expect that Medishield Life will encounter some of the following problems:
1. It aims to cover everyone for a lifetime, and to include pre-existing illnesses. Judging from the experience of Medicare in America, it could become very costly.
2. The key challenge is to manage the expectation of health care for the aged - a challenge that America, with their decades of experience, was not able to solve. Singapore will face the same challenges.
3. Asking everyone to pay for the cost of Medishield Life through insurance premiums will not be easy. The cost will be unaffordable.
4. Making it compulsory to solve Medishield Life will not work. Many people will not heave the money to pay the premium. Those who have, will complain about the cost.
5. We need an "out of the box" solution to manage the expectation of health care for the elderly - especially when the cost is paid by insurance, or by the government (like in America). I am not aware of any successful system to manage it well. But, it can be found, by an innovative approach.
1. It aims to cover everyone for a lifetime, and to include pre-existing illnesses. Judging from the experience of Medicare in America, it could become very costly.
2. The key challenge is to manage the expectation of health care for the aged - a challenge that America, with their decades of experience, was not able to solve. Singapore will face the same challenges.
3. Asking everyone to pay for the cost of Medishield Life through insurance premiums will not be easy. The cost will be unaffordable.
4. Making it compulsory to solve Medishield Life will not work. Many people will not heave the money to pay the premium. Those who have, will complain about the cost.
5. We need an "out of the box" solution to manage the expectation of health care for the elderly - especially when the cost is paid by insurance, or by the government (like in America). I am not aware of any successful system to manage it well. But, it can be found, by an innovative approach.
8 comments:
Why not take a look at Canada's national healthcare system.
Most Americans envy the Canadians on this matter.
SOURCE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-canadian-health-care-in-one-post/
I have read your blog and begin to have doubts on my life insurance plans. What are the questions I should ask my agent, so that I can make the right decision if I should cancel it
Mr. Tan's comments echo what has been in our mind. Many people would like to hear what kind of innovative approach feasible in the local situation.
We see Govt wan us to dig deeper into our pockets, as they anticipate medical costs would relentlessly rocket up.
With Insurance, the wool still comes from the sheep's back, with the Authorities trying to lessen its responsibility of medical costs to citizens.
Again, this scheme will be thrust down our throats with no recourse for objection whatsoever.
The so called consultation is just a PR exercise.
With your many years of experience in the insurance business your input for a viable and sustainable scheme will be most welcome. Afterall we are all in the same boat. As you have envisaged a lot of challenges for the scheme your feedback to the Government will save us a lot of headaches in the future. Your contribution I am sure will be appreciated by all Singaoreans.
This is a time bomb. It is not economically feasible to cover everyone, regardless of health condition, under the same terms and conditions. Either the government have to put in more subsidies every year or the public have to pay more premiums. There is another social impact. The healthy will question why they need to pay more premiums to subsidise the unhealthy, while the unhealthy will argue "Why not?"
Ref @Koh of Nov9:43pm, Mr Tan' s suggestions seem to have always fall on deaf ears despite his years of experience in Insurance and plain common sense.
The Authority is only interested in pushing away its responsibilities as a Government and Regulator.
Our govt spends only 1.5% of our GDP on health care. The lowest among developed countries.
Our govt should raise it to 5% of our GDP.
Hence the govt should foot the entire Medishield Life scheme.
Do you agree ?
Insurance should be left to private businesses. The govt should only be involved in enforcing contracts that the insurance companies have drawn up for their clients, not setting major rules of the contracts like covering illness for life. Insurance is purely a business decision and I treat any decision to buy insurance as such. Medical costs continue to skyrocket because of government interference, eg limiting Medicine degree intake, subsidising only certain treatments, making it illegal for effective alternative non-Western treatments to be recognised as medical treatments.
Post a Comment