Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Another way to look at the fundamental approaches to the problem.
When people have ownership of something, are in control and aware of the costs they will more actively participate in controlling those costs. So, if I shop and select my health insurance, pay for my health insurance premiums, pay deductibles and co-payments, see the bills, understand the coverage, I will be part of the overall solution in driving costs down.
On the other hand, if someone else "owns" my health care coverage (employer plans or government plans) they will manage my health care to their priorities. If I am unaware of heath care options and the real costs I have no incentive to keep the costs down. The third party may or may not do what is in my best interest.
McCain's plans has the intent of getting Americans more involved in their health care. Obama's plan is more of the same. McCain's plan will help reduce overall costs, Obama's plan is more of the same. If you really want "change" or some new ideas, perhaps the McCain plan is worth consideration.
|
What a fascinating way of putting it. Thank you!
I was a bit disappointed with the link the OP provided. Unfortunately it does not really compare and contrast - only mentioning what McCain is lacking that Obama has included. Here is a link to a thought-provoking comparison of the healthcare stance of Obama vs. McCain (vs. Clinton,written in April 2008). Link:
Where Clinton, Obama, and McCain Stand on Healthcare - US News and World Report
Note that none of the proposed plans come close to the complete coverage offered to EU citizens.