SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alighieri who wrote (503169)8/10/2009 1:41:28 PM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574890
 
Our system does cost more and everyone doesn't have health insurance (as opposed to health care).

However, providing health insurance to all - which is all the current plans will do (at the expense of most private plans) - won't do anything about the cost issue.

What might are things that aren't part of the Democratic plans.

Limiting damages for "pain and suffering" and "punitive" damages so there are fewer lawsuits, fewer giant awards, less defensive medicine, lower malpractice insurance costs.

Encouraging free market reforms based on high deductible plans and bearing small costs out of pocket, vouchers for health insurance, etc.

Private companies like Walmart and Walgreens and all the doc in a box clinics are doing more to lower health care costs than anything a Democratic plan will do.



To: Alighieri who wrote (503169)8/10/2009 1:43:46 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574890
 
One fact you can't manipulate is that our system costs a lot more and covers fewer people.


Yes, having the best system in the world costs more.

By "fewer people" I think you mean a smaller percentage, but that really isn't true. Very close to 100% of people in the United States can get adequate health care if they choose to do so.

I'm not sure any other country can match that.