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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (303967)	9/22/2006 1:33:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574054

Actually they would be lowered: There isn't sufficient information covering all of the costs to be able to back up that conclusion. Part of the reason single payer is less expensive is that they tend to stress preventive medicine... and because everyone is insured, problems are detected earlier and cured more cheaply. Earlier isn't always more cheaply. Treat someone now and they may not die of one condition, but instead die later of a much more costly condition. Of course the extension of life would be a good thing, but that doesn't make it cheaper. As for most expensive there are many reasons for that. The implication that it is only or mostly due to a smaller government role in health care isn't very well supported, in fact you have shown no solid data that indicates that its even partially because the smaller government role. I hardly consider that to be a fault of yours. Perhaps such data is impossible to provide. There are to many hypotheticals and too much complexity to be really sure. One can present informed opinion and speculation, but this isn't the type of subject that can easily be settled with simple concrete fact.