A battle is raging and it appears that some of our larger corporations are losing big time. It appears the fight is to figure out a means to avoid the legacy costs associated with providing adequate healthcare to employees.
It is clear that insurance companies have reaked havoc on an already broken system. I have not been happy with fact that my pops has struggled to make ends meet, while he has spent thousands of dollars on anti-rejection medicine, to maintain the kidney he received roughly 5yrs ago. Is it a necessary evil? I'm not at all certain. What is clear, is that we have a system which is financed by the taxpayer and employer. The argument has always been, that the government should not finance healthcare.
However, the model appears to be working quite well in Canada and Europe. Why haven't we adopted at least a pseudo-social policy stateside? The answer is fairly obvious, pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies have a symbiotic relationship. In that, they stand to lose a boatload of cash if the government were to regulate the system. Unfortunately, the consumers are those the suffer most from the collusion tactics. I'm really surprised that we have not witnessed more John Q types of rampages, as a result of the ever increasing health care premiums and the general exclusion of the under or unemployed.
Every taxpaying citizen should have access to affordable healthcare.
However, I do not believe that large corporations should be picking up the tab for healthcare.
Should this practice continue you'll see more companies in financial straits, just like GM.
At this stage, bankruptcy may be the best bet for GM. Only time will tell.