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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (235792)	7/9/2007 1:05:31 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 281500

But what I asked you is, where are your figures that health care is "worse". For many people, probably for most people, government tinkering made things better. You only need to look at the care for the elderly to see that. Now you can argue the cost isn't worth the care, but I don't see how you can argue the care is "worse". And if we can help the elderly, we can help the young, and everyone else. The question is, how much is a healthy life worth, and what are we willing to pay? That is the question France and England have answered with socialized medicine. Healthy lives are worth a lot to them, and they are willing to pay. Their systems seem to provide a better quality of care at a lower price. If you have data to the contrary, I'll be happy to look at it. If you have some data on how the government actually made care worse I'll look at that too, but so far I have seen nothing. I've given you stats and graphs. Give me something to support your POV.