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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denizen48 who wrote (22135)	6/20/2017 12:26:41 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Recommended By i-node Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360632

Then maybe finally doctors can administer the system, instead of lawyers. Do you really think they're going to put the doctors in charge of what gets covered and what gets paid with taxpayer money?

To: denizen48 who wrote (22135)	6/20/2017 2:09:28 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360632

>> It's simply common sense that when you take out the for-profit insurance companies from health care, you will get a more efficient system. Oh, really? "Common sense?" Can you provide a few examples where government "efficiency" has led to better outcomes than for-profit organizations? Maybe you could start with the USPS and go from there. I didn't think so.

To: denizen48 who wrote (22135)	8/3/2017 1:14:24 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 360632

the Krankenkasse, of which there are over 100 Hence not "single" It's simply common sense that when you take out the for-profit insurance companies from health care, you will get a more efficient system. Whether true or not, it certainly not obvious. In most areas when you take the profit motive away from supplying goods and services you get a less efficient system.