Stone (2009) has accused the bog insurance companies of United States. He says that these companies are unable to offer standard insurance programs rather they somehow prevent the standard practices for their profit goals' achievement. He says that calling of the private insurance program totally is not possible hence indirect efforts like single-payer are being used. He says that while universal health insurance is the goal, there are many obstacles in the way. The roles assigned to the middle men complicate the job. The aptient cannot have required and relevant medical tests without getting approval from the middle man. This does not only decrease the efficiency of process by taking more time but also it increases the cost by giving middle man his share.
The author gave convincing yet inadequate evidence on how the single payer can be the money saver. Since the single payer is not availing services from others, there is no competition and hence low efficiency. The patient is not full aware of how to spned money on medical perspectives hence the lack of guidence can cost more. The author did not fully tell which cost areas are more challenging with regard to decision making i.e. administrative or medical and scientific. The decsionon making and competition should not be handed over to the Americans since it is not everybody's capacity to make medical decisions without...
Stone (2009) says that it is vital to take into account and consider the benefits of social insurance.
The author presented a somewhat new idea. He said that brining administrative and technical reforms in
health care like the Medicare reform of 65 no more of a confusing job for
public than the help. Hence, the patients and insurance holders should not be confused through the medical and administrative terms rather they should be guided well by political interventions. Once the democratically and political solution is presented, it is expected to be more convenient, helpful and easy for the people. Such a solution will not be misguiding like that of single-payer since political solutions are people based and not profit-based like technocratic solutions.
The
argument offered both consumer and professional argument. It is understandable too since it is written from the perspective of a common health insurance holder who wants economic solutions and not the word games. The political sincerity will help people get public or private insurance matching their needs as well as pockets.
References
Stone, D., (2009), "Single Payer - Good Metaphor, Bad Politics," Journal of Health Politics,
Policy and
Law, 34(4). 531-542
What is Single Payer? (2013), Retrieved from: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what-is-single-payer
