Will Killing Insurance Executives Solve Our Healthcare Affordability Problems?
December 7, 2024
Even if killing the CEO of a health insurance conglomerate would instantly cure America’s healthcare problems it would still be egregiously wrong. Killing is wrong. Cold-blooded murder is egregiously wrong.
Why are people so upset with healthcare insurance that they would condone the murder of one of its executives? Well, “death panel” comes to mind. It’s the term Sarah Palin used to describe what would happen if the US undertook nationalized medicine. In fact, insurance companies are death panels when they arbitrarily (it seems) decide what life-saving procedures and medications they will allow.
Do you (young, healthy people) ever say, “Health insurance costs me more than I save in medical bills”? Well, it should, unless you’ve encountered an unusual high-cost medical issue. Note that your car and home insurance almost always cost more than you receive in claims—unless you wreck your car or your house burns down.
Health insurance is the exception in the insurance world. In every other type of insurance, the insured pay the insurers to undertake risks that might be greater than they can otherwise weather. In the unlikely event that your house burns down, you’ll need a lot of money fast. It’s reasonable to buy insurance to shoulder that risk.
Health insurance should be like that, but it’s not. You do need insurance to pay for an unlikely heart attack. You shouldn’t need it for a standard CT-scan—but you do. My most recent CT-scan cost $10,560, which, without insurance, I would have had to pay. Insurance paid the hospital $517 for that CT-scan, an amount I could weather. So, if I didn’t have insurance, or if the insurance company had denied coverage, I couldn’t have afforded the procedure.
Medicare requires health care providers to discount their services when submitting claims to Medicare. Private insurers follow suit but can’t demand as much. So, the providers mercilessly jack up their rates to afford the discounts they must offer insurers. To maintain the facade of discounts, they must charge the uninsured the full amount. Bizarre!
If this weird calculus weren’t in place, insurer profitability and their customers’ wellness would align. Preventive vaccines, medications, treatments, and tests could be charged to customers at affordable costs, reducing the occurrence of serious injuries and illnesses. People should then accept large deductables for lower-cost insurance against catastrophic costs (like car and home insurance).
There is another factor that does not involve health insurers. Non-profit hospitals are amazingly greedy. God forbid you ever have a large claim denied by your insurer. Your hospital will come after you for that inflated, crazy full amount. They will sue you. They will garnish your wages. Bankruptcy. Homelessness. Good luck! (Doctors, on the other hand, don’t fare so well. Medicare pays them very little (after their required discounts). They generally don’t have the stomach for lawsuits and attachments.)
Indiana Legislature Passes Ban on Transgender Treatments
April 6, 2023
The issue is not abortion. It’s not about pronouns or gender-affirming care. I am adamantly pro-choice, but I, most people, consider any abortion to be a tragedy. I am opposed to laws limiting gay and transgender rights, but I fervently wish that everyone could be happy with the gender identity they were born with. But abortion is sometimes the less tragic alternative. Happiness with one’s gender is sometimes unattainable. Decisions to abort or change my gender are mine, my family’s, my doctor’s. NOT MY LEGISLATOR’S!
Inflation Affect on Stock Prices
September 23, 2022
My good friend, and political adversary, Mike Burns asked me if I “still believe” stocks are impervious to inflation. That was not my precise contention, but I’m not opposed to the representation. What I had said was that stock prices respond to inflation, so those investments will fare better than others—and much better than my pension, which takes a direct hit.
He rightly posits that rising interest rates, to combat inflation, reduces investments, and negatively impacts stock prices, as we’ve seen recently. My stocks investments have taken a hit.
But stock prices have always recovered from losses incurred in times of high interest. If the battle against inflation leads to a recession, stock prices may take a while in recovery, but eventually stock prices cover inflation.
Baby Formula Crisis
May 24, 2022
The news is awash with cries of government ineptitude concerning the baby formula shortage. I agree that the administration failed to address an obvious calamity in time to avoid, or even ameliorate it. U.S. Food and Drug Commissioner Robert Califf told Congress that the FDA had responded as expeditiously as possible. I’d like to see a timeline. What did they do on the day in February that they closed the Michigan factory that produced 20% of America’s baby formula? There were already shortages. Wouldn’t it be clear that closing the plant would quickly cause critical shortages?
Culpable as it is, blaming the government is shortsighted. How did we become so vulnerable that one infant formula plant is critical to America’s non-breastfeeding mothers? If we want to blame the government, should the government have controlled baby formula market shares? That’s not how we do things in America.
We are committed to free enterprise to shape America’s markets and economy. The price and availability of baby formula, and everything else, is determined by supply and demand—and the profit to be made making and selling products. To the greatest extent possible we want our government to stay out of it.
We do tolerate some government regulation, especially for health products like baby food. In 2008 we discovered, too late, that imported infant formula was laced with melamine to raise protein levels. The contaminant caused critical health issues that weren’t caught for months.
Free enterprise forces shaped America’s infant formula production and marketing into a near-monopoly, with only a few producers making our supply in a few large facilities. Profitability concerns weakened control standards in one of those large factories. Regulators reluctantly, belatedly, shut it down in February 2022 as babies across the country fell ill. Our country was already straddled with supply, distribution, and workforce problems. No one, it seems, heeded clear warnings that disaster lay ahead.
Everyone blames the government when things go wrong, but no one wants the government to control the things that go wrong—with good reason. Governments have a terrible track record running industries. Free enterprise is a better system. But enterprise is a big ship. It turns slowly and sometimes hits icebergs. That’s when people turn to the government to solve the problems.
We must allow free enterprise to flourish, but regulate it to avoid its worst excesses. Industry leaders and regulators must constantly review market conditions for disruptions, and take action when a need like the current one is easily foreseeable.