Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Another Fox Host Calls For Less Health Insurance Protection

Reported by Guest Blogger - December 17, 2009 -

Guest blogged by Dan

Just a few days after Glenn Beck suggested that less health insurance protection would be a more compassionate solution for Americans than more (though without volunteering himself to be a guinea pig), Fox Business' John Stossel has a column suggesting that no health insurance would be even better.

In his column yesterday (12/16/09), Stossel wrote that health care costs have been rising "just as fast in countries with government-run health care" as in the United States. Stossel also wrote, "It's true that we have always spent more on health care than countries with government systems. But that's partly because we're wealthier, and partly because other countries don't respect our drug patents, free-riding on our medical innovation." He offered no links, no studies, no evidence to substantiate his analysis. Even more importantly, he offered no information about health care outcomes. Maybe that's because the U.S. is 50th on the CIA list for life expectancy, well beneath countries with government-run health care such as Germany, France and the U.K.

Then, apparently satisfied he had "proved" that nobody had a good system, Stossel wrote, "Someone will ration health care. In America, insurance companies usually do it. In most of the rest of the world, governments do. Costs skyrocket under both systems. Its time we tried the third option: let individuals use their own money to buy health care."

Do I REALLY understand the suggestion to be to ELIMINATE health insurance? Turn life into a giant crap-shoot where one serious illness will beggar a family? Eliminating the health insurance companies and throwing all their workers on the street? Or perhaps more relevant to Stossel and his friends, throwing all the insurance companies' stock holdings and other assets on the market to be sold at whatever price? Does dumb begin to cover the situation?

Many of Stossel's readers seemed to like the idea:

"B.A.Geezer" wrote:

Third party healthcare payments need to be eliminated. When people have insurance to pay their repair bills, they don't take as good care of themselves as they should. Unnecessary medical visits would be eliminated if the patient had to pay every time,resulting in a more moderate lifestyle. Also, if Phys-Ed was required again for all students in secondary schools (no excuses) they would grow up in much better condition, Less obeisity, and much lower medical bills.
December 16, 2009 at 4:25 pm

"Joe" wrote:

I disagree with the entire concept of insurance. As a healthy human being who exercises, doesn't use tobacco, and eats well, I end up getting screwed. I have to pay for all those fatties and human ashtrays, and people hoping to live for a couple more days when death is inevitable for us all. Put my money in my hands.
December 16, 2009 at 1:04 pm

"Rich Anderson" wrote:

Why has the cost laser surgery gone down while other health care costs gone up? Because we as consumers have to pay for it. We shop around and we ask more questions. We have to apply the same principle to the rest of health care. It's the only way we can control costs.
December 16, 2009 at 12:56 pm