Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
I think the #1 problem is that we don't know what the problem is.
We've had studies by doctors, like the AMA and New England Journal of Medicine identifying why our costs are so high yet no one pays it any attention. Those reasons never entered the political debate AFAIK. If you don't correctly identify the problem(s) you can't fix it/them. (Reminds me of my sig.)
We often hear of other countries' HC system, yet I've seen no real discussion of why their system is capable of providing HC for less. Hint: it isn't about whose name is listed as payer on the check (i.e., "single payer").
Now, it may be that some yelling "single payer" know the 'score', but don't want to discuss it for fear of people freaking out etc and rejecting it. A real "single payer" system comes with a bunch of substantial changes that I bet people won't accept and couldn't be implemented with out great upheaval to our HC system and economy even if they would.
Fern
I suggest we look at the NIH situation. Funding is not kept up with the science needed and politicians dictate to the scientists what takes priority even if it makes little sense because it looks good. Getting and keeping grants? Virtually impossible these days and it's not just the Republicans. Here's how we do things, not very intelligently.
We have awfully screwed up priorities and wouldn't have it any other way.
