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: Road Walker who wrote (2804)	11/9/2007 4:08:24 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

LOL, I agree it's not the single payer part. It's the 'universal' part that increases average longevity. Its not clear that any real world move to universal health care increases longevity above what it would otherwise be in that state, province, or nation. And also that differences health care are not the overwhelming reason for differences in life expectancy, but rather just one of many causes. Whew. You finally admit that universal health care increases longevity. What a bizarre statement. Saying that difference in health care are one factor in differences in life expectancy doesn't even vaguely resemble saying that universal health care systems increase longevity over more market based or mixed systems. Edit - Expanding on that thought. "Universal" or "not universal" is only one of many possible differences in health care systems, and its only one of many differences between the health care systems in the US and Canada, or the US and the UK, or any other two countries you want to compare.