The US Health System includes getting our money’s worth.
Principles that must be included are:

1. The person with the most incentive, best motive to select the right facility or doctor is the person getting the care.
The system provides the information needed for the selection. No outside entity is required for the selection.

2. The best person to guard against fraud or misuse of our health dollars is the person getting the health care. This person knows who showed up or delivered a service.

3. A person watches the spending of their own money much better than approving any other payment!

4. Therefore: our health system must use a health fund made up of contributions, according to their ability to pay, from those who will receive health care. Those using their money from the fund would then be obligated to contribute more in following years. Two funds would provide competition.

ADVANTAGES

We will start getting our money’s worth.
People would be free to seek a better job, if not tied down by health insurance. This is the best portability.
Not having to know, pick or directly fund health insurance would lead business to grow and hire more people.
Doctors would lose the expense of a specialist in insurance requirements and forms. Doctors could spend more time practicing medicine.
Medicare problems are solved. Medicaid problems become manageable.
This arrangement would include everything great about insurance with no funds diverted to for-profit companies. Such companies restrict health care. Some people of high quality or a business will supplement a fund. Any profits would stay in the people’s health fund.
Most people in the US will assist in their health care.
More money would become available for other purposes.
All needed Technology exits!

PROBLEMS

This foundation for America’s Health System has problems that have very good solutions. Our present health “systems” do not have good solutions.
These health funds would require many rules, accounting, checks and balances. Good people exist who would solve these problems.
Care for the young, old, and handicapped need additional arrangements.
Many people would lose money they are taking from our health dollars and would try to block any efficient system.
Some people might not know this is only a system for paying for health care, not the care.

Kenneth Brooks Richardson Texas

I understand that it drives up cost for everyone but it is still hypocritical for insurance to whine over be soaked like this when they soak MILLIONS of people everyday and increase the cost of living for insured and un-insured every day, and while they drive up costs in every facet of life.

Gutsy move: He’s a leader in the industry (health insurance) that 4 of 10 people believe is most responsible for increasing health costs, and “enjoys” a reputation as low as tobacco and oil companies.

More importantly, he was a key player in Governor Romney’s reform that mandated universal health coverage, about which he was skeptical. The media and voters are going to expect him to have some solutions to the health crisis.

Because of the risk of a national coverage mandate, and Mitt Romney’s continuing presence as a presidential candidate, Baker the politician’s views on health reform will be at least as interesting as Baker the health-plan CEO’s.