Will Soldiers Have to Use Private Ins?

[lookout123]

Another thing the Republicans love to attack - paying for retired workers? We have to renegotiate those contracts to save the car companies!

I'm not sure on your angle there. He worked for a farm implement company and they did renogiate their contracts repeatedly. The benefits were significantly less than what the original agreements allowed for but at least now they actually can expect to get what they've agreed upon indefinitely.

Not only is it paid for by the government, it is also administrated by the government, and not run through private insurers. I don't know the specifics of your dad's UAW deal, but I would guess they paid premiums on your dad's behalf to a private insurer.

Fair point but I don't really see the relevance. I've worked for companies that had large group plans that were serviced by a name brand insurance company even though the company self insured 100% of the payouts. How is that any different than this employer (military/government) deciding they can self insure for less than they would have to pay another organization?

All insurance by nature is a form of socialized medicine in that we pay a fee to a company to spread the risk over greater numbers so the obligation isn't too great for any one individual. I believe that is different than the single payer government run medical system some seem to want.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by lookout123

How is that any different than this employer (military/government) deciding
they can self insure for less than they would have to pay another organization?

Because SOCIALIZED MEDICINE is BAD!!! Didn't you hear? The government can't do anything right! lol

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by lookout123

I'm not sure on your angle there. He worked for a farm implement company and they did renogiate their contracts repeatedly. The benefits were significantly less than what the original agreements allowed for but at least now they actually can expect to get what they've agreed upon indefinitely.

Or until the next of the repeated renegotiations. I was referencing the common thread of anti-union rhetoric complaining about the cost of retired workers.

Fair point but I don't really see the relevance. I've worked for companies that had large group plans that were serviced by a name brand insurance company even though the company self insured 100% of the payouts. How is that any different than this employer (military/government) deciding they can self insure for less than they would have to pay another organization?

They also run their own hospitals.

All insurance by nature is a form of socialized medicine in that we pay a fee to a company to spread the risk over greater numbers so the obligation isn't too great for any one individual. I believe that is different than the single payer government run medical system some seem to want.

Well, that description in particular is exactly what a single payer government run system would involve, minus the company, though there would be other differences.

But either way, my point is that there is, in the United States, a government funded, administered, and operated medical plan that is good enough and well enough run that a hue and cry is raised over the idea that veterans would have to instead use a private plan that they are already covered under.

Any arguments against the single payer plan will have to come from somewhere other than competence. There are any number of other arguments against it, but we do know that the government can do it.

[lookout123]

the idea that veterans would have to instead use a private plan that they are already covered under.

in all honesty I don't know too many vets who would go to the VA if they had any other option. BusterB's experiences are but a sliver of some of the stories to trickle out of the joint.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

But either way, my point is that there is, in the United States, a government funded, administered, and operated medical plan that is good enough and well enough run that a hue and cry is raised over the idea that veterans would have to instead use a private plan that they are already covered under.

That would be a change in the contract. Soldiers don't have to pay co-pays for care given in the service hospitals or VA's. Retired people pay for Tricare Prime if they want it, a one time fee of $450 for a family. Tricare Standard requires no payment but services are significantly reduced.

Movement to a civilian system of insurance would put them in a pool with everyone else unless the government would pay the fees and costs with no caps, unlikely, and it would subject them to someone who is often not trained to reject care they would otherwise be eligible for in the current system.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Movement to a civilian system of insurance would put them in a pool with everyone else unless the government would pay the fees and costs with no caps, unlikely, and it would subject them to someone who is often not trained to reject care they would otherwise be eligible for in the current system.

Worse than that- it would subject them to someone who is trained to reject care they would otherwise be eligible for in the current system.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Worse than that- it would subject them to someone who is trained to reject care they would otherwise be eligible for in the current system.

SO we agree to disagree. Those people lack the skills to reject care. They do it on a cost basis only.