Well, I’ve said all I cared to say about the Health Care debacle. I had planned to write up a post about how we solve the problem, what I think the best steps are to take toward a more workable system. In fact, I had drafted a large part of it and was planning to post it tomorrow.
Then the CEO of Whole Foods went and did it for me.
He says it best, and I love most of the piece…until he gets to the part about how our health problems are self-inflicted by overeating, not exercising and smoking.
Which is a popular opinion that I’m tired of tilting at just for the moment. I will ask this one thing of Mr. CEO of Whole Foods, though. And that is “if these fattening foods are so awful, why do you sell them in your store?” Seriously, Whole Foods sells ‘small’ gelato cups the size of a grapefruit and frosted cinnamon rolls as big as your head. And they’re the only grocery store I’ve ever been in which sells chocolates behind a candy counterooops…scratch that. I forgot they did it in the Food Halls at Harrods. If that counts.
So preach on about how bad it is to be fat, but don’t hesitate to make money off those appetites and foods you demonise. Kinda cool how that happens.
——
UPDATE
I’m a bit upset at the small-mindedness over on Daily Kos, where they seem to think that this statement by the Whole Foods guy is some bloody betrayal of Progressivism. I just don’t understand this way of thinking–that unless you’re on Our Side you’re a blackguard. Although their threatened boycott of Whole Foods may mean that it’s less crowded the next time I go in for one of those Giant Gelati or Cranium Cinnamon Rolls.
Just Another Pretty Farce 
“Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.” – I have an issue with this one, to the extent that (state) government mandates have been necessary to get some insurance companies to cover contraceptives; I’d be surprised if it were really “customer preference” that those companies not cover contraception prior to the mandates.
Plus, this: Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans strikes me as funny. Because the insurance industry doesn’t seem to have many obstacles to creating high-deductible plans for those of us with pre-existing conditions.
“I have an issue with this one, to the extent that (state) government mandates have been necessary to get some insurance companies to cover contraceptives; I’d be surprised if it were really “customer preference” that those companies not cover contraception prior to the mandates.”
I’m not sure I agree, because I don’t think it does any good. The original idea of insurance is to cover thinks that present a risk. If something is 10% likely to happen, insurance will probably be about 10% of the cost of that event. If something is 90% likely to happen, the cost of insurance for that thing happening will be very close to the cost of that event happening. In other words, there’s a very good chance that a woman before menopause will be taking birth control, so guess what – they factor that into the cost of insurance. When an event is very likely, the cost of insurance vs. the cost without insurance will be somewhat close to each other.
I’m not saying covering contraceptives is bad – my family has used it in the past, it is just no longer insurance, it’s essentially prepaid health.
I could understand the argument that an insurance company is required to offer certain types of insurance (although I disagree), but I don’t understand the requirement that the customer would have to buy it. From my understanding that’s how it is right now. Customers must buy certain types of insurance, it’s not just a restriction on the comapnies.
Well, of course, the company also gives you the option of not buying the insurance with the huge deductible. But then, of course, you have no insurance.
nm, I was referring not so much to the deductible, but what all comes with the package, i.e. birth control, certain types of counseling, etc… I’m just saying it seems reasonable for somebody to have flexibility in what insurance they buy, as with a car, computer, house, etc…
But back to the high deductible, maybe it would be nice to have that option, again, there’s a difference between requiring a company to offer a high AND low deductible vs. only being allowed to offer a low deductible.
Well, of course, the company also gives you the option of not buying the insurance with the huge deductible. But then, of course, you have no insurance.
I think maybe something wasn’t clear in the original article.
I’m assuming that WF offers the same plan that we’ve got through T’s employer, because it’s now a common work-around that’s all the range in trendy companies. (T. works for a trendy company along the same lines as WF.)
You have a High Deductable Plan. But then you also get a pre-loaded Debit Card in the amount of the Deductable–provided for by the company. It’s much cheaper for them to do it this way than to pay the premiums on a low-deductable plan. So the employees aren’t out any take-home paycheck money.
The debit cards (linked to HSAs) are, I believe, tax deductable for the employer, so it amounts to a huge savings. I read through the article twice. Theirs likely operates the same way, although at first blush it sounds like the employee pays the deductable out of their take-home paycheck money.
And to Chance’s earlier point about the difference between prepaid health care and health insurance; if possible I’d elect for a plan that covers the high-end stuff (x-rays, CAT scans, hospital stays, specialty meds) and then pay the low-end stuff myself. I can swing a $75 doctor visit on the odd occasion.
In the past when we’ve talked about this, I (and several others) have likened the current state of health insurance to having your auto insurance pay to put gas in your car and have your oil changed. I think that’s an apt analogy, as is having your homeowners’ insurance pay to replace lightbulbs and have a yard crew mow your lawn.
there’s a difference between requiring a company to offer a high AND low deductible vs. only being allowed to offer a low deductible.
My point is that it isn’t difficult for insurance companies to offer high deductible plans. They offer a wide variety of them. To suggest that one reason the current system is failing so many people is that there are obstacles in the way of companies offering high deducible plans is akin to saying that another of the problems is that the sky is green.
And, Kat, I envy you your $75 doctor visits. I have yet to have a routine office visit in Nashville that cost me less than $100, in network. Wait, that’s not true. My follow-up visit to the neurosurgeon when I was having all that back and arm trouble was only $40. Of course, the initial visit was $400.
You are not a nice kitty.
Chance raises what I consider to be the critical issue at hand: Medical Insurance vs Healthcare.
The minute you force insurance companies to take on people with pre-existing conditions, you have moved from insurance to managed care. Same goes for forcing them to cover contraception or Viagra or whatnot.
[…] by Chance on August 28, 2009 Kat linked to a great article in which the CEO of Whole Foods lists some great steps toward health care […]
Thanks for the great article.