Page 1 of 1

[分享] JAMA: Who Pays for Health Care in US?

Posted: 2008-03-06 10:17
by Jun
This is why having a third or more of health insurance premiums go into the pocket of insurance companies' CEOs and shareholders is absolutely inexcusable.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/299/9/1057

In the March 5 issue of Journal of American Medical Association.

[quote]
Who Really Pays for Health Care?
The Myth of "Shared Responsibility"

Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD; Victor R. Fuchs, PhD


JAMA. 2008;299(9):1057-1059.

When asked who pays for health care in the United States, the usual answer is "employers, government, and individuals." Most Americans believe that employers pay the bulk of workers' premiums and that governments pay for Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and other programs.

However, this is incorrect. Employers do not bear the cost of employment-based insurance; workers and households pay for health insurance through lower wages and higher prices. Moreover, government has no source of funds other than taxes or borrowing to pay for health care.

Failure to understand that individuals and households actually foot the entire health care bill perpetuates the idea that people can get great health benefits paid for by someone else. It leads to perverse and counterproductive ideas regarding health care reform.

The Myth of Shared Responsibility

Many sources contribute to the misperception that employers and government bear significant shares of health care costs. For example, a report of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services states that "the financial burden of health care costs resides with businesses, households, and governments that pay insurance premiums, out-of-pocket costs, or finance health care through dedicated taxes or general revenues."1 A New America Foundation report claims, "There is growing bipartisan support for a health system based on shared responsibility―with the individual, employers, and government all doing their fair share."2

The notion of shared responsibility serves many interests. "Responsibility" is a popular catchword for those who believe everyone should pull their own weight, while "sharing" appeals to those who believe everyone should contribute to meeting common social goals. Politicians welcome the opportunity to boast that they are "giving" the people health benefits. Employers and union leaders alike want workers to believe that the employer is "giving" them health insurance. For example, Steve Burd, president and chief executive officer of Safeway, argued that decreasing health care costs is critical to his company's bottom line―as if costs come out of profits.3 A highly touted alliance between Wal-Mart and the Service Employees International Union for universal coverage pledged that "businesses, governments, and individuals all [must] contribute to managing and financing a new American health care system."4

The Massachusetts health care reform plan is constructed around "shared responsibility." The rhetoric of health reform proposals offered by several presidential candidates helps propagate this idea. Hillary Clinton, for instance, claims that her American Health Choices plan "is based on the principle of shared responsibility. This plan ensures that all who benefit from the system contribute to its financing and management."5 It then lists how insurance and drug companies, individuals, clinicians, employers, and government must each contribute to the provision of improved health care.

With prominent politicians, business leaders, and experts supporting shared responsibility, it is hardly surprising that most Americans believe that employers really bear most of the cost of health insurance.


The Health Care Cost

Posted: 2008-03-06 15:20
by xiaoying
问题在于,就算免除EMPLOYER的Health Insurance Mandate,又如何确保工资得到公平调整?

另,目前兴起的HSA Plan对于控制Cost可能有一定功效,算是Reform的一种形式?

Posted: 2008-03-06 15:26
by Jun
又如何确保工资得到公平调整?
应该是会跟现有的工资调整机制一样啊,市场调节。如果雇主手里钱多了,劳工市场的平均水平也会向上浮动。至于是否"公平"分配,其实跟现在的分配过程一样,CEO 还是比干活的多。

很多经济学家屡次指出,过去二三十年美国的工人(包括白领)平均收入在算进通涨后不增反降,造成贫富分化越来越严重,一般都把这个现象 outsourcing 和 corporate profits 这些明显的因素,这里提出的医疗保险上涨导致净收入下降,恐怕也是个原因,只是我还没在主流经济论里听人说起过。

Posted: 2008-03-06 21:51
by 豪情
很多经济学家屡次指出,过去二三十年美国的工人(包括白领)平均收入在算进通涨后不增反降,造成贫富分化越来越严重,一般都把这个现象 outsourcing 和 corporate profits 这些明显的因素,这里提出的医疗保险上涨导致净收入下降,恐怕也是个原因
就是高了UHC, 还是会每年大幅度上涨, 医疗费用就是涨的很快.