re: #352 prononymous

I’m not sure. I imagine it could work ok either way. The specific details of the implementation being the key to success. But I can definitely see advantages and disadvantages to either approach.

However, to step back from the theoretical math and broad ideological points brings us back to the real question. What’s to be gained from changing the structure/funding/etc of the poison control centers? It is an effective program. It helps save money, eyes, and lives. And it hasn’t been demonstrated that there is anything wrong with the program as it is now.

So why would we abandon a program that is effective and hope that someone will think of something better? For ideology?

Because we have a serious money problem and a well-planned reorg might reduce costs without reducing capacity.