> But in America’s health care financing system, people tend to change commercial insurance whenever they change jobs, lose Medicaid coverage when financial circumstances change, or leave the commercial market altogether when they become eligible for Medicare at age 65. That means one company will be stuck footing the big bill, and another will probably reap the benefits of a healthy liver 20 years later.
>“If it is cost-effective from a societal standpoint, it is not necessarily going to be cost-effective from a health plan standpoint,”
/sigh. Can we have a public option for health insurance already, please?
We have a pharma company not playing by the normal, "gentlemen's rules of the game" that backload costs. Instead, they've got a great cure and are going with the "fuck you, pay me" model. Which, fine, more power to them. I really have no trouble with it. However, unfortunately, it doesn't play well with our current racket of employer-based health insurance.
>“If it is cost-effective from a societal standpoint, it is not necessarily going to be cost-effective from a health plan standpoint,”
/sigh. Can we have a public option for health insurance already, please?
We have a pharma company not playing by the normal, "gentlemen's rules of the game" that backload costs. Instead, they've got a great cure and are going with the "fuck you, pay me" model. Which, fine, more power to them. I really have no trouble with it. However, unfortunately, it doesn't play well with our current racket of employer-based health insurance.