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: J_F_Shepard who wrote (17190)	4/22/2010 5:30:39 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

the editorial is an opinion without facts. Why would the boston globe, a very liberal paper, start a series on health care problems unless they really have concern over it? Supplement medicare insurance is costing people i know in ma. $500.+ monthly. That appears to be a big chunk of retiree out of pocket money. I assume part of the reason may be mandated medical coverage procedures that they are paying for because of the state laws. Why has major hospitals refused new patients for primary care like mass general hospital? Ma. has yet to inforce law to go after those not in the health care program. Ma. has yet to try to bring in balance the cost of medical coverage. Ma. did back off on total coverage because of costs.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (17190)	4/22/2010 8:13:35 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

"Massachusetts cannot stop there. It also needs to figure out how to rein in the escalating costs of medical care and health insurance." " once citizens have near-universal coverage, they like it " There's no new news here. Yes, people feel good about universal coverage and yes, it's a big cost item. Both were obvious outcomes pre-reform. Some people, though, were so enamored of the former that they ignored or denied the latter. Too soon old, too late smart.