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: TimF who wrote (263076)	4/29/2008 7:40:48 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"People putting the data in, in unapproved ways can be, and sometimes have been prosecuted for fraud, over complex technical concerns, when the health care provider's entry may more accurately reflect reality than the government's ideas" WHAT? With nationalized health care, the cost of health care can be reduced on a per capita basis and the requirements for additional coverage can be eliminated. Preventive care, seeing people before their illnesses get worse for example, would also reduce the cost to the system. Bringing in additional doctors and nurses from overseas would also help. Other countries do not pay as much as we do. Since we already pay so much and do not cover everyone, we could cover all and have better services than they do in other industrialized countries. Again, what country is clamoring to have our system? ------------- You don't believe that other countries do better with less than we do? Let me sell you a newly painted purple bridge. Then prove to me that the US system is that great and worth what we pay for it. ------------- No, yet again I am asking you how you are applying the idea of consumer surplus to the health care system. ------------ No, people don't need to know who the FDA is or who UL is or what either of them do. Government regulation is good enough, not perfect but good enough, that most people are quite comfortable going to a store and purchasing most products. That is due to the track record of government regulation. Having regulation over, say, restaurant hygiene means that we do not have to worry most of the time that the restaurant we are eating at has rats and roaches crawling through the food bins. ------------ What government agencies are you talking about that survive even if they are harmful or useless? ------------ Lovely. You would have companies kill consumers (aka unlucky penguins on the front row) so that the other consumers would learn a valuable lesson about said company. That company then blithely changes its name, its address and goes back into business with consumers being none the wiser. That is an efficient way to keep companies from harming us. Do you know which toothpaste was poisoned or which dog food was poisoned? Which companies marketed these and what brands do they sell under through which outlets? How can you tell if they change packaging and continue to ply their wares? How many deaths does it take? More importantly, what kind of resources will it take for all of us individually to regulate all of the companies we do business with?