Since there aren't enough blogs about the health care/insurance debate

I was winding down for bed, and I ran across Republicans like Obamacare. I think it makes a lot of sense and is worth reading and considering.

But here's the thing.

I believe the entire premise is wrong.

Medical insurance is this delusion that got injected into the equation shortly after the Depression (-ish) when employers had to come up with extra benefits to work around government-mandated payroll caps.

Back then, hospitals were these awful places where people went to die. They wanted to update their image. So they set up this deal (if memory serves correctly, it started with Blue Cross/Blue Shield) where employers could set up plans that allowed people who felt sick to go to the doctor a few times every year.

The government got involved (well, it was never really out of the picture, since we're talking about corporations), and voila. Here we are.

Now the conversation is all about whether states can relax the requirement that insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions.

I ran across a bunch of people at work earlier today arguing about this. They seemed to agree that the obvious solution is

1. set up a plan where the federal government pays insurance premiums, with an option for rich people to get Cadillac plans
2. let the insurance companies set their own rates and exclude people with expensive pre-existing conditions

Everybody involved agreed that I make enough money that I should pay huge amounts to cover the poor.

And that that money has to go to the insurance companies.

Maybe someday I'll write about my dad's "Cadillac insurance plan" some other time. He probably had the sweetest labor union health insurance deal ever, until it ran out.

 I've been on a lot of sides of this. I've seen the "my wife is sick, and I'm too broke to do anything" version. Along with the "Crap, now I'm sick...I wish our insurance was as good as it was when my wife was sick" version. Add lots of variants for in-law problems.

One angle I've missed has been the actual doctors' perspective. The closest I've gotten there has been my conversations with Khrys. As a health-care provider, he thinks the government-provided options work great.

I also haven't run across the "Sorry, we've hit your limit. You'll have to figure out how to pay the rest" point.

In a lot of ways, that seems like the worst. That's the entire point behind paying for insurance in the first place. Something goes wrong, medical expenses go through the roof, and you're just trying to keep someone you love alive.

But, hey. You're starting to cost them money now. So you're done.

And we're back to my original point (I know, finally).

This isn't (or, at least, shouldn't) be about insurance.

As far as insurace goes, Medicare is pretty bottom-of-the-barrel. I like having access to a doctor, and an MRI machine, and good drugs, on a pretty reasonable basis. I *like* living in a first world country.

My knee did something terribly wrong last Monday (-ish).

Thanks to Laura (and my company's insurance plan), I got to talk to a doctor the next day. And then I had an MRI by the end of the week.

Canada generally gets much higher props for having much better health-care than the U.S.

According to http://www.ottawasun.com/2016/05/26/mri-wait-times-rise-again, in Canada I would have needed to wait 5.5 months to get an MRI for the problems I'm having with my knee.

Maybe their doctors are better?

Thanks to the magic of modern computers, I have a follow-up appointment tomorrow afternoon.

You know what isn't important to this point?

Insurance.