There are a whole lot of interconnecting issues with health care reform, and some of them could impact progress; however, one cost reduction issue that would primarily hurt lawyers is tort reform. If we can get rid of and cap frivolous lawsuits we can get virtually eliminate the enormous number of "cover-your-ass" unnecessary tests ordered by medical professionals and greatly reduce malpractice insurance. I recently talked with a physician who practiced for a year in New Zealand. Her total malpractice insurance for the year in NZ was $1,800 (and I think that was NZ$).
Chris _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David R. Block Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 11:00 PM To: Radical Centrist discussion list Subject: Re: [RC] Up to $3,800 fine for failure get health insurance They need to call this something other than Health Care Reform. In general, the care is fine. In some instances, outcome is fantastic. The cost, it ain't so fine. How much progress are we willing to sacrifice by lowering the cost (and the profit) of the care? David "There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own money -- if a gun is held to his head."--P. J. O'Rourke Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote: Hi Billy, On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:00 PM, [email protected] wrote: A top senator is calling for fines of up to $3,800 on families who fail to get medical insurance after a health care overhaul goes into effect. This is the fundamental paradox of health care reform. In theory, everyone says they are in favor of lowering insurance rates and preventing insurers from denying or dropping coverage. Unfortunately, the only two options for doing that are: i) providing insurance at a loss, since those most at risk for diseases would be more likely to apply. This means the government has to basically run the whole thing. ii) mandatory enrollment, either automatically or with a penalty for failure to enroll There's no easy answer, but somebody's got to face that brutal fact if we're going to make any progress. -- Ernie P. _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
