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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (1922)	8/31/2007 2:31:23 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

re: A fair price is probably somewhere in the middle. No, it has to be much closer to what the insurance companies pay. That's where they get the vast majority of their revenue, and they are profitable. re: The market in health care is incredibly distorted and there are winners and losers all over the place. Very screwed up system. That's something we (and most) will agree with. re: I tend to look at issues, including health care issues, in terms of long-term system efficiency and viability. Many people frame this particular issue in terms of winners and losers. They tend to opt for increased distortion geared towards their favorites. I find deliberately increasing distortion an unnatural act. In this case the losers are those least able to afford to lose. As far as distortions, a 5X to 10X difference in billing is huge distortion; I don't think making it more even would be "deliberately increasing distortion". Right now, at least in some cases, the poor and sick are subsidizing the people with insurance.