Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
So, are you telling me that I am misinformed Host? Some super elite council of rich white men subsidize and perpetuate a notion that frivilious law suits are the cause that drive up insurance premiums, and it is completely unfounded and false? It's merely a vast conspiracy? I'll believe you, but besides one line referring how in 06' malpractice suits evened out, which does not at all address how they spiked the several years before that, the only other thing your post touched on was these evil white men and their connections, also they fund groups sympathetic their causes .
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=4968&type=0
Interesting it wasn't an increase in claims, it was an increase in damages...
BUt I'm sure I'm offbase on this, it's probably has nothing to do with anything.
|
There is little evidence that the cost of malpractice insurance has an impact on total cost of health care. In fact, the impact is minimal.
From the CBO study:
Quote:
Evidence from the states indicates that premiums for malpractice insurance are lower when tort liability is restricted than they would be otherwise. But even large savings in premiums can have only a small direct impact on health care spending--private or governmental--because malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of that spending.(3) Advocates or opponents cite other possible effects of limiting tort liability, such as reducing the extent to which physicians practice "defensive medicine" by conducting excessive procedures; preventing widespread problems of access to health care; or conversely, increasing medical injuries. However, evidence for those other effects is weak or inconclusive
|
A
survey this week found that 2 out of 3 Americans support mandatory health insurance.
IMO, in the short term, employer-based programs may still be the most practical, with tax (and other) incentives to small businesses to provide basic coverage to all employees.
In the longer term, single payer may be the most cost-effective solution.