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: dybdahl who wrote (18366)	7/20/2010 9:55:00 PM
From: skinowski	3 Recommendations Respond to of 42652

This is why European countries with socialised health care systems try to keep a part of the health care sector on private hands. Denmark once had a 100% socialised health care system, and that was not a success Our hospitals are mandated to take care of sick people regardless of insurance status or their ability to pay. In practice, hospitals absorb the costs - of course, this means that people with insurance - or those who pay their bills - will, ultimately, pay for the charity cases. In other words, we've been paying for this for many decades. We could improve access to outpatient care - but that's not enough for our elected officials. In the end, the greatest impact from the "reform" will be that politicians will take charge of the actual flow of the money. Instead of passing through the hands of private insurance companies, it will flow through Washington. I think our political ruling classes will repeat the mistakes of the Europeans and will, eventually, adopt a single payer system - which will make it illegal to practice privately. They want healthcare to become a "public utility"... like the police, or like schools. Except that the police and education are local. This will be federal.