When it’s free or super low cost, it’s paid by the government. This means the government has a vested interest in keeping you healthy so they don’t have to pay more. It’s a great set up.
Tbf, for profit insurance companies also have a vested interest in keeping you healthy. Healthy people require less care which means more profits.
It’s just that insurance companies also have a vested interest to make sure that they don’t pay out for expensive treatments either. You can be healthy and then get cancer which is expensive vs be a sloth whose only form of exercise is walking back and forth from the front door to their bed and has heart issues.
Edit: judging by the down votes, I suppose it wasn’t clear that I’m not trying to defend for profit health insurance. Let’s be clear here: single payer is the best way to do healthcare. I was only trying to point out that the incentive to keep your customers healthy is the same regardless of who is paying. The only difference is the motive. One wants to make sure they have money for shareholders while the other wants to make sure they have money for everyone to get care.
individual health is about more than individual health… air quality, stress (including financial, other employment), quit campaigns, etc are all things that are solved at the national or regional government level. they’re all linked with better health outcomes, and incentives and profit motive are aligned when health care is paid for by government
When it’s free or super low cost, it’s paid by the government. This means the government has a vested interest in keeping you healthy so they don’t have to pay more. It’s a great set up.
Plus more preventative care. Get something checked out early rather than waiting months and now being treated inpatient.
Tbf, for profit insurance companies also have a vested interest in keeping you healthy. Healthy people require less care which means more profits.
It’s just that insurance companies also have a vested interest to make sure that they don’t pay out for expensive treatments either. You can be healthy and then get cancer which is expensive vs be a sloth whose only form of exercise is walking back and forth from the front door to their bed and has heart issues.
Edit: judging by the down votes, I suppose it wasn’t clear that I’m not trying to defend for profit health insurance. Let’s be clear here: single payer is the best way to do healthcare. I was only trying to point out that the incentive to keep your customers healthy is the same regardless of who is paying. The only difference is the motive. One wants to make sure they have money for shareholders while the other wants to make sure they have money for everyone to get care.
individual health is about more than individual health… air quality, stress (including financial, other employment), quit campaigns, etc are all things that are solved at the national or regional government level. they’re all linked with better health outcomes, and incentives and profit motive are aligned when health care is paid for by government
I am in full agreement. I am realizing that my point wasn’t made clear. Hopefully my edit will clarify things.
Or they could just arbitrarily deny you care