Should Social Security Taxes Be Optional for Younger Generations?

[Economist]

Does anybody actually think to pull their head out of their ass and fact check anything before posting?

Alcohol consumption by country
USA is at 40th place in terms of alcohol consumption. Luxembourg and Ireland are first and second place respectively, both of which have UHC. Other countries on that list with both higher alcohol consumption and UHC are Germany, Denmark, Britain, Spain, France, and Australia. Looks like the government really doesn't care.

Hold on a second, I think you're missing my points. I was not even trying to talk about facts. I was just saying that it scares me, that people will now have a greater say in what other people do, and they will be infringing upon the personal liberties of others.

In my opinion, you may see people try to set up more laws about what other people can do. Do you disagree that there may be additional nanny state laws under such a system?

 

[turbo]

I haven't had much trouble getting the insurance company to pay my various health problems. Broken arm, needed surgery. Had a good deal of dental work done (root canal in same tooth worked on 3 times as well as wisdom teeth removal). Only one time (for the last root canal on that tooth) did I have to pay out of pocket, and it was a little over $300 after insurance.

Doctors have a hell of a time getting payments from insurance companies, which was my point. Perhaps 30% of the overhead in a medical practice is dedicated to trying to get paid for covered services. I was a network administrator for a large opthalmic practice so I know how medical billing works. The most important people (after the doctors) in such a practice are the coding specialists - highly skilled people who review procedures and structure insurance claims to conform to the peculiarities of all the various carriers. It is not unusual to have claims rejected several times, even if they are coded properly because the insurance companies make lots of interest on the money they hold. People who decry social programs like SS and call universal health care "socialism" have no idea of the amount of money that private health insurance companies suck out of our health care system. The folks who want to privatize SS are apparently willing to slap a similar layer of parasites on our country's most important social welfare program.

 

[Economist]

Doctors have a hell of a time getting payments from insurance companies, which was my point. Perhaps 30% of the overhead in a medical practice is dedicated to trying to get paid for covered services. I was a network administrator for a large opthalmic practice so I know how medical billing works. The most important people (after the doctors) in such a practice are the coding specialists - highly skilled people who review procedures and structure insurance claims to conform to the peculiarities of all the various carriers. It is not unusual to have claims rejected several times, even if they are coded properly because the insurance companies make lots of interest on the money they hold. People who decry social programs like SS and call universal health care "socialism" have no idea of the amount of money that private health insurance companies suck out of our health care system. The folks who want to privatize SS are apparently willing to slap a similar layer of parasites on our country's most important social welfare program.

Some people tend to think that the government can do a better job with these things because there are no profits, and I strongly disagree with that (and encourage people to research the role that profits play in economics). If it's true that the government can do a better job with these things because of the lack of profits, than that argument should hold in many industries. Why stop at health care? The government should be able to provide all goods and services better than the private sector.

You're right that there are many overhead costs associated with insurance. Some have blamed this on the way insurance is run (claiming that it is not free market enough because customers, doctors, and insurance companies are too detached from one another). However, do you really think that there will not be large amounts of governmental administrative costs to take the place in a "universal" system?

 

[turbo]

You're right that there are many overhead costs associated with insurance. Some have blamed this on the way insurance is run (claiming that it is not free market enough because customers, doctors, and insurance companies are too detached from one another). However, do you really think that there will not be large amounts of governmental administrative costs to take the place in a "universal" system?

The administrative costs would be greatly reduced, in part because the procedure coding requirements would be standardized, and because there would be no incentive for the universal payer to withhold payment and force numerous resubmission of claims. This is a huge problem in medical practices, and it requires them to borrow against their receivables when big expenditures pop up unexpectedly - like a retinal laser than goes toes-up and needs to be replaced NOW.. The problem is that banks prorate their interest rates based on the ages of the receivables. They may lend no money at all on receivables aged 90 days, some on 60-day receivables at a high interest rate, and more money on 30-day receivables at a lower interest rate. Like I said, this is a big drain on our health care system. Privatization of SS would encourage investment bankers to jump in and game the system in similar ways.

 

[mheslep]

Why stop at health care? The government should be able to provide all goods and services better than the private sector.

The administrative costs would be greatly reduced, in part because the procedure coding requirements would be standardized, and because there would be no incentive for the universal payer to withhold payment and force numerous resubmission of claims. This is a huge problem in medical practices, and it requires them to borrow against their receivables when big expenditures pop up unexpectedly - like a retinal laser than goes toes-up and needs to be replaced NOW.. The problem is that banks prorate their interest rates based on the ages of the receivables. They may lend no money at all on receivables aged 90 days, some on 60-day receivables at a high interest rate, and more money on 30-day receivables at a lower interest rate. Like I said, this is a big drain on our health care system. Privatization of SS would encourage investment bankers to jump in and game the system in similar ways.

You didn't address the quoted question. The logic of your argument (from points above) appears to be that a government run enterprise will, from costs of scale and other factors, always be more efficient than a privately held for-profit one. I believe the evidence is clearly to the contrary.

 

[turbo]

I do not believe that to be the case, either, but in this particular case there is a real need for universal coverage with a single payer. In one stroke, it would eliminate much of the drag on the system, reduce overhead for doctors, and simplify claims submissions and payments. Once you get into basics, like health and economic security, there are some real benefits in a centralized system of administration. Like I've said in earlier posts, the people lying to Generation Xers about the inevitable collapse of SS are neo-cons who want to dismantle all social services and let the "free market" take over. If you think that health insurance companies have a lot of money to throw around, buying Congressmen to prevent discussion of universal health care, think of what kind of clout investment bankers would gain if all the young, healthy people opted out of SS and they had all THAT money to play with. Privatization of SS would bankrupt the system and finance a lot of Ferraris for the bankers. SS can be fixed by increasing the total amount of income subject to taxation modestly, as Robert Reich points out. Congress doesn't have the guts to do it, though if Obama is elected, he can hold their feet to the fire.