The Corporate Case for Single Payer

[eridani]

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/11/04/corporate-case-single-payer

Mingling among the doctors, nurses and activists at the single payer conferences in Chicago this weekend was one Richard Master.

Master is the owner and CEO of MCS Industries Inc., the nation’s leading supplier of wall and poster frames — a $200 million a year company based in Easton, Pennsylvania.

Master has just produced a movie — Fix It: Healthcare at the Tipping Point.

He was in Chicago to show it to the single payer advocates gathered there attending two conferences — the Physicians for a National Health Program annual meeting and the Single Payer Strategy Conference put on by nurses and other labor unions.

In a way, Master was a fish out of water — a businessman among activists.

But he had reached the same conclusion.

“My company now pays $1.5 million a year to provide access to healthcare for our workers and their dependents,” Master said. “When I investigated where all the money goes, I was shocked.”

What he found was that fully 33 cents of every health care premium dollar “has nothing to do with the delivery of health care.” Thirty-three percent of the healthcare budget was being spent on administrative costs.

That’s why he reached out to a couple of award winning filmmakers to produce Fix It — which makes the corporate case for scrapping the current multi-payer system for a single payer.

[Sherman A1]

1. I have always tried to argue this point

that it is less expensive for corporations and employers in a world of single payer health insurance. I often wonder why more of them do not push to improve their own bottom line by helping lead the country in this direction?

[Efilroft Sul]

5. I think I know why corporations don't want single payer.

It decouples health care from the serfdom to which most American workers have grown accustomed. Single payer brings true mobility to the work force. It enables employees to literally say, "Take this job and shove it." It allows people looking for work to not have to worry about an unexpected medical event that could strip away whatever meager savings they have in the bank.

It's about control, really. The corporate types and their water carriers will talk about socialism or government control encroaching upon everyone's freedom of choice. In reality, the corporate masters of the universe are secretly celebrating that workers have no choice at all but to be beholden to the HR office and insurance benefits that get more expensive and shittier by the year.

[CanSocDem]

6. Exactly!! Great post. (eom)

[alarimer]

7. They would have to pay workers more to get them to stay.

Right now, it's benefits keeping people from jumping ship to a better job. I know I'd think twice.

[Efilroft Sul]

10. Absolutely.

I know of a few friends who are hoping to not get laid off and make it to the point that they are eligible for Medicare. The benefits, crappy as they have become over the years, are really the only reason why they stay on. Well, there's the paycheck, too, but it kind of stinks — but that proves your point that employers would have to pay more to get workers to stay. I think big business calculated long ago that paying the costs of benefits is worth the price of keeping wages down and employees in line.

[Hortensis]

14. For sure that's part of it. Many are also run by conservatives, though,

Last edited Fri Nov 6, 2015, 09:31 AM - Edit history (1)

who are swept up in today's right-wing anti-government ideology. Profits are not always the controlling motive.

I was just reading that many of our thousands of local power companies won't cooperate with Washington to protect against cyber attacks, leaving their own companies, customers and homes wide open to destruction, because of anti-government beliefs.

[Efilroft Sul]

18. That's bloody stupid on the power companies' part.

The conservative execs seem to forget about the law of unintended consequences. It CAN happen to them.

Holy shit, how do these people manage to keep getting into positions of responsibility? They're not fit to run my kids' lemonade stand.

[Hortensis]

19. Oh, yes. And we know for sure that ISIS, for just one,

has been trying to take down parts of our grid -- unsuccessfully so far. It's apparently technically very, very difficult to actually manage because of the complexity of our slapped-together, piecemeal "systems" -- the reason one of the hundreds of attempts each year has not already succeeded, but no expert believes it will not happen. The questions are when, where, how bad. A whole region or regions down for weeks to months is a real possibility.

I'm reading Ted Koppel's new book, Lights Out, now. (Why I'm distracted into talking about this.) He obviously wrote it to be fairly quick and easy reading in hopes of making more people aware, but it's entertaining enough and discusses some things I hadn't already read about. Because of the disastrous effects of deregulation in the energy sector, we're actually even less secure now than our previous failed levels.

[Efilroft Sul]

20. Thanks for the tip on Koppel's book.

If I get a moment to breathe in the next two months, I'll try to read it.

[Live and Learn]

2. Single payer is far cheaper and saves lives. There is no (worthy) debate.

Not to mention, (as Bernie says) health care is a human right. If it is not, then we have absolutely no right to control medications.

[Recursion]

3. Why is he paying 33% overhead?

The average for private insurance is 13%.

Is he counting hospital overhead? His own HR department's?

[eridani]

4. No, it's 33%. By cutting things out of the definition, you can get a lower number n/t

[Hortensis]

15. What about the ACA's 80/20 rule that requires 80% of all

premium dollars to be spent on patient care, 85% for large plans covering a lot of employees? It may be this guy did his research before the ACA. 33% was not unusual then.

[eridani]

16. Insurance companies are quite adept at renaming overhead as care n/t

[Hortensis]

17. Yes, I'm not seeing news about widespread collusion by

the government to not audit this fraud. I do see occasional reports of refunds to customers. ??

[B Calm]

8. I remember Toyota picking Canada over Alabama (2006) because they had health care.

[polly7]

9. Health care IS a human right.

And, the best possible should be available to all people everywhere in the world, no matter their financial circumstance. Anyone who believes it should be for profit, is as dangerous and disgusting as someone with plenty himself denying a starving child food or water unless he/she can pay up. Sorry to be so blunt, but it is a basic human right, and something I find opposition to almost inconceivable.

[lovuian]

11. Our health system is collapsing ...its reality

Corporations realize it too.....prices can't continue to go up and up and up

it's cutting into their budgets and their employees are getting sicker not better with our current system

[zipplewrath]

12. The GOP will bring it to us

I've said for years that single payer is coming, and the GOP will bring it to us. The major multinationals are going to get tired of paying for a cost which the other countries get to share across their economies. We're going to get "single payer" and it reality it will end up being a class based system where the richest get the most and the poorest the least.

[eridani]

13. That is what happened in Taiwan in the 90s. The left opposition proposed it, and

--the center-right ruling party took care to enact it in time to benefit from its popularity.

[eridani]

21. Some good references on this

The Business Case for Single Payer: http://tinyurl.com/ok2f7un
See also: www.fixithealthcare.com
#businesscaseforsinglepayer #singlepayer

[Vinca]

22. You would think corporations would be all over the GOP to fight for single-payer.

It would save them a fortune. But, you'd also think they'd be voting Democratic since the economy plummets under the GOP over and over and over again.