Talk:Health insurance in the United States

message: The lead has been edited back a forth recently, changing the sentence . . . 
:"The US mixed economy/market-based health care system relies heavily on private and not-for-profit health insurance, which is the primary source of coverage for most Americans."
. . . back and forth between "mixed economy" and "market-based".
Right now I'm inclined to suggest going with . . .
::"The US health care system relies heavily on private and not-for-profit health insurance, which is the primary source of coverage for most Americans."
. . . because the issue isn't really that relevant to health insurance.
But, most people in the U.S. would not describe the health care system as a "mixed economy" one, however, because outside of some limited examples such as the Veterans Administration health system, most medical facilities and providers are privately rather than governmentaly owned and operated.  The insurance market is a bit different, because there are significant government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.  That's on the reimbursement side, however, and the term "mixed economy" is not generally used to describe social insurance systems, but rather systems where there is government ownership of health care delivery systems. EastTN (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point distinguishing between health care and health insurance.  Since the sentence in question doesn't make the distinction as clearly, I'm for leaving it as is. --Ronz (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Describing the US Health Care System 

message: I notice there are links to the United Kingdom's healthcare system at the top of the article; I'm assuming that this is a mistake (the article started with 'In the United Kingdom' until I recently changed it), but could this be to provide a comparison between the US and UK systems?
Nicoleelkins (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, Nicole.  Yesterday, the article was vandalised by an IP address.  Your edit today corrected one element of the vandalism, but left several others in place. I've restored the pre-vandalism version.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to United Kingdom

message: Until PPACA, there was essentially zero federal regulation of health insurance. Yet this article has no discussion of state regulation and variations. Not saying I'm going to fix it, but it'll need to be addressed... II | (t - c) 05:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  More state by state analysis 

message: Some interesting things happening that could be covered:
* TRUMP HRA PROPOSAL SURPRISINGLY SUBSTANTIVE, SAYS OBAMA ADMIN OFFICIAL - HRAs could put a bunch more people onto the exchanges, maybe revitalize them?
* The false promise and limitations of pre-tax health accounts - a bit more skeptical
* Will Trump's push for flexibility reshape health insurance markets? - not sure about the 1332 waivers stuff
* Selling Health Insurance Across State Lines Is Unlikely to Lower Costs or Improve Choice - not as interesting as the above stuff
II | (t - c) 06:29, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trump initiatives 

message: There is a noticeboard discussion regarding the neutrality of 's edits to this article (Special:Diff/910497164/912742742) and other articles related to Medicaid estate recovery. If you're interested, please participate at . — Newslinger talk 17:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This article still has a POV tag. Does the article still include biased or opinionated content? Jarble (talk) 13:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The disputed content from 2019 is not currently present in the article, so I've removed the  tag. Thanks for the reminder. — Newslinger talk 07:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noticeboard discussion regarding {{np|NormSpier}}'s recent edits