DW asked in my last post whether I’d be turning in my health care for the government’s program.

The answer: As a freelance writer, I pay $1,200 monthly for insurance—and it’s absolutely dreadful coverage. $30 for a general visit, $50 for a specialist, limitations left and right, up and down, an insanely high deductible for prescriptions.

So, will I be trading it in?

In about three seconds.

I know … I know. Big, bad, scary, evil government will do a terrible job. Probably so. But it can’t be any worse than what’s been instituted by the private, for-profit corporations.

It just can’t.

10 thoughts on “$1,200”

  1. Jeff: Sign me up, too. Like you, I’m a freelancer who pays for her own insurance. Like you, I have limited coverage and pay out the nose for an inadequate plan. My access to care IS limited. I waited 2.5 months to have a possibly cancerous cyst removed from my body. I couldn’t pick my doctor. One was chosen for me, and that’s how long I had to wait. That’s limited access to care.

    Yes, there are millions of uninsured people in the U.S., but there are millions more like you and me who are underinsured and one medical emergency away from financial ruin. Sixty-two percent of all bankruptcies are the result of medical bills. What’s that saying about the status quo?

    John: That piece you link to is an opinion piece, not an article. Major difference.

  2. @hmmmmmm – I read that article and I see nothing in there that says that government interference is what is driving Jeff’s premium. Can you specifically say where it says that in the article?

    If I did not have a COBRA subsidy right now, I would be paying over $1400 a month to maintain my coverage. I dread the day when the subsidy ends.

  3. If the President works this health care program the same way goverment workers (of which I am) receicve benefits then the anti-health care bill zealots are insane.

    The right could care less about health care they attack the President out of fear that he could be another FDR

  4. Alrighty then.....

    So, is your rampant support for Health Care reform about what’s best for the 46 million uninsured Americans, or is it about what’s best for the 4 Americans that live in your house?

  5. Jen,
    Serious question: If you waited 2.5 months last time, how long would you wait if another 40 million people had the same tier of access to health care as you?

    And think about supply and demand when you consider your answer. If another 40 million people have access to the current supply of doctors and hospitals–what does that do to prices?


  6. As long as government offers cheap insurance that covers everything the private guys do, you’d be crazy not to go for it. The issue is that it will bankrupt the country.

  7. Christopher,
    In the article, it says, “Most people, however, do not pay the full cost of their health insurance. The poor and the elderly receive free or highly subsidized insurance via Medicaid or Medicare. Much of the working-age population gets subsidized insurance because employer-paid health insurance premiums are not treated as taxable income….

    The implication is that patients and doctors constantly face the choice between high-cost, state-of-the-art care and moderate-cost, conventional care. If these decision makers face little financial penalty for choosing the best possible care, they will do so every time. Thus subsidized-insurance combined with medical advancement means rapidly increasing expenditure.

    This suggests that to restrain government health spending, policy must reduce existing subsidies, not introduce new government insurance. Inefficiencies in health care are a problem, but they persist because existing subsidies mean health care providers face limited incentives to control costs.”

    Read that carefully. It answers your question.

Leave a Reply