re: #543 lawhawk

The elderly population is more likely to have chronic conditions and therefore the greater expenses. In particular see Chart 2 of the pdf linked above.

I understand that just fine. That doesn’t mean you’re in any way right to claim it is THE driver of health care costs. Did you read the article I linked?

As for the Singapore example, as per that previously linked article - that country has not implemented the kind of program that we have here in the US (Medicare/Medicaid), and are trying to figure out how to fund a system along those lines, but runs up against the very problems we have here.

So how does that equate to ‘not having any answers’, exactly? That, to me, says that they’re attempting to solve the problem, not that they’ve thrown up their hands and declared it to be unsolvable.

They’re attempting more than to set up a Medicare equivalent, by the way— since they already cover acute cases through the normal system, saying that they have no system like Medicare is not actually a true statement. What they lack is a system to deal with day-to-day care; they have a system for acute care.

They are trying to use their unique mix of private/public to solve the problem— an example that I still think we could follow. They do this by attempting to subsidize private and charitable organizations long-term health care provisions for the elderly.

sma.org.sg

I am still failing to see how what you have said is in any way an argument against the Singapore model’s efficacy in the US. Obviously one couldn’t excise it and slap it down whole, it’d have to be adjusted, but what’s with the flat-out rejection?