
Single payer needs to happen. It will, however, take many years to deal with the underlying infrastructure changes. Expanding public options now while working towards a single payer system is the best path imo
The only viable path is to convince 80% of the Americans that it’s a good idea. So far, it’s failing.
On the surface it sounds great, but there are a lot of considerations. The private insurance sector employs millions of people. Secondly, hospitals systems will be hit really hard because the rates they receive from Medicare are significantly lower than what they get through private insurers. That in turn could have rippling effects, might push people away from the medical field at a time where we have a shortage of doctors. And lastly, more of a moral question - if you can afford a higher quality of care (shorter wait times, advanced treatments, etc) should you be able to buy it over others?
Like any Us gov program. Implementation will be tough but policy makes sense. We’re lagging behind other developed economies in terms of health equity.
I like a public option first.
I realize and agree that europe is able to do healthcare better than the US. However, the US govt cant even figure out how to deliver mail on Sundays, and would rather see them out compete private healthcare models before I give up my insurance
I’m super liberal, but Medicare for all is too big a change to implement on the time scale discussed during the primaries. I think Warren and Sanders we’re discussing making it policy within a couple years?? That’s just ludicrous. Our healthcare system is so complex and intertwined with private insurance, that the only way we can really make changes is gradually. Start with a public option that is subsidized so that everyone has access. Then in 5-10 years make it illegal to have health insurance through your employer (or something similar). Improve step by step from there. Too bad that will never happen either. I’m pretty sure even this crisis won’t make Americans agree enough to hold politicians’ feet to the fire and make real changes.
E being ranked 34th on overall healthcare outcomes?
No. I like public option better.