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: TimF who wrote (3988)	1/18/2008 11:36:02 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

Also if "the private market serves us best 99% of the time, the remaining 1% doesn't leave enough for health care (which takes up about 15% of our GDP). Maybe you think something more like the private market serves us best 70% of the time.... Health insurance comes nowhere near 15% of GDP.

To: TimF who wrote (3988)	1/18/2008 5:57:45 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

The reasons you gave most recently (profit and promotional costs) also apply in other industries. If reducing or eliminating them amounts to a real savings than why wouldn't doing the same thing be beneficial elsewhere? The only way to eliminate such corporate overhead is for the government to nationalize other industries. What in my posts would ever make you think that's something I would favor?? This is a national health care thread and I've specifically commented only on the health care industry. I'm a committed capitalist and trade the markets for a living. I try to keep myself free of any ideologies and open to all sorts of common sense approaches to problem solving. It's not any more complicated than that:)