re: #87 researchok

Single payer is the way many countries go but in the it isn’t ideal (Canada and the UK, for example) with lesser services- and may say quality of care- now the rule of thumb. That’s why I like Obama’s one size does not fit all idea, allowing the states to craft their own versions (as in populated states versus less populated states having different needs). I believe acknowledging single truth will help get him re elected. That both sides are curiously silent tells me he hit the mark.

Also, the original idea was to make sure 33 million uninsured had access to health care.

I do wonder if we wouldn’t have been better offer starting with insurance reform, disallowing insurance companies from offering coverage to anyone. From there we could have moved on to health care reform, absolutely necessary given demographic trends.

What bothers me most is how both sides want to reduce the conversation to slogans as opposed to having a serious discussion.

Have you seen the LGF page on ideas for health care reform? Some really good stuff in there.

Honestly? The “health insurance” industry needs to go in general. Why? Because most of what Americans seem to feel should be covered by health insurance, quite simply, cannot be insured. Regular checkups, treatment for known chronic conditions, etc. are all basically known, largely fixed costs. Pretty much the only way you can have a system of insurance is to make it so: 1. People with any pre-existing conditions can be declined. 2. Risk very high premiums because those who feel they need coverage tend to be highest risk.

You know, a system like it has been.