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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (211082)	7/18/2009 1:20:28 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I think they'll suck 'em in (providers) on the promise of maintaining reimbursement, then when the bills start rolling in they'll kneecap 'em. After a couple years there won't be any private alternatives for the "basic" coverage, because the Feds will go into deficit to maintain benefits. After the competition is flushed, they'll strong arm ALL providers to "control costs" (by that, I mean drug, durable equipment, doctors and hospitals. Providers will have no leverage and will have to take what they're given or go outta business. That's when the real rationing starts (or at least rationing by inconvenience/shortage of services), checkmate. And I'm not really against it, but I don't have any illusions that it will substantially improve health care for those who are satisfied with their employer sponsored options right now. It will improve health care for those who aren't covered (even the ER frequent flyers) and for that we'll pay 100-150 billion/yr. That's the deal, and there's no real way around it (unless yer willing to put meaningful tort reform on the table to rein in costs.....Obama is not).