There we just have disagreements and that's fine. I think that a public payer option can substantially streamline health care costs and produce a system that encourages preventative health care and provides reasonable remuneration to doctors while not incurring excessive overhead. You think otherwise. We both think the other person is a fucking idiot with no concept of healthcare information or economics. Well, I'm assuming that as we are on opposite sides of the issue it seems and that's what I think of you.
"Rationing" of healthcare is a reality. Doesn't matter if the system is private or public. The phrase itself is quite the canard. Rationing in the historical meaning would imply "you may not have this or this you only get this bit". But that is not what we are talking about at all. Rather we are talking about what, potentially, an insurer will pay for. That insurer, potentially but not actually at all mentioned in the current governmental discussions to my chagrin, might be the government. All plans currently under consideration retain the private employer health care system. So how, in fact, is there rationing in that? And even if there were a "public payer" option (dear Gods I hope there is) it would not prevent any individual from obtaining private insurance. So where is the rationing? If you mean that a potential public payer option (as remote as the possibility may seem) might not pay for some medical procedures...well, I'm a tad confused since insurance currently doesn't pay for all sorts of procedures. So perhaps you mean that a public option would not miraculously fix a problem that private insurance currently has but will do it at substantially lower prices? Save me your ill-fitting histrionics and hand wringing Robert. On this issue you are a concern troll and you'd do better focusing your energies on the very real issues of providing quality care and exploring the ways in which information technology can help the medical industry as a whole. Judah On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Robert Munn <[email protected]> wrote: > > Shifting costs to the government isn't going to fix the problem, it will > only make it worse. The end result of socialized medicine is going to be > rationing of care. Most of the developed world has the same problem- aging > populations and ever-more expensive drugs, tests, and surgeries. We need to > cut costs across the board in the health care industry or we are all going > to go bankrupt. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:291044 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
