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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (76180)	7/24/2008 9:49:41 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543221

<<<I'm posting this piece from the NYT to illustrate the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" nature of cookie cutter community medical payment systems. One approach produces waste with their added costs. The "solution" proposed likely would produce underservice and potentially higher costs long term. If you try to avoid the problem pair by throwing in an auditor, you add cost that might exceed the cost of either problem. No good solution to how to handle the commons regarding health care. You could remove it from the commons, that is privatize/individualize it, but then you have other problems, not costly problems, but still problems>>> It is a problem, but it is made more so by emotions invested in the problem. It is obvious that the solution exists. In the best of all possible worlds we have sufficient means to satisfy all wants and needs. That possibility of course exists but we ae far, far from having that capability. Given that we live in a real world, we have to make choices that are effected by incentives and resources. The solution has to come from an empirical and scientific methodology. Using a hybrid solution of empirical analysis and invisible magic and individual free for all does not make any sense.