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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alighieri who wrote (16057)4/3/2010 11:05:47 AM
From: Lane31 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
I limited myself to the PO as a desirable sliver of the total health care puzzle

No, you limited yourself to a desirable sliver of the total PO puzzle. If you claim that the PO saves money, then the overall PO has to save money, not just your desirable sliver. To save money, an approach has to do less stuff and/or do the same amount of stuff cheaper. You have taken a stab at demonstrating that the stuff it does do would be cheaper but even that you haven't covered completely let alone addressing the less stuff factor.

I really believe that the only way to contain costs and care for Americans (all of them) is single payer with regulated payouts.

I believe that you sincerely believe that. And I can see why you might believe that when you cherry-pick slivers so adeptly. But that doesn't make your belief correct.

The evidence is there for the objective of mind.

There's "evidence" out there for the true believers. For the objective of mind, not so much.

The average cost for the OECD nations is less than half of ours and the debate of whose health care provides highest quality rages on, with the US not looking so good.

This effort has been loaded with value statements like that. That some folks mistake value statements for analytically-achieved conclusions is a flaw in our society. In that regard the US is not looking so good.