Can Public Option Work?

[eagleseven]

Every other industrialized nation in the world has national health insurance, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the healthcare lobbyists gave $3.4 BILLION DOLLARS to members of Congress in the last decade.

When was the last time our President was flown to Europe for treatment he couldn't get here?

Rehashed one-liners aside, if you want National Healthcare so badly, perhaps we could just contract the French government to setup and run our system? Frankly, I trust the French bureaucrats far more than the incompetent assholes that pass for legislatures in this country...

 

[Chris]

Every other industrialized nation in the world has national health insurance, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the healthcare lobbyists gave $3.4 BILLION DOLLARS to members of Congress in the last decade.

When was the last time our President was flown to Europe for treatment he couldn't get here?

Rehashed one-liners aside, if you want National Healthcare so badly, perhaps we could just contract the French government to setup and run our system? Frankly, I trust the French bureaucrats far more than the incompetent assholes that pass for legislatures in this country...

Every other industrialized country in the world has national health insurance and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. That is a fact.

And the French have a better system than ours. No question.

They also have many more doctors per capita. Why? Because their medical schools are free. That means more doctors and lower medical costs.

Increase the supply and the cost goes down. Pretty smart.

 

[Varth Dader]

Every other industrialized nation in the world has national health insurance, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the healthcare lobbyists gave $3.4 BILLION DOLLARS to members of Congress in the last decade.

When was the last time our President was flown to Europe for treatment he couldn't get here?

Stop talking about the treatment of the few, and let's pay attention to the treatment of the many.

Anyways, using your logic, how many Americans flew to India or other countries last year to get treatment? This report (http://www.ipa.org.au/library/59-4_HANSEN.pdf) says between half a million to 3/4 of a million.

 

[Care4all]

One could argue that the ability to shop around for the best price would bring down the cost of insurance.

Take auto insurance as an example. if I have under X dollars of claims against my collision coverage I can avoid a surcharge or at least only get assessed a lesser surcharge.

If I need a fender repaired I am free to find a guy who will do it for the lowest price thereby keeping my premiums lower. We didn't have to abolish car insurance to do it.

Similarly, if my health insurance policy worked so that I was free to find the best deal on a CAT scan then my insurer would have less to pay out and premiums would go down.

there is no need to abolish insurance to implement this simple strategy.

right now your insurance company is doing the negotiating....if the hospital charges a thousand for the cat-scan, negotiated with the insurance company to only charge $600 for it.....

this hasn't brought the costs of healthcare to where it is affordable...even though they are getting 40% off of the catscan.... prices are still too high.

insurance companies do negotiate for the BEST PRICE already, only upfront....and prices are still through the roof....?

How can we know we are getting the best price when we are out of the loop?

And really, do you think the hospital would make a deal where they didn't get the maximum profit.

i guarantee you if the price of services was known, competition would spur a price war.

You would see things like CAT Scans R Us where you could get a doctor's order and walk in to get scanned at a cut rate price.

shit my Vet has an X ray in his clinic and the quality of the film is just as good as the one's you can get at a big people hospital. My vet charges less than 100 bucks for the same service the human doctor charges twice or three times as much for.

Why? because I can call the other 5 vets within 30 miles of me and ask what they charge for an x ray. I guarantee that we could get better prices than the insurance companies do.

let me use aetna group dental insurance as example....if i go to one of the dentists inside their negotiated group, to have a tooth pulled it is $75 bucks, but if you do not have dental insurance....which my mother does not, it is $140 bucks for the tooth extraction from the same dentist....

aetna has a tool online where you can get their negotiated price info for your or any zipcode and also get the 'normal' expected price without insurance for the procedure....

They negotiate a price per region they are in.... in maine where i am, the cost of these different dental procedures is 10%-20% higher than in Florida where my parents live, but their discount once negotiated is still comparable in the reduction in price...as example my insurance company may pay $90 bucks to an in network dentist up here, but the normal price for the procedure without insurance would be something like $170 bucks.

Well anyway, i gave this info to my mom and she said to herself, I'll be damned that they can only charge you "x" for the same thing they are charging me XX for...so she tried to negotiate with them....the best they would give her is a charge of $112, 20% off....so, my negotiated insurance price of $75 bucks is much greater savings than my mom's individual negotiating power...and she called several dentists to negotiate, not just one.

-------------------------------------------

I suppose what i am trying to say is that I do believe that insurance companies negotiate to the best of their ability and are not SLACK in that area and i believe they can negotiate better than the individual.

they would be negligent to their business if they did not get the best and cheapest price possible for the services of the hospital and doctor....and I am not certain that individuals have as much power in negotiation as individuals....

I guess I need more information on how this plan that you speak about would work....

Also, when you need a catscan, it is usually an emergency and taking the time to call around and negotiating the fee is not really that likely...

Health care does not seem to fit, like other widgets would....because you can bet your bottom dollar that I would check the prices of a 42 inch flat screen from every retailer out there before i buy it...and with routine health care, i might do such, but with any kind of emergency or critical situation, I would not even THINK about what this was costing me....it would be "save the life" first...that's all that would be on my mind.

Ideally, if insurance companies never got involved, if businesses were never encourage through tax breaks to buy insurance for their employees, if hospitals were never funded by the government for emergency rooms, if PHARMA was never funded with subsidies for R and D, and if the elderly were never given a government sponsored insurance such as medicare...you can not necessarily bet your bottom dollar that health care services would be much less expensive...because then the hospitals will be paying their own emergency room fees for the indigent, and PHARMA would be paying 40% more for their research and development, and all the elderly would either be turned down for their health care by the hospitals and die on us, unless they had boo coos of money....

the only thing that might come down in price are routine doctor visits i suppose? Because those would be the things that we could have the time to negotiate over...

I guess i just don;t understand how you forsee this working?

 

[The Rabbi]

The problem here is third party payment not the health care system in general.

Why is it that we know the costs of everything we purchse except for medical services and products?

Think about it. We have effectively insulated the medical industry from market forces. Is it any wonder that prices keep rising?

Don't you think that if we had the option to look around for a deal on a CAT scan or a blood test etc that we would choose the clinic that provided that service for the least cost?

yes, it is insulated from market forces...and insurance companies insulate....they should be wiped out.... all gvt tax write-offs for businesses and individuals for health insurance should be wiped out, Medicare for seniors wiped out, and emergency room care paid by our gvt wiped out, and all research and development gvt grants wiped out, and all rules closing the purchase of drugs worldwide be wiped out...

ONLY THEN could we truly have a situation where market forces to keep prices lower would work...

we are so far gone in subsidies, even without this health care insurance bill....there is no way that all those things above will stop being funded by our gvt....not imo.... so, if they will not cut all those programs mentioned then what's next? can anything else other than price caps on fees/hospital/doctor charges work?

Darn and here I thought you were learning something.
Yes, the issue is 3rd party payers. When it is someone else's money you dont spend it as wisely.
The solution has to start with empowering individuals to shop for their healthcare like anything else. There will be and should be insurance for things most people cannot afford to pay for themselves. But I suspect most expenditures in medicine are not of that type but more the "my kid has an ear ache" type.

 

[eagleseven]

They also have many more doctors per capita. Why? Because their medical schools are free. That means more doctors and lower medical costs.

No. I practically live in a Medical School, and can tell you the costs aren't the problem.

The American Medical Association is.

We have thousands of bright young people desperate to become doctors, but they cannot, because of arbitrarily high and completely irrelevent standards the AMA maintains to create an artificial scarcity. You wouldn't understand unless you saw the process up-close and personal.

As Obama's bill does not dismantle the American Medical Association, but rather placates them (the AMA supports the bill), American medical costs will remain sky-high. Don't even get me started on the proposed prescription drug reform...more like handout to the pharmaceutical companies.

The public option is not a silver-bullet, but rather, just that, an expensive option that does nothing to solve the underlying flaws in our system. Pouring more and more money into our current system solves nothing, yet this is all Obama proposes to do...

 

[Care4all]

They also have many more doctors per capita. Why? Because their medical schools are free. That means more doctors and lower medical costs.

No. I practically live in a Medical School, and can tell you the costs aren't the problem.

The American Medical Association is.

We have thousands of bright young people desperate to become doctors, but they cannot, because of arbitrarily high and completely irrelevent standards the AMA maintains to create an artificial scarcity. You wouldn't understand unless you saw the process up-close and personal.

As Obama's bill does not dismantle the American Medical Association, but rather placates them (the AMA supports the bill), American medical costs will remain sky-high. Don't even get me started on the proposed prescription drug reform...more like handout to the pharmaceutical companies.

The public option is not a silver-bullet, but rather, just that, an expensive option that does nothing to solve the underlying flaws in our system. Pouring more and more money into our current system solves nothing, yet this is all Obama proposes to do...

the AMA is definitely the problem.... we need to increase our medical students and schools ASAP.... without any reform, we will need these doctors for the boomers and an increase in doctors IS AN INCREASE IN SUPPLY, prices should fall....

 

[The Rabbi]

They also have many more doctors per capita. Why? Because their medical schools are free. That means more doctors and lower medical costs.

No. I practically live in a Medical School, and can tell you the costs aren't the problem.

The American Medical Association is.

We have thousands of bright young people desperate to become doctors, but they cannot, because of arbitrarily high and completely irrelevent standards the AMA maintains to create an artificial scarcity. You wouldn't understand unless you saw the process up-close and personal.

As Obama's bill does not dismantle the American Medical Association, but rather placates them (the AMA supports the bill), American medical costs will remain sky-high. Don't even get me started on the proposed prescription drug reform...more like handout to the pharmaceutical companies.

The public option is not a silver-bullet, but rather, just that, an expensive option that does nothing to solve the underlying flaws in our system. Pouring more and more money into our current system solves nothing, yet this is all Obama proposes to do...

Your contention would seem to be contradicted in this thread;
http://www.usmessageboard.com/healthcare-insurance-govt-healthcare/92396-friedman-on-curing-healthcare-no-licensure-of-physicians.html
fwiw, I think you're right.
But I disagree Obama wants to pour more money in. He wants to pour more money some places but take it out of others. Like Medicare.

 

[eagleseven]

Let us look at the American Medical Association's proposed "reforms" line by line, shall we?

AMA - Our Vision for Health System Reform

Health insurance coverage for all Americans

More demand, with continued AMA-restricted supply, means even higher wages for currente AMA doctors.

Insurance market reforms that expand choice of affordable coverage and eliminate denials for pre-existing conditions

Forcing insurance agencies to pay for more treatments means higher demand, and higher doctor salaries.

Assurance that health care decisions will remain in the hands of patients and their physicians, not insurance companies or government officials

All the fun of a government-sponsored monopoly, but none of the regulation! Have your cake, and eat it too!

Investments and incentives for quality improvement, prevention and wellness initiatives

We need MORE free money from the government to do our jobs. We just can't do our jobs making only $300k a year...

Repeal of the Medicare physician payment formula that would trigger steep cuts and threaten seniors' access to care

Medicare doesn't pay doctors enough...this must be changed. Medicare should pay full price, like everyone else! Didn't I mention we don't get paid enough?

Implementation of medical liability reforms to reduce the cost of defensive medicine

Dammit, how are we supposed to afford malpractice insurance when we make only $300k a year? We need to make it so nobody can sue us!

Streamlining and standardizing of insurance claims processing requirements to eliminate unnecessary costs and administrative burdens

Paying secretaries to fill out paperwork all day takes a big chunk out of our salaries, you know. In fact, if the government could make insurance paperwork illegal, so that we automatically get paid whatever we want to charge, that'd be great!


Am I the only one who is VERY concerned that the AMA supports Obama's healthcare reforms? They stand to make off like kings, at our expense...

 

[Care4all]

The problem here is third party payment not the health care system in general.

Why is it that we know the costs of everything we purchse except for medical services and products?

Think about it. We have effectively insulated the medical industry from market forces. Is it any wonder that prices keep rising?

Don't you think that if we had the option to look around for a deal on a CAT scan or a blood test etc that we would choose the clinic that provided that service for the least cost?

yes, it is insulated from market forces...and insurance companies insulate....they should be wiped out.... all gvt tax write-offs for businesses and individuals for health insurance should be wiped out, Medicare for seniors wiped out, and emergency room care paid by our gvt wiped out, and all research and development gvt grants wiped out, and all rules closing the purchase of drugs worldwide be wiped out...

ONLY THEN could we truly have a situation where market forces to keep prices lower would work...

we are so far gone in subsidies, even without this health care insurance bill....there is no way that all those things above will stop being funded by our gvt....not imo.... so, if they will not cut all those programs mentioned then what's next? can anything else other than price caps on fees/hospital/doctor charges work?

Darn and here I thought you were learning something.
Yes, the issue is 3rd party payers. When it is someone else's money you dont spend it as wisely.
The solution has to start with empowering individuals to shop for their healthcare like anything else. There will be and should be insurance for things most people cannot afford to pay for themselves. But I suspect most expenditures in medicine are not of that type but more the "my kid has an ear ache" type.

I understand what skull is saying, and idealy, he is correct and you are too when it comes to us being out there shopping around for our own doctor....who charges less....

But as I mentioned, i believe this can be done for routine situations, like your yearly physical, your yearly tests such as mammogram and pap smear or PSA test or colonoscopy, or routine blood work....and SOME savings could occur....

But the health care things that are expensive, that you imply should be covered by insurance....how is this really going to save on health care...it is insurance and they may not negotiate better than the individual if you use the same standard you are using for regular insurance that covers everything including routine?

 

[The Rabbi]

I dont understand your question/objection. Most medical expenditures probably occur as routine things. So controlling those costs through shopping/competition will save money overall. The expensive treatments will be negotiated by insurance.

 

[Care4all]

I dont understand your question/objection. Most medical expenditures probably occur as routine things. So controlling those costs through shopping/competition will save money overall. The expensive treatments will be negotiated by insurance.

i don't believe the most expenditures are routine costs....it is just the opposite....the most expensive part of health care are hospitalization and prescription drug costs.

I'm not certain that we could negotiate any better deal than the insurance companies do, which is about half the cost of the doctor's visit than without the insurance....at least it APPEARS to be...

everything is so messed up, it's hard to be sure.... the reason i say this is because hospitals/doctors could be inflating the ''normal, non-negotiated prices'' in order for them to say they are taking 'a loss' on their income taxes when they are forced to pay gvt medicare prices negotiated.

but back to medical costs, i think that if we did handle our own routine check ups and had hospitalization/catastrophic insurance only, it would not lower prices enough for the most costly part of health insurance, which is hospitalization....

and group plans at work places are already changing....at my hubby's work, they offered for next year, only one insurance choice, aetna i believe, and it is a plan where basic physicals and tests are paid 100%, but any other procedure or doctor's visit is paid only 80% and you pay the rest.... like if you are sick with the flu or appendicitis or tonsillitis, have diabitis etc. then you pay the 20% plus the doc visit co pay fee of $35... and drug copay $35, and until matt and i spend $5 grand in the year out of our own pocket in network, $10 grand out of network within the year, before the insurance does come back in to pay 100% of it....AND the price of the insurance is the same as ly's while last years with his company was $2500 out of pocket for the 2 and only $25 bucks an office visit and $25 for drug copay.....

they 'believe' this type of plan will DISCOURAGE people to go to the doctor....

it be one thing if there was any SAVINGS from their plan this year, so that could be used towards the 100% higher deductibles, but it is the same price as the better coverage plan they had last year?

 

[The Rabbi]

I dont understand your question/objection. Most medical expenditures probably occur as routine things. So controlling those costs through shopping/competition will save money overall. The expensive treatments will be negotiated by insurance.

i don't believe the most expenditures are routine costs....it is just the opposite....the most expensive part of health care are hospitalization and prescription drug costs.

I'm not certain that we could negotiate any better deal than the insurance companies do, which is about half the cost of the doctor's visit than without the insurance....at least it APPEARS to be...

everything is so messed up, it's hard to be sure.... the reason i say this is because hospitals/doctors could be inflating the ''normal, non-negotiated prices'' in order for them to say they are taking 'a loss' on their income taxes when they are forced to pay gvt medicare prices negotiated.

but back to medical costs, i think that if we did handle our own routine check ups and had hospitalization/catastrophic insurance only, it would not lower prices enough for the most costly part of health insurance, which is hospitalization....

and group plans at work places are already changing....at my hubby's work, they offered for next year, only one insurance choice, aetna i believe, and it is a plan where basic physicals and tests are paid 100%, but any other procedure or doctor's visit is paid only 80% and you pay the rest.... like if you are sick with the flu or appendicitis or tonsillitis, have diabitis etc. then you pay the 20% plus the doc visit co pay fee of $35... and drug copay $35, and until matt and i spend $5 grand in the year out of our own pocket in network, $10 grand out of network within the year, before the insurance does come back in to pay 100% of it....AND the price of the insurance is the same as ly's while last years with his company was $2500 out of pocket for the 2 and only $25 bucks an office visit and $25 for drug copay.....

they 'believe' this type of plan will DISCOURAGE people to go to the doctor....

it be one thing if there was any SAVINGS from their plan this year, so that could be used towards the 100% higher deductibles, but it is the same price as the better coverage plan they had last year?

HArd for me to get data right off. But look here:
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/highlights.pdf
Of all spending only about 32% was due to hospitals. So there is a lot of routine health care spending out there.

 

[namvet]

will accept cash with proper ID

 

[Care4all]

I dont understand your question/objection. Most medical expenditures probably occur as routine things. So controlling those costs through shopping/competition will save money overall. The expensive treatments will be negotiated by insurance.

i don't believe the most expenditures are routine costs....it is just the opposite....the most expensive part of health care are hospitalization and prescription drug costs.

I'm not certain that we could negotiate any better deal than the insurance companies do, which is about half the cost of the doctor's visit than without the insurance....at least it APPEARS to be...

everything is so messed up, it's hard to be sure.... the reason i say this is because hospitals/doctors could be inflating the ''normal, non-negotiated prices'' in order for them to say they are taking 'a loss' on their income taxes when they are forced to pay gvt medicare prices negotiated.

but back to medical costs, i think that if we did handle our own routine check ups and had hospitalization/catastrophic insurance only, it would not lower prices enough for the most costly part of health insurance, which is hospitalization....

and group plans at work places are already changing....at my hubby's work, they offered for next year, only one insurance choice, aetna i believe, and it is a plan where basic physicals and tests are paid 100%, but any other procedure or doctor's visit is paid only 80% and you pay the rest.... like if you are sick with the flu or appendicitis or tonsillitis, have diabitis etc. then you pay the 20% plus the doc visit co pay fee of $35... and drug copay $35, and until matt and i spend $5 grand in the year out of our own pocket in network, $10 grand out of network within the year, before the insurance does come back in to pay 100% of it....AND the price of the insurance is the same as ly's while last years with his company was $2500 out of pocket for the 2 and only $25 bucks an office visit and $25 for drug copay.....

they 'believe' this type of plan will DISCOURAGE people to go to the doctor....

it be one thing if there was any SAVINGS from their plan this year, so that could be used towards the 100% higher deductibles, but it is the same price as the better coverage plan they had last year?

HArd for me to get data right off. But look here:
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/highlights.pdf
Of all spending only about 32% was due to hospitals. So there is a lot of routine health care spending out there.

Interesing link/report. Thank you Rabb. so, a good chunk is in preventative medicine, and minor sickness and savings could be had if we let the market work....how long do you think it would take for the market forces to lower prices? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? it does take competition to work down the prices and 'supply' as well...

and if it is going to work, (which it should), WHY would we leave out an area that is more than 50% of these costs off the table to reform or the chopping block? the catastrophic or hospitaliazation insurance plans?

 

[The Rabbi]

i don't believe the most expenditures are routine costs....it is just the opposite....the most expensive part of health care are hospitalization and prescription drug costs.

I'm not certain that we could negotiate any better deal than the insurance companies do, which is about half the cost of the doctor's visit than without the insurance....at least it APPEARS to be...

everything is so messed up, it's hard to be sure.... the reason i say this is because hospitals/doctors could be inflating the ''normal, non-negotiated prices'' in order for them to say they are taking 'a loss' on their income taxes when they are forced to pay gvt medicare prices negotiated.

but back to medical costs, i think that if we did handle our own routine check ups and had hospitalization/catastrophic insurance only, it would not lower prices enough for the most costly part of health insurance, which is hospitalization....

and group plans at work places are already changing....at my hubby's work, they offered for next year, only one insurance choice, aetna i believe, and it is a plan where basic physicals and tests are paid 100%, but any other procedure or doctor's visit is paid only 80% and you pay the rest.... like if you are sick with the flu or appendicitis or tonsillitis, have diabitis etc. then you pay the 20% plus the doc visit co pay fee of $35... and drug copay $35, and until matt and i spend $5 grand in the year out of our own pocket in network, $10 grand out of network within the year, before the insurance does come back in to pay 100% of it....AND the price of the insurance is the same as ly's while last years with his company was $2500 out of pocket for the 2 and only $25 bucks an office visit and $25 for drug copay.....

they 'believe' this type of plan will DISCOURAGE people to go to the doctor....

it be one thing if there was any SAVINGS from their plan this year, so that could be used towards the 100% higher deductibles, but it is the same price as the better coverage plan they had last year?

HArd for me to get data right off. But look here:
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/highlights.pdf
Of all spending only about 32% was due to hospitals. So there is a lot of routine health care spending out there.

Interesing link/report. Thank you Rabb. so, a good chunk is in preventative medicine, and minor sickness and savings could be had if we let the market work....how long do you think it would take for the market forces to lower prices? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? it does take competition to work down the prices and 'supply' as well...

and if it is going to work, (which it should), WHY would we leave out an area that is more than 50% of these costs off the table to reform or the chopping block? the catastrophic or hospitaliazation insurance plans?

Well, when AT&T was broken up how long did it take for rates to drop? I think it was within 6 months.
I don't understand your second paragraph as it isn't English.

 

[Care4all]

HArd for me to get data right off. But look here:
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/highlights.pdf
Of all spending only about 32% was due to hospitals. So there is a lot of routine health care spending out there.

Interesing link/report. Thank you Rabb. so, a good chunk is in preventative medicine, and minor sickness and savings could be had if we let the market work....how long do you think it would take for the market forces to lower prices? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? it does take competition to work down the prices and 'supply' as well...

and if it is going to work, (which it should), WHY would we leave out an area that is more than 50% of these costs off the table to reform or the chopping block? the catastrophic or hospitaliazation insurance plans?

Well, when AT&T was broken up how long did it take for rates to drop? I think it was within 6 months.
I don't understand your second paragraph as it isn't English.

why still buy catestrophic insurance? isn't that just keeping prices higher as well, because market forces can not work? why not eliminate the middle man there?

 

[The Rabbi]

I dont understand that.
Health insurance is there to pay for things that you cannot afford to pay for. Catastrophic insurance would seem to be one of those things. Maybe the main one.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I dont understand that.
Health insurance is there to pay for things that you cannot afford to pay for. Catastrophic insurance would seem to be one of those things. Maybe the main one.

In fact, that is how insurance used to work.

You paid your doctor for check ups and such and insurance was only for the big ticket items like operations and major injury.

 

[Claudette]

Cost is the problem with healthcare. If they removed the regs and let the insurance companies compete against each other country wide you would see costs go down. Every person and company would be looking for the best coverage at the least cost. Thats human nature. Its also common sense. Something the clowns in DC have none of. The free market would work if the clowns would only let it. They want to dismantle our whole system and remake it withtthe Govt running the show. The Govt that can't run anything cheaply or well. Jeeze. Morons one and all. The public option will end up costing the taxpayers more and more. You have 47% of the people in this country who pay no taxes at all. Those paying taxes will be footing the bill for everone.

When I first started working back in 70's my healthcare costs were about $2.50 a week. Thats right. What drove up the cost? Medicare which was instituted in 65. The Govt only pays doctors what they want to pay them. The rest is passed on to anyone with insurance. The 47% that don't pay taxes will just be riding the gravy train provided by those that pay taxes. Such a deal for them.

Tort reform is something that is also needed. The doctors have to pay such high malpractice insurance costs and they pass that onto their customers. Don't get me wrong, there are some crappy doctors out there that should be sued but there are also loads of frivilous lawsuits out there that drive up the costs of healthcare. Tort reform is a hot potatoe that neither party wants to touch. After all, the minute anyone mentions tort reform the lawyers lobby starts throwinig money at both parties and end of story.

Oh yeah. Theres loads of ways to reduce costs in healthcare. To bad the clowns in DC can't see it or don't want to see it. Public healthcare?? Bunch of BS in my book. I sure don't want our disfunctional Govt, run by a bunch of clowns, to run my healthcare. How about you???