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: TimF who wrote (311740)	11/24/2006 10:42:08 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1590260

re: And medicare figures don't include the costs for the doctors to deal with medicare. Single payer may have a lower cost here. It will have a lower cost, substantially lower than dealing with 1500 separate insurers all trying to keep from paying the bills. Talk to a doctor about admin costs. re: Also there is reason to think that Medicare's overhead would go up if we made it a program for everyone. Quite the opposite. More transactions means less cost per transaction. re: To get a real cost comparison you have to include all the costs, both from Medicare, and from private insurance. I've seen no figure for all of Medicare's costs. I've seen wildly different figures for private insurance's costs. You present the case as something like "Medicare is cheaper and more efficient and the numbers back me up", but you don't have the real relevant numbers. I can't solidly refute you because I don't have the real relevant numbers either. Instead we have different guesses and estimates, that aren't even really estimates of the total cost, but rather only part of the cost. There are in depth studies out there... I don't have the time to find them. Bottom line is that we can insure everyone in the country for about the same cost as we pay now. You may not think insuring 40Million+ more people is a benefit; I do.