Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (529713)	1/26/2004 1:24:04 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

re: If you didn't make the deal, there would be no savings. exactly but that also imply that larger share of fixed cost is assign to us, US customers. Now, considering that fixed cost is most of the cost ....... re: do not understand why you would deny that the evidence of fitness is mortality improvements can not be explained by improved medical procedures alone. The mortality depends on life exposure to hazard, diet, fitness, etc..... re: In the instance of health insurance, competition mostly occurs at the level of the health plan at health plan level the optimization is done by insurance company which might have different criteria for selecting doctors than the person who needs care.... re: we get so much more that it is still a bigger bang for the buck I am not arguing that we are getting "bigger bang for the buck" but that in itself does not mean much since improvements are also coming from better technology and we should expect better care at the same cost. With proper insurance one should get the best available care at the time rather than better than what is used to be 30 years ago or 1000 years ago. Now to make matter a bit clearer, I am on a side of insurance comapnies. Insurance companies do what they design to do and fairly well. Insurance companies are not designed to deal with virtual care cost fixing by the medical industry -AK