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 (6349)	3/13/2009 4:20:11 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

None of which means preventive care is a bad idea, its often a very good idea, just not necessarily a cost saving one. Indeed. Cost effectiveness and quality care are sometimes compatible and sometimes not. As a matter of public policy, I am not at all persuaded about the value of preventive care as a tool for cost-effectiveness. As a tool for improving the quality and length of individual life, absolutely.

To: TimF who wrote (6349)	3/13/2009 5:04:21 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

None of which means preventive care is a bad idea, its often a very good idea, just not necessarily a cost saving one. Just shooting from the hip, thinking out loud. What if a private insurance company set up a test insurance program; very local. 1/2 standard cost for coverage. But you had to visit an office once a month, had disciplined screening tests, had to meet with an exercise/diet counselor (could probably meet with 15-20 people a day, plus office expense). Had to keep track of your diet and exercise on some form or web site; with the subsequent lecture from your counselor if you didn't comply. And ultimately expulsion from the program if you would not follow the guidelines. Would that work economically? Maybe... maybe the price would be a little higher. But we know that moderate exercise produces phenomenal results. We know our system is too expensive. We can guess that we are less healthy than our counterparts in other industrialized coutries with national health insurance. Shoot it down... this is just an honest brainstorm at cost solutions without a national health care system. Or better yet can you think of changes that would work better?