本人认为，employer－based医保对费用增加有促进作用。好像给consumer多了一层隔离层。

所有跟帖： 

• no i don't agree -用户名被占用了- ♂ (420 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:01:29

• If group-rate can reduce the rate, wouldn't it be even lower if -老忽叔叔- ♂ (116 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:05:10

• yes! -用户名被占用了- ♂ (204 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:07:15

• That's a european-style system. It works great, but would never -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:36:08

• It works only in some counties which -用户名被占用了- ♂ (227 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:44:37

• Even that, I bet US will never pass anything like that. It's a -老忽叔叔- ♂ (86 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:46:23

• the insurance market is organized and regulated by the state,but -WXC1204- ♂ (530 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:25:38

• Wouldn't it be a socialism if you control the price? -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:38:40

• of course it is not, even worse ... -用户名被占用了- ♂ (281 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:42:50

• Haha, now I understand why GOP wants to have state control. -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:47:25

• But, it's a easy fix, I suppose, have a federal exchange. -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:48:43

• NO, it is not going to work! -用户名被占用了- ♂ (148 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:49:56

• So, more mergers of insurance companies? That will drive down th -老忽叔叔- ♂ (78 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:51:54

• Use anti-monoply law to break it -用户名被占用了- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:53:53

• then，break it！ -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 13:54:21

• break who? they exist only in small market -用户名被占用了- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 14:02:50

• small states or small market? -老忽叔叔- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/15/2012 postreply 14:08:25