评论“医疗保险福利:重新评估”。

E. Ginzberg
{"title":"评论“医疗保险福利:重新评估”。","authors":"E. Ginzberg","doi":"10.2307/3349825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Americans have repeatedly demonstrated their preference for health insurance against out-of-pocket payments for large medical bills. The proposed reliance on \"competitive markets\" is not likely to meet with public or congressional favor, and risks substantial new costs while promising little fiscal relief. A more modest proposal is offered.","PeriodicalId":76697,"journal":{"name":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. Health and society","volume":"65 1","pages":"230-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1984-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comment on \\\"Medicare benefits: a reassessment\\\".\",\"authors\":\"E. Ginzberg\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/3349825\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Americans have repeatedly demonstrated their preference for health insurance against out-of-pocket payments for large medical bills. The proposed reliance on \\\"competitive markets\\\" is not likely to meet with public or congressional favor, and risks substantial new costs while promising little fiscal relief. A more modest proposal is offered.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. Health and society\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"230-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1984-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. Health and society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/3349825\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. Health and society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3349825","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国人一再表明,他们更倾向于健康保险,而不是自掏腰包支付大笔医疗费用。依赖“竞争性市场”的提议不太可能得到公众或国会的支持,而且有可能带来大量新成本,同时也难以带来财政上的缓解。有人提出了一个更为温和的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comment on "Medicare benefits: a reassessment".
Americans have repeatedly demonstrated their preference for health insurance against out-of-pocket payments for large medical bills. The proposed reliance on "competitive markets" is not likely to meet with public or congressional favor, and risks substantial new costs while promising little fiscal relief. A more modest proposal is offered.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信