(no subject)

Date: 5/6/10 00:47 (UTC)
"Not easily, and not without considerable risk."
um... ridiculously easy for me (hell, when I priced it, I could get catastrophic insurance for <$50/month. That's about what a tank of gas costs me). AND what risk? Less than the risk of having health care through work where it can disappear if I get fired (yeah, there's cobra, but that's a horrible deal and it's not forever).

"dealing with serious health issues"
No matter what system you use, someone will not get the health care they want. Ultimately it all boils down to who will die because they don't get that care and who chooses. You pointing out the corner case where someone dies is no more meaningful than me pointing to the fact that NICE (UK health care) has hard limits on how much they will pay (no more than X amount of money for Y probable months of extended life).

So the question becomes how do we decide who gets what health care. It's a complicated problem because if you plow too many resources into health care you negatively impact the quality of life (and I would rather have a good life and take some risks than have great healthcare and a horrible life). My answer is simple: I can't decide for anyone but myself and the same applies to everyone else. I'm curious what your answer is, and why you think your answer is correct.

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods


MONTHLY TOPIC:

Failed States

DAILY QUOTE:
"Someone's selling Greenland now?" (asthfghl)
"Yes get your bids in quick!" (oportet)
"Let me get my Bid Coins and I'll be there in a minute." (asthfghl)

June 2025

M T W T F S S
       1
2 34 5 678
910 1112 131415
1617 1819 202122
2324 2526 272829
30