SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: yard_man who wrote (259835)9/10/2003 6:14:18 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor  Read Replies (2) of 436258
 
I see your point...but the system you've described is hopelessly complex with regard to underwriting, eligibility review and administration of claims. It's MORE complex than what we have now, in fact. The argument for nationalization centers around two key issues: Universal coverage and a very well circumscribed package of benefits that can be more simply, quickly and fairly administered. On the margin, it may be less expensive, but that's not the key issue (at least at first). Providers deal with fewer entities, which may cut costs on their end. If necessary, costs can be contained later by across the board reduction in benefits. For example, in one fell swoop Viagra could be made an exclusion. Or obesity surgery. Or breast reductions, ad infinitum. The basics are provided, not much more. If people want more they can pay for it themselves, or buy supplementals. It ain't perfect by a long shot, but it's a lot better than what we've got now.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News