|
||||||
|
Planet Money’s Alex Blumberg and Chana Joffe Walt
By Laura Knoy on Tuesday, October 6, 2009.
The day after the US government announced it was taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, NPR.org launched a new podcast, Planet Money, as a way to present very complicated economic issues to the every-person, from real estate, the stock market, the job market, health care economics and more. As part of their visit to New Hampshire, they join us to talk about the state of the economy and about their work.
Guests
- Alex Blumberg, contributing editor for Planet Money and a producer for This American Life
- Chana Joffe-Wal, correspondent for Planet Money
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoocomments
All comments are moderated before appearing on the site. Comments must adhere to the NHPR.org comment guidelines and terms of use.
On previous shows callers from the health care industry complained that it wasn't the Insurance companies that drove the costs up for employers, is was the middle man or the Health care providers(HMO's) who jack up the costs thus making it impossible for employers to offer the employees affordable health care.
Who regulates the rates that Employers pay for employee health care Insurance? Should the US Government regulates those rates to keep them affordable for employers?
One thing that I find interesting is how the high costs of health care are distorting the employment market. Rapidly increasing health care costs are a disincentive to hire more workers, and they have a vested interest in taking a job applicant's perceived health status into account. Also, the high costs of providing insurance provides an incentive for employers to get more involved in their employees' lifestyle choices. This would be annoying in good economic times, but in a downturn it could put some employees' jobs in jeapordy if they are perceived as being a major health care cost driver.
Your guest was RIGHT in making the 'All You Can Eat" analogy. Most employees have no idea what their health care plan costs; but a simple bookeeping change could fix that. The true cost ought to be shown as part of everybody's gross pay on their paychecks then witheld along with tax deductions. I wonder why nobody in Washington has suggested that?
In the laudable spirit of the guests, who try to present technical economic issues in common-sense terms, for me one major aspect is continually under-emphasized, comparing what we get to what's realistically available.
One caller asked this basic question, and I want to amplify it: Every other advanced country has better health care (meaning better outcomes) and universal coverage for half the cost that we Americans pay. This is not just a little less, it's massively less than we pay!
Why do we Americans settle for inferior health care and allowing ourselves to be looted by the providers? Insurance companies, drug makers, equipment makers, and doctors and other providers are being protected by our broken policies, at ordinary peoples' expense! But the mainstream media doesn't even discuss it, as if it were a forbidden topic.
There are many consequential follow-up issues on the high cost of health care, mainly involving one thing, Protectionism. Patent monopolies keep drug costs and equipment costs artificially high; there are alternatives both for paying for innovation and getting prices down to marginal rates, like generic drugs and like all other technical advances. Restricting competition by, for example, not allowing foreign-trained qualified physicians to immigrate and compete for lower salaries. Nontransparent pricing where we consumers are not allowed to even know the costs of all the procedures and drugs before we buy.
Economic journalists need to expand making vivid comparisons so we can judge if we're being told enough. We should be saving money by health reform, not paying more for the same old bad deal.