Healthcare Reform and Big Business
It was mentioned to me last week that one thing that could save US businesses like GM and Ford is health care reform. Imagine if there was some national healthcare plan similar to those in Europe or Canada. US workers would suddenly become more competitive, corporate profits would soar and companies like Ford and GM could rebuild. Why aren't these companies pushing to reduce these costs? Are these corporate leaders concerned with the long term and at the impact on the rest of the country? (Ha! Just kidding!). Really: why doesn't big business in the US lobby to reduce one of their largest and out of control costs? Is it just that they are too uncomfortable agreeing with union leaders, Hillary Clinton and Europeans? Help me out here my business / medical brethren.
posted by Dr. Steven Morphy-Godchaux III at
8:48 AM
5 Comments:
I suspect a lot of tort claims would also disapear. Believe it or don't but the big chunk of the average claim for damages in accident cases is for the medicals. For a lot of people who are hurt, it is a crap shoot to find some deep pocket to pay for their medicals and their future upkeep. They can't do it; they are too messed up from the accident. A civilized society finds a way to take care of these people whether they are hurt out of their own fault or not. Accidents do happen. The US takes care of them through an costly inefficient system of tort litigation.
By
Philip Seymour Morphy, at Fri Sep 08, 11:30:00 AM CDT
I agree that our system for dealing with accidents is wacky. But I don't see why business in the US does not unite and push for some kind of health care reform. They would seem to be potentially big winners here.
By
Dr. Steven Morphy-Godchaux III, at Fri Sep 08, 08:50:00 PM CDT
Limiting the argument to the car industry - you mention Ford and GM in your post. The real problem at Ford and GM is that there is an overcapacity of production in the world wide auto industry. A few years back, I read in the Economist that the world can produce ca 80 million cars a year but needs only 60 million. That is Ford and GM’s problem and in fact VW’s problem too.
By
Philip Seymour Morphy, at Sat Sep 09, 12:21:00 PM CDT
Back to the original premise - I have two issues. First, the law of conservation of mass applies here. Nothing can be created or destroyed, including health care costs. Shifting the source of the funds from Ford and GM to their employees won't work when they go on strike demanding higher wages to pay the extra taxes the government will demand for this socialized medicine. Secondly, is there any public assistance program that the government runs that is efficient, effective and something you'd want to take advantage of? Let me see, public housing - no; social security - no. Why would public healthcare be any different?
By
Murphy "Mac" Morphy, at Mon Sep 11, 11:31:00 AM CDT
This is my point abou the long-term effects. So is this what business leaders are thinking of? In place of a quick dump of a huge cost in the short-term, they are concerned about how a government run health care system would effect the nation? I see most corporate leaders as people who would not miss an opportunity to shift costs away from the corporation and away to ... well, just about anywhere. And this is their job.
By
Dr. Steven Morphy-Godchaux III, at Tue Sep 12, 08:42:00 AM CDT
Post a Comment
<< Home