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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (240690)	12/29/2013 11:12:10 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541073

Yes, but in a pure insurance system everyone pays the same. The AFCA is not that. I'm not saying we shouldn't attempt it, but i am saying it remains to be seen if the "losers" in that system will go for it. As long as insurers are part of the health care system they will have input into what the the rules will be. This concept of "subsidization" is a "Johnny come lately" to our culture don't you think? Against it are centuries of the concept of American rugged Individualism and people taking care of themselves. Didn't matter anyway when medical science was limited. They couldn't do much any way. Its the cost of the medical machines and the research for new drugs that has us A"hoist in our petard' of modern science. At some point the costs of that have to come into balance of what we can afford to do. Some sort of health care rationing in the future is what I predict will be the outcome based on the trends in place now.