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: John Koligman who wrote (2610)	11/1/2007 1:25:36 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

"Apparently most of the folks endlessly pushing statistics on this thread don't care too much about 'minor' problems like this, or other 'minor' problems like lack of choice in a large state like NY..." If the ability of capricious bureaucrats in places like NY to force insurers to cover treatments that people do not want was eliminated then market distortions like that would be greatly reduced if not eliminated. What if the market for everything was similarly Balkinized?

To: John Koligman who wrote (2610)	11/1/2007 3:51:06 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Apparently most of the folks endlessly pushing statistics on this thread don't care too much about 'minor' problems like this, or other 'minor' problems like lack of choice in a large state like NY... I don't think it's a minor problem. I just think the proposed solutions are bass-ackwards. As I understand the problem, it's wrongheaded regulation. If NY can engage in wrongheaded regulation, what's to keep the Feds from doing the same or worse if they assume responsibility and supercede NY? I think we have less risk with the market.