Healthcare - DonationBasedHealthCare - CooperativeHealthCare - old content moved to HealthCareArchive
(page is work in progress)
(summarization of discussion at Coworking Google Group your input here or there appreciated! :) )
large institutional investors (think, your pension
or 401 plan) as any nefarious scheme to screw
people out of their money. Having, say, $$$ in
a health care mutual fund or ETF provides a little
more perspective, as such an investor may well
recoup health care costs from one side on
the other side.
in health care. I'm neither for nor against large
torts, I can see arguments both ways, but either
way the risk of billion dollar torts is a part of
doing business. Any health care union will need
to have a plan for dealing with potentially
of large lawsuits.
broken, given the situation with medical schools
and legal prohibition against forming a health
care union. In a freer market, neither of these
prohibitions would be allowed.
provide some serious leverage on the legislative
front, on both sides of congress. The dems will
be interested for obvious reasons, but strangely
enough, the more right repubs would back it because
it allows people more freedom for individual
initiative, with commensurate personal responsibility.
A win/win.
the following makes for a no-brainer bill:
1) Stirs up strong emotions in a large voting bloc. In this
case, almost every believes Something Must Be Done.
2) Almost impossible to articulate a good argument against it.
Who could argue against less expensive health care without
coming across as anti-consumer?
3) Relatively weak and unfunded opposition who rely only on making
logical arguments, but don't have a political war chest behind them to
give large contributions to Senators and members of Congress.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is the hard one: the health care industry has some of the
most powerful backers existing.
4) Allows the proponents to easily score cheap, low-risk political
points. Politicians who oppose the bill on principle can be branded
as against consumers. In this case, opposition is ridiculous.
People can form credit unions for banking, but not health
care unions? Ridiculous.
5) NO DEBATE in Congress -- Both parties needing to
Do Something About Health Care, with the added benefit
of Republicans get "smaller government" out of it.
6) Revenue-neutral. All costs are thrown on the consumers.
Government bears little or no costs. Can this be done?
Almost certainly there will need to be some limited form
of regulation, to the same extent credit unions have at least.
"Here is an offer: $150 donation to get a CA or
DE non-profit incorporated to formally explore
health care options for the coworking model.
CA does not charge 1st year franchise fee
($800), so this can be done reasonably
inexpensively."
SamRose believes the quickest way to implement what DaveDoolin desribes above is to:
1. Create an equitable, legally sound model from the ground-up that gives people the legal right to create and self-govern health care cooperatives. This would effectively be a nationwide legislation proposal, since no current laws exist that accomplish this
2. Connect with potentially interested political action networks, like MoveOn.org, CommonCause, and any other. Offer solution as a package to networks, and work with networks to coordinate activists to lobby congress to change laws nationally. This is a tough proposition, but I believe these are the actual necassary steps to see this through (SamRose)
Page Information
|
Wiki Information |
Recent PBwiki Blog Posts |