The Reality of Managed "Care"

[BigV]

Originally Posted by wolf

Speaking as someone who spends an unfortunate amount of my work day arguing with insurance companies, it's not care that's managed, it's cost.
--snip--

Good point, wolf, right on target.

Which brings up the next questions: Our current health care delivery system has profit as it's primary motivating factor. Witness the story above, wolf's testimonial and countless others like it. Profit can be a wonderful motivator, but in the absence of profit, there is a corresponding absence of motivation. No motivation, no health care, and you get stories like this one.

A government run system would, supposedly, run on the energy of different motivations, since it would not be profit; mandate, perhaps, or duty. We're all familiar with the performance of government run programs, and, to be honest, they run the gamut from well run to abysmal. **All** systems have their flaws.

I think the best plan (which will still have flaws and weaknesses) would be one where there were different, complementary motivations. Profit *and* legislation, for example. We live in a world where the best systems have complementary parts. Your body has muscles that work in opposition, and work well. Our own government has separate aspects that work individually to drive the whole forward.

The wisdom of the "All things in moderation" applies to our current health care delivery system as well. Profit only has the flaws we see today. Government only would have different blind spots. But a well crafted combination of the two would easily surpass the performance we enjoy/tolerate/suffer today.