– Income-based premiums
Letters from readers
Published: 06/13/2024, 09:08 a.m.
Among the main objects put to the vote on June 9 was the initiative Maximum 10% of income for health insurance premiums. His rejection makes our reader react.
KEYSTONE
Subscribe now and enjoy the audio playback feature.
BotTalk
Grand-Saconnex, June 9
The socialist initiative aimed at limiting health insurance premiums to 10% of income was therefore refused by the Swiss people. It would have nevertheless made it possible to offer a breath of fresh air to citizens with modest incomes, but it posed several problems, including an explosion in expenditure for the State (additional subsidies of 3.5 billion). The German-speaking people rejected it, partly because they did not want to pay for French-speaking people who were more spendthrift than themselves. So here we are again, back to square one. Today’s losers talk about the single fund, which poses other problems, which I cannot mention here.
For my part, I don’t understand why we don’t finally come to premiums set according to income, as is done in all OECD countries. This solution has the advantage of being fair and of not leading to additional expenditure for the State, at a time when it needs to make savings, particularly at the level of the Confederation.
This system would not penalize less spending cantons for the benefit of more spending cantons. Furthermore, according to a projection echoed by the “Tribune”, such a system would benefit 90% of Swiss people. Unfortunately, we can fear that the most privileged 10%, who make up our ruling spheres, will oppose it with all their might. These are the same people who campaign for tax cuts, who block all cost reductions in the field of health (lobbyists), who refuse to increase aid and call into question the minimum wage…
The major objection to income-related premiums is the lack of incentive to limit spending, and a supposed misperception of the true costs of health care. What bad faith! Expenditure tends to increase in any case (aging of the population, more sophisticated treatments).
Measures such as the health record, blocked for 10 years, or the obligation to integrate into a healthcare network would be likely to reduce waste and control soaring expenses. What are we waiting for to adopt them? For the rest, unless we defend two-tier medicine, there is no other solution than the pooling of costs, in one way or another. The current system is no longer viable anyway, because more and more citizens can no longer cope with the frantic pace of annual increases!
Jacques Morard
Did you find an error? Please report it to us.
26 comments
