1) A sober reminder that the ACA does nothing from a supply-side perspective. Three letters: AMA. Health insurance coverage is not access to healthcare.
2) This was pretty obvious from the start. If the law mandates that certain conditions be covered, premiums will rise. Yet a blatant price change would draw customers' ire. In comparison, reducing health network coverage is much more opaque.
In a similar vein, telcos deliberately offer a wide variety of convoluted plans to make it harder for consumers to effectively choose.
Another example - when the minimum wage rises, firms adjust by working their employees harder, or reducing benefits. There are countless ways to skin a cat - Nature simply finds a new equilibrium.
3) "The simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors".
LOL at the sheer audacity of the spin.
Back in my biker days, there was a well-known mechanic by the name of Ah Koon. Now, Ah Koon might have been an excellent mechanic - or not. But I never got the chance to properly appraise his skills, for the simple reason that once he had established a reputation in the community, he was overwhelmed by the resulting demand.
You literally had to wait 8 hours before he even started working on your bike at all. Imagine what that did for Ah Koon's service standards.
So if the ACA turns out a roaring success as its supporters hope, everything hinges on whether these "narrow networks" have "sufficient capacity" to cater for the increased indigent population.
Quite an oxymoron there. Especially since the main reason for using them is financial.
4) The poor will ALWAYS be worse off than the rich. Whether in a single-payer system like Australia where they suffer long waiting times, poor service standards and outdated facilities, or the magic pudding of the ACA with its narrow networks, they will ALWAYS be worse off.
The chequebook has somehow to balance, the sums somehow add up. Nothing will ever change that.
The
simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network
allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors;
participating providers, meanwhile, may agree to price cuts in exchange
for new volumes. - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.fDraaWMn.dpuf"
The
simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network
allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors;
participating providers, meanwhile, may agree to price cuts in exchange
for new volumes. - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.fDraaWMn.dpuf
The
simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network
allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors;
participating providers, meanwhile, may agree to price cuts in exchange
for new volumes. - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.fDraaWMn.dpuf
The
simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network
allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors;
participating providers, meanwhile, may agree to price cuts in exchange
for new volumes. - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.fDraaWMn.dpuf
The
simple equation: Insurers say that limiting the size of the network
allows them to steer patients to high-quality facilities and doctors;
participating providers, meanwhile, may agree to price cuts in exchange
for new volumes. - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.fDraaWMn.dpuf
