This past weekend was 'meet the parents' - round 1, up in the bay area. I think it is suffice to say it went well, and we all had a good time. Perhaps some photos soon, I haven't even looked at them all yet.

I had a thought yesterday on my way home from work, as I was changing stations on the radio and finally landed on NPR where they were discussing (and that might be a stretch... more like reporting on) the fact that 70% of people who voted for Obama listed health care as one of their primary concerns. In the past, I've been quite against any sort of government run health care. Look at the DMV and how disorganized that is! There are horror stories of other countries that have gov't run health care - not that they all end up that way, but it is easy to focus on the bad.

At the same time, there are some aspects of the way things are that I dislike perhaps even more. The first is business provided health insurance. Why does where I work have anything at all to do with my health insurance? The history probably has to do with the business being able to get it cheaper and ensure that those who otherwise wouldn't qualify for insurance now can get it, because others that qualify easily are under the same umbrella of company X.

My third thought on the issue is that the system is harmed by people who go to the doctor simply because they can, not because anything is wrong with them - and it's already covered by their insurance. You have a cold? Then go home and sleep and take vitamin C... stop infecting all the other people in the doctor's office... and wasting the doctor's time, and insurance's money.

Item number four on the issue is the idea of a 'provider network'. If I have to go to the hospital and I'm in Maine, then it should be equivalent to a visit within my home area. To think otherwise is ridiculous, and stems from the fact that medical expenses have multiple sets of costs... one set for the well insured which offsets another set for the uninsured who are charged less. If you're in the network, those hospitals are going to be nicer to the specific insurance company. Ridiculous.

The last issue that really peeves me, my company effectively would pay me more (via paying more for my insurance) if I chose a different plan, or if I was married or even more if I had kids! All of these things have absolutely nothing to do with my job, and should have nothing to do with my overall pay and benefits.

At the same time, I really like my insurance... high deductible with a medical savings account. It gives me a good choice of doctors with the ability to have 0 net medical expenses on the year. It also creates incentive for me to find cheaper care when available for things not fully covered, so that more money stays in the savings account for the future. I think that is overall good for the industry.

Taking all this into account, the thing I would love to see happen (although it probably won't anytime soon) would be a Federal Government run high deductible with medical savings account system for every US citizen. It appears to solve everything other than the fact that I'm not a fan of the gov't getting involved in my life. The federal government puts money into the savings account annually, or monthly and it can only be used for medical expenses or to meet the deductible for the high-deductible insurance. Citizens can opt to put more money into the account on a recurring basis and take tax deductions on those amounts. Preventative care is of course covered in full, but other doctor visits would be covered based on the care needed. Things like colds would not be covered by insurance, and the patient would have to pay for this out of the savings account or out of pocket if they've exhausted the account. More serious items would be covered once the deductible was met. Perhaps a form of income tax to fund the system would be put in place, but that should be offset by the businesses not having to pay for insurance directly and thus paying the employees more.