A lot has been made recently about the evolution of the healthcare system in the United States. One of the current aspects is the cost and its implications and people's household budget. One of the things I hear consistently is that the premiums have increased to the point where the deductibles together our unsustainable for most health hold incomes. So as the title indicates I hear quite often I can't afford to use my health insurance. After doing a substantial amount of reading from multiple sources it seems to me that there are only two directions that the country and going at this point. The first being that the system will go completely under government control meaning that health insurance providers will be squeezed out of the primary function of managing health care of which the government will pay all bills are all coverage which also means they will dictate what they will pay for and what they will not ergo making anything else patients responsibility. Furthermore, the funding mechanism would be a substantial tax increase in there and Social Security or secondary health care tax most likely very similar to what we see is an income tax based on people's ability to pay. The offset with them be the reduction or elimination of most private health insurance completely and they would then transform into a supplemental health care network of which they would supply benefits similar to what we have now but on a smaller scale.
The second option or direction that healthcare could take in the future would be to simply offer a cash option for all patients and all healthcare situations. This would seem the less likely of the two to succeed simply because it would not allow for the general socialize culture of some people to succeed which does have its fervent politicians deeply invested because it does not create a funding mechanism for their campaign contributions in the future I'm like the current system which healthcare providers much greatly prefer to create influence within. You're seeing elements of this approach currently in the alternative healthcare profession like myself we are even though health insurance is an option it is actually cheaper in some cases or just slightly above premium prices that would allow most consumers about care to receive a substantial cash discount.
In my own recent experience I chose not to use my health insurance and to simply negotiate with each healthcare vendor directly this would include hospitals doctors ambulance services x-rays etc. These rates were usually 50% or lower than the original bill. I simply reduce reducing administrative cost in dealing directly with the consumer many vendors are able to lower the prices substantially which is what used to happen in the healthcare system up until HMOs are introduced. This does of course however bring up one other thing and that is that cutting-edge technologies can only be used by the most wealthy because they could afford them this without inhibit future medical research but likely see with laser eye care and other services once experimental a very expensive has now and made affordable ones development costs and procedure protocols can increase efficiencies. What would also need to happen for this to succeed as a massive reduction in the regulation of businesses and the complete or partial illumination of HM all policies and regulations brought on by the federal and state governments in order to allow competition on a national scale that would simply allow for someone to receive cash discounts similar to a membership discount card especially negotiated by the channels without any other regulations tied to them.
In the end I believe that if you cannot afford to use your health insurance it will only increase the likelihood that you will spend all of your money to pay for someone else's South Carolina your own and that perhaps payment penalties would be substantially better than even having health insurance at all in its current form. A footnote hear that I am not advocating breaking the law I am nearly bringing up the point that from a logical perspective it seems more and Pantages to pay a penalty and keep your options open then to pay premiums you cannot use the benefits of as a practice of human nature and fiscal logic.
As a purely logical point of order I would suggest that our politicians throughout the world and throughout time have been less interested in the lives of the people they serve than their own purposes therefore I would not anticipate politicians doing the right thing up until the point where the jobs. Responsible legislation does not seem to be the active goal of many politicians at this point ergo I would not consider them reasonable and finding solutions as well. I would consider it a very real possibility that the financial assets of many Americans will be completed simply by attempting to follow their civic duty and law and see no substantial return on such investments. I would consider grease a wonderful example of politicians be more than willing to allow their tire economic system to collapse just for the opportunity to keep their jobs and even at that point they do not truly care about their constituency they care about whether they can sustain their own needs. I would also consider a real possibility that we have seen the same type of behavior in our own politicians within the United States regarding this particular issue in general. This is not a political point of view is simply a point of logic that past events have dictated not only in our own country but in others that we cannot always rely on our politicians to do the things that will benefit the constituencies they represent but those of the people who provide them the greatest affluence and continuing their current arrangements.