IF there was national health care, would it affect other insurance?

Question

such as car insurance, house insurance, workmen's comp?
Since everyone would be covered medically, would it affect those kinds of insurance?

Please don't preach that national health care isn't free. I already know that.
My question is do you know if it would affect other insurances.

Answer 1

Good question I think that is would have to reduce the Liabilty as there would be no Medical need to cver injury, there would be only pain and suffering and punative damages(punishment)

Answer 2

Everyone seems to assume that national health care would be "free." In the countries that have national health care, it is not free--doctors must be paid, hospitals must be funded, as do staff from the administrator down to the janitor.

I think everyone interested in national health care should look at the existing examples of national health care, i.e. Canada, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Germany, and others. I think you would find that huge differences exist according to the culture and society. The Netherlands functions quite well from a tax-funded system. Great Britain suffers under a similar system. Germany is less a system of nationalized medicine as a system of mandatory insurance.

The united States is making far too many generalizations without any real proposal.

Do you know of any real American proposal for national health care? I do not.

Addition: We cannot evaluate what impact national health care will have on other insurances until we know what type of a plan will exist. If it is a system of mandatory health insurance like Germany's in which taxes are used in cases where someone cannot afford insurance, the industry may benefit; however, if it is a nationalized system like England's, insurance companies will try to make up the loss through other products. Until we have a sound proposal, we cannot meaure the impact. JLS

Answer 3

It might have an indirect effect on workmen's comp, if both were gov't programs and budget tight, but I don't see how it could effect private ins. co's, except that maybe you could afford better coverage, not having to pay for health insurance. Also, there would still be plenty of doctors with established practices who would not be forced to accept all insurances, including national health. So people with money or private supplemental insurance could go to their private doctors and stay in private rooms ;and not have to stand in lines at govt clinics like the squeakers want you to think.
But if they just needed something basic, like a flu shot, they could get it free or cheaply like the masses and not have to pay their doctor for an office visit.
Also, since companies wouldn't have to consider health insurance for their employees as their expense, they could pay you more.

Answer 4

NATIONAL HEALTH CARE WOULD EFFECT THE COST OF EVERYTHING. HOW DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNMENTS OF SOCIALIZED COUNTRY'S PAY FOR THE MEDICAL CARE. THE NUMBER ONE PROPONENT OF FRANCE DEFICIT IS HEALTH CARE. THE PRICE OF GASOLINE IN NORWAY IS ABOUT $9.00 PER GALLON DUE TO HEALTH CARE. THE GOVERNMENTS HAVE TO PAY FOR IT SOME HOW AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT YOU WILL IN THE END PAY FOR IT. THE OUT OF POCKET COST (CO-PAY) IN SOCIALIZED COUNTRY'S IS ABOUT THE SAME AS WE PAY HERE IF NOT A BIT MORE. SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IS NOT THE WAY TO GO.

We should also keep in mind that the “nearly 50 million” without health insurance is an intentionally misleading number: Most of the uninsured are either uninsured by choice (mostly young and healthy people, 40% of the uninsured), eligible for public health programs but haven’t signed up (30% of the “uninsured”), or simply between jobs and likely to have insurance again within months. And, believe it or not, 20% of people the Census Bureau counts as uninsured are not American citizens. The number of truly, involuntarily, and permanently uninsured is a small fraction of what socialized medicine proponents claim.

The primary reason that medical costs are rising so rapidly is the disconnect between the consumer (patient) and the supplier, namely that the consumer does not feel enough of the cost and therefore has little incentive to be careful how much he uses. (Imagine auto insurance that covered minor scratches and oil changes.) Creating a “single payer” system will only make that problem worse. ...

Answer 5

Not at all....all types of insurance are seperate issues. Also, let's stop using the term NATIONAL HEALTH CARE. The subject is NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE. The government isn't going to take over hospitals or your local Doc in the Box....what will happen is that these people will actually get paid with 99% less of the hassle that they now have getting the private health insurance mafia to pay up.

Answer 6

To some extent... Actually it wouldn't eliminate insurance companies even in regards to health as the more affluent constituents could purchase added protection at their whim.
It's also necessary to understand that insurance companies are very well diversified into many different aspects such as IRA investments, annuities, and even sectors that aren't generally associated with insurance agendas.
Taxes would probably go higher. My personal perspective on this is... Yes, I am my brother's keeper and I have a responsibility to the rest of humanity. If anyone is in any need of medical assistance, is in pain, and needs care, I think they should have it and will pay my part to see that it's provided for them. This goes for smokers, drinkers, fat, skinny, overexercisers and underexercisers. EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE HEALTHCARE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THEM UNCONDITIONALLY!!!

Answer 7

I think dano is right - a lot of vehicle insurance has an element of medical coverage mixed in it (for injuries resulting from accidents)...I'm sure that would be effected one way or another.

Answer 8

Insurance companies would realize a higher profit margin and we would bleed out of our bank accounts from the increased taxes.

Answer 9

You would think it would save those companies money, wouldn't you. What do you think the odds of those savings being passed on to the consumer would be?