Der Trihs, please see my question above. Thanks.
Wouldn’t that more properly qualify as an employee benefit then UHC?
I don’t think so. All the doctors, PAs, nurses and technicians are military themselves. It’s not run on a “for profit” business model. Medical care provided to the spouses and dependents could be considered an employee benefit, I guess.
Retirees get private insurance, more or less. I think it depends where you live.
Being profit or not for profit isn’t relevant though, both types exist as insurance companies in the US. Military members get the benefit because they are employed by the US government so that’s why I would call it an employee benefit rather than an example of UHC.
To the OP:
Physicians For a National Health Care Program, a leading UHC advocacy group, estimates that funding an effective single-payer program in the US could be accomplished by keeping the current level of government spending on health care (Medicaid, Medicare, insurance for government workers, etc), and raising employer payroll taxes by 7% and income taxes by 2%. Since nobody would have to pay insurance fees anymore, this would represent a net savings for most employers and individuals; the big losers would be those companies that currently choose not to offer health care to their employees.
They also anticipate a one-time $20 billion investment would be needed for job retraining for people currently employed in the insurance and health administrative fields.
So, although “the government” would be spending more on healthcare, “we” (the US economy as a whole) would still be spending roughly the same amount; the extra costs of covering the uninsured and inadequately ensured would be made up for by the savings in adminstrative waste and insurance company profits.
So, your friend is mistaken; there is no good reason to fear that switching to a single-payer system needs to wait for flusher economic times.
I think I understand what you’re saying, and sorta not. If your company has an IT department and you have to avail yourself of their services, you’re not enjoying “IT insurance” as an employee benefit.
My office has a nurse on staff for the benefit of employees. (Ok, so they don’t do surgery…) I would consider that an employee benefit. They have decided that it is a good idea to employ someone for the good of the staff.
The military has decided that it is a good idea to employ medical staff to take care of their employees. That is why I see it in the same way.