Related Articles

One Comment

  1. 1

    Tim Woodruff

    Agree with almost everything in above. But…..two points
    1. Whilst the Federal G may have a fiscal obsession the real problem is that it is ideologically opposed to equity, to equality of opportunity and firmly believes that the best the masses deserve is a good safety net.

    2. ‘equitable and efficient’ co-payments are reported to exist in quite a few European countries. Why co-payments? Why not no co-payments? What is the purpose of co-payments? If it is to send a price signal to those who can afford them, how can they be made equitable? A $100 co-payment for Alan Joyce means little. A similar co-payment for someone on a comfortable $100,000 income will mean a lot more. That isn’t equitable. Is it to raise revenue? Why not just use standard taxes? Is it because other countries have them? Not a good justification. Co-payments simply ask people to pay twice, once through taxes and then with the co-payment. Why is one payment (adjusted according to means) not sufficient?

    tim woodruff
    doctors reform soceity

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

© 2015 – 2020 Croakey | Website: Rock Lily Design

right-share-menu

Follow Croakey