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: Mary Cluney who wrote (10661)	10/23/2009 11:42:00 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

medicare denies coverage at a higher % rate than private insurance. Obama care will deny coverage also and in greater numbers "The disparity between those that can afford a Cadillac, Rolls Royce, or Testarossa health care option and those that have to be taken to the ER is morally problematic." why ? is it wrong that some people can afford better food ? better education ? Yeah we can fix it, start with tort reform, why isn't tort reform even mentioned in the democrat bill ??? seems strange doesn't it ? You see it's not about fixing anything, it's about control. I wish Americans would wake up and see the monster they elected.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (10661)	10/23/2009 3:03:39 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

We can go to the moon. We can go to mars. We can fix health care. As I've pointed out a few times here, the types of challenges are not remotely equivalent. 1 - Political and economic problems are different than engineering problems because people have minds of their own. They have their own opinions and agendas and preferences and responses to new initiatives. Trying to treat a political or economic problem like it was a difficult engineering problem is setting yourself up for failure. 2 - Going to the moon is a very specific goal. The achievement of it was somewhat complex (extremely complex by most standards but simpler than the current situation by an enormous amount) but the goal was simple. Reforming medical care and/or medical insurance is a complex serious of goals, each one of which is complex by itself, and most of which are controversial. 3 - Health care in the US is a much larger issue than the Apollo program, or other large initiatives like the Manhattan Project, any future manned mission to Mars, or even (since the war is limited in time and the need for health care is not) WWII. 4 - The moon effort involved a massive increase in resources. It was a toss enough money at a specific problem and you can get results situation. The current health insurance situation is often presented as trying to save money or reign in costs, without getting lower care. Tossing huge amounts of money at it doesn't get you that extra efficiency. It just increases the amount of money spent, and/or changes where the money comes from. If you want to use a space challenge in comparisons to the health care problem, a better one might be creating a situation where access to space is cheap and easy. Then you have an issue of efficiency, rather than just "toss as much money as we can at the problem". But this still falls down for the reasons stated above in #1. Its still an engineering problem.