- Thread starter
- #21
No it isn't, that is just stupid. It won't increase the cost of health care one iotta. The same care will be delivered it just won't be financed by the whole population.
____
I have yet to see direct government involvement decrease cost and raise efficiency.
You seem to think this time, when impacting 1/5 of the American economy - it will be different.
Why?
I didn't say it would increase efficiency, I just said that the cost of actual health care isn't negatively effected by the health bills now under consideration.
However there is clearly a LOT of room to improve medical cost efficacy as we pay at least 46% more for health care than anybody else on earth.
The present private system is powerless to drive down health care costs. The results speak for themselves. (70% increase in health care costs over a decade)
A number of alternative organizational structures could in fact cut our health care costs/patient in half. As evidenced by what the rest of the world pays.
But we already have a fully inefficient government run system which isn't capitalizing on but one mechanism to reduce health care costs and it is still far more efficient than private health insurance. And it covers almost everybody over 65.
So unless you wanna abolish Medicare, your position contradicts itself.
So what we have here are more claims denied - and a higher per patient cost with Medicare vs Private Insurance. The government has no incentive to provide lower cost better service alternatives.
Next...
http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/07/busting_medicares_low_administ.php
Last edited: