3/21/2014

Leong Sze Hian’s comments on the Medishield Life

Leong Sze Hian asked several questions on the Medishield Life Scheme following Gan Kim Yong’s comments in Parliament in his article, ‘Alternative daily news(81) Affordable Medishield Life?’ posted in the TRE. His questions would help many to have a better understanding of the things not said about the Scheme and is a compelling read, highly recommended for all Sinkies who are still not aware of what this Scheme is all about and how it would hit them when it comes into force.
 

I would just want to expand on a couple of points made by Sze Hian. He quoted Gan Kim Yong saying these:
 

1. “The premiums that lower- and middle-income households will have to pay for the new Medishield Life insurance that kicks in next year, will be the same or lower than what they now pay. That is after taking into account the Government’s permanent subsidies and Medisave contributions and top-ups.
 

2. “… a typical Singaporean household, comprising a working-age couple with two school-going children, will take up no more than half of their annual Medisave inflow to pay for their MediShield Life premiums.
 

In point 1, the meaning is that the gross premium would be higher but would be offset by permanent subsidies, Medisave contributions and top ups. Gan had said that the net amount to be paid would be the same or lower than what they are paying now. Would this be the same as time goes by? Would the permanent subsidies match any increases in future premiums? Would future premium hikes eat up all future Medisave contributions? Would top ups cease in the future or varies?
 

For the initial stages of the Medishield Life’s implementation, the net premiums paid could be reasonable if they are lower or the same. But there is no guarantee what the amount will be like when the gross premium will definitely be much higher.
 

As for point 2, the base reference is a typical household of two working adults and two children, and the premiums paid will be no more than half their annual Medisave contributions. Sounds fair and good. The problem comes when there is only one working adult. The problem will be further compounded for families with more than two children and only one working adult. For those single parents with 4 or more children, tough, take my word for it.
 

And the most important part that is yet to be made known, what will the Medishield Life cover and what not covered?

Kopi Level - Green

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am not too comfortable with the first point about "after taking into account the Government's permanent subsidies and 'medisave contributions' and top-ups".

In other words, as long as medisave contributions go up in tandem with increases in premiums Sinkies are deemed to be paying 'the same or lower than what they now pay'. Is that the premise or am I mistaken? And is that a loophole that allows the Government to keep on increasing medisave contributions indefinitely to feed the premium blackhole?

That certainly does not lend credence to the argument of Sinkies paying the same or lower down the road, because contributions to medisave comes from worker's pockets too.

patriot said...

They will shift the Goal Post all the time to make sure the People Score their own goals.

patriot

Virgo49 said...

The Top Ups only temporarily for a few times and will said depend on the economy.

Or after we won the GE, then complete HALT.

As for those with existing illness, many clauses that would exempt payment or claims.

Even for a simple case of hypertension, the clause stipulated even blood disorders and whatever connect to this chronic sickness.

They will cover all fields so that you claim nothing out of them.

The excess clause for vehicle claim will now be more applicable to the HUMANS.

Anonymous said...

What is it that makes the govt from managing the coverage directly than getting private insurance involvement. This is a NATIONAL PROGRAM so why let private org benefit fm it. It shld be run with ZERO profit . I personally believe govt can still do if they want to and i sincerely hope someone in authority will make the right decision before its too late.

Matilah_Singapura said...

I think those who don't jump into MSL now are being silly. The deal looks like a damn good one -- SG.GOV is covering most of the initial cost -- which means in the future they won't so costs will rise.

I'm thinking of cancelling my crazy-expensive Aussie private cover and pay for health insurance in Singapore instead.

Singapore's public health care is world class. So far, so good.

b said...

When there is a major health problem, they will say it is useless to save you - better to let you die than suffer, better for the family, etc etc. They will not try to save you unless you are some big shot. They kept the premiums you paid and they will pay out very little in terms of costs. It is a rip off. Healthcare should be free to all - financed by the other direct and indirect taxes we have paid.

b said...

When there is a major health problem, they will say it is useless to save you - better to let you die than suffer, better for the family, etc etc. They will not try to save you unless you are some big shot. They kept the premiums you paid and they will pay out very little in terms of costs. It is a rip off. Healthcare should be free to all - financed by the other direct and indirect taxes we have paid.

Anonymous said...

Medishield Life is no good.

Whatever they do is NEVER good enough. ONLY and ONLY MY OPPOSITION can do better for us SINGAPOREANS, we locals will SUPPORT each other, moral support.

I PATRIOT





Matilah_Singapura said...

@459:

>> Healthcare should be free to all - financed by the other direct and indirect taxes we have paid.

That has very bad consequences, one obvious one being unsustainable. It becomes a vast sink hole for capital, which might be needed to fund defense, education etc. And you end up paying more and more tax, because when the govt runs things, costs invariably blow-out to crippling levels.

But the one that bothers me most is the shackle on our own individual personal freedoms:

If I am being taxed for your healthcare, then I get to say how you live your life. Which means that I HAVE THE TAX PAYER RIGHTS to tell you, via use of government intervention in your life:

1. How and what to eat -- i.e. total ban on "unhealthy" foods
2. What leisure activities you may engage in
3. Not to smoke, drink or do anything deleterious to your health.
4. Not become fat and sedentary -- i.e. force you to exercise to a fixed govt standard

....and so on.

You can imagine the nightmare. All because people wrongly think that healthcare is a "right", which it is clearly NOT.

Anonymous said...

What if the people are infected by mad cow disease, bird flu and other infectious diseases?
Plse do not do bird talks like mad cow.

Matilah_Singapura said...

@146:

>> What if the people are infected by mad cow disease, bird flu and other infectious diseases?

All these are acts of nature. They are bound to occur at sometime, to someone.

Like all acts of nature, some will survive and others won't.

Even if the govt intervenes, not everyone will be save. The best the govt can do is to lead a collective effort with the population to minimise the consequences of widespread virulent outbreaks. The other cruicial role for the govt is ENFORCE quarantine.

Take the 2003 SARs outbreak as an e.g.

1. People still died regardless of govt intervention

2. The effort was collective

3. Govt enforced quarantine, because some irresponsible motherfuckers insisted in breaking being quarantined at home.

4. Govt was vigilant at points of entry -- thermal scanning etc.

Anonymous said...

Those got quarantine d and confined, no need to pay for foods and other essentials, including medical check-ups and all?

AND YOU THINK THEY ARE SICK BECAUSE THEY DID NOT

TAKE CARE OF THEIR OWN HEALTH?

They no need to work to earn to pay for above which are SUPER EXPENSIVE AS THEY ARE LIVING IN THE MOST EXPENSIVE CITY IN THE WORLD?