以就业为基础的健康保险和全民保险:人们知道的四件事并非如此

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW Connecticut Insurance Law Journal Pub Date : 2009-04-01 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1371965
D. Hyman
{"title":"以就业为基础的健康保险和全民保险:人们知道的四件事并非如此","authors":"D. Hyman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1371965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Employment-based health insurance is the Rodney Dangerfield of U.S. health policy: it gets no respect from anyone. Employment-based coverage (\"EBC\") may not get much respect, but it covers roughly 177 million people - and it appears to have considerable staying power - even if the principal explanation for that staying power is nothing more compelling than inertia. Given the likely prevalence of EBC for the foreseeable future, it is worth emphasizing four important points about EBC and universal coverage. What these points have in common is that they are myths - most people believe they are true, even though they are not. The four \"myths\" are these:* Employers pay for EBC;* There are 45.7 million uninsured Americans; * Universal coverage means everyone will have access to high quality care;* Universal coverage will solve the cost problems of American health care. The paper explains why each of these points are \"things people know that aren't so.\" It then highlights the budgetary and collective action problems with trying to get to universal coverage without relying on EBC, at least for the foreseeable future.","PeriodicalId":29865,"journal":{"name":"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2009-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Employment-Based Health Insurance and Universal Coverage: Four Things People Know That Aren't So\",\"authors\":\"D. Hyman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1371965\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Employment-based health insurance is the Rodney Dangerfield of U.S. health policy: it gets no respect from anyone. Employment-based coverage (\\\"EBC\\\") may not get much respect, but it covers roughly 177 million people - and it appears to have considerable staying power - even if the principal explanation for that staying power is nothing more compelling than inertia. Given the likely prevalence of EBC for the foreseeable future, it is worth emphasizing four important points about EBC and universal coverage. What these points have in common is that they are myths - most people believe they are true, even though they are not. The four \\\"myths\\\" are these:* Employers pay for EBC;* There are 45.7 million uninsured Americans; * Universal coverage means everyone will have access to high quality care;* Universal coverage will solve the cost problems of American health care. The paper explains why each of these points are \\\"things people know that aren't so.\\\" It then highlights the budgetary and collective action problems with trying to get to universal coverage without relying on EBC, at least for the foreseeable future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1371965\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1371965","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以就业为基础的医疗保险是美国医疗政策中的罗德尼·丹泽菲尔德(Rodney Dangerfield):它得不到任何人的尊重。以就业为基础的覆盖(“EBC”)可能不会得到太多的尊重,但它覆盖了大约1.77亿人——而且似乎具有相当的持久性——即使这种持久性的主要解释只不过是惯性。鉴于EBC在可预见的未来可能流行,关于EBC和全民覆盖有四个要点值得强调。这些观点的共同点是它们都是神话——大多数人认为它们是真的,即使它们不是。这四个“迷思”是:*雇主支付EBC;*有4570万美国人没有保险;*全民覆盖意味着每个人都能获得高质量的医疗服务;*全民覆盖将解决美国医疗保健的成本问题。这篇论文解释了为什么这些观点都是“人们知道的事情,但事实并非如此”。然后,它强调了至少在可预见的未来,试图在不依赖EBC的情况下实现全民覆盖的预算和集体行动问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Employment-Based Health Insurance and Universal Coverage: Four Things People Know That Aren't So
Employment-based health insurance is the Rodney Dangerfield of U.S. health policy: it gets no respect from anyone. Employment-based coverage ("EBC") may not get much respect, but it covers roughly 177 million people - and it appears to have considerable staying power - even if the principal explanation for that staying power is nothing more compelling than inertia. Given the likely prevalence of EBC for the foreseeable future, it is worth emphasizing four important points about EBC and universal coverage. What these points have in common is that they are myths - most people believe they are true, even though they are not. The four "myths" are these:* Employers pay for EBC;* There are 45.7 million uninsured Americans; * Universal coverage means everyone will have access to high quality care;* Universal coverage will solve the cost problems of American health care. The paper explains why each of these points are "things people know that aren't so." It then highlights the budgetary and collective action problems with trying to get to universal coverage without relying on EBC, at least for the foreseeable future.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Demand for Health Insurance in the Time of COVID-19: Evidence from the Special Enrollment Period in the Washington State ACA Marketplace Licensing the Insured: Providing Driver Licenses to Unauthorized Immigrants Has Not Impacted Auto Insurance in California Terrorism Risk Insurance Act: Time to Renew . . . or Rethink? Loss of ‘Unattended Property in a Public Place’ – Testing the Good Faith of the Travel Insurer The Insurance Business in Transition to the Physical-Cyber Market: Communication, Coordination and Harmonization of Cyber Risk Coverages
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1