This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Salt Is A Class I Drug
From The Daily Capitalist
The Food and Drug Administration is planning an unprecedented effort to gradually reduce the salt consumed each day by Americans, saying that less sodium in everything from soup to nuts would prevent thousands of deaths from hypertension and heart disease. The initiative, to be launched this year, would eventually lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in food products. ...
A recent study by researchers at Columbia and Stanford universities and the University of California at San Francisco found that cutting salt intake by 3 grams a day could prevent tens of thousands of heart attacks, strokes and cases of heart disease. ...
"We can't just rely on the individual to do something," said Cheryl Anderson, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who served on the Institute of Medicine committee. "Food manufacturers have to reduce the amount of sodium in foods."
This will get wings because, friends, you are paying for my health care. As health care costs rise because of government regulation and control, there will be pressure to cut costs as the bill for Obamacare spirals out of control. The justification will sound very reasonable. "All we need to do is cut salt intake by 3 measly grams a day, and we would save so much money because people wouldn't have salt related disease." That sounds OK. But ...
... then you need a regulatory apparatus to monitor this reasonable rule. A Salt Intake Control Evaluation Board (SICEM) would be set up to regulate food salt content. Since people really like salt, they would buy more salt at Safeway and use it to flavor things the way they want it.
As the futility of SICEM is apparent, we would have the Salt Control and Rationing Board (SCARB) to regulate individual salt intake. You would need a doctor's prescription to buy salt and, if your blood pressure was too high, well, you would be a parasite on the rest of us because you would be driving up our medical costs due to your anti-social behavior.
Unscrupulous types would then create a black market to meet the growing demand for illegal salt. This would be a huge opportunity for drug traffickers and, after bloody turf wars to control the market, a few cartels would arise. Of course you would have some shady doctors whom you could pay to get a prescription. The fraud would be enormous.
A special regulatory police would be required to audit and control this illicit trade. This Health Enforcement Legislation Police (HELP) would have officers dressed in white lab coats highly trained in salt related health matters. They would have broad authority to audit the health records of suspected salt abusers. A Special Branch would hunt out traffickers. These highly trained officers, known affectionately as the "Salty Dogs," would require greater and greater authority as the salt trade gets out of hand. Raids would be made randomly on households looking for private salt stashes. Tearful moms would be hauled off to salt health re-education camps (SHRECs).
Pretty soon the government would be forced to step in and nationalize salt production to control the market. In order to discourage consumption, they would completely control salt production and distribution, subject to the aforementioned rules. A Salt Czar would set production quotas and prices. This would hugely help the illegal salt cartels, because the government makes it a controlled substance. Lobbyists would seek emergency relief for their clients who needed salt in their businesses. Friends of the Czar would get rich.
This is what Friedrich von Hayek called "The Road to Serfdom."
Don't even think about a Double Quarter Pounder® with cheese. We can't afford it.
»
- advertisements -
Lawyers and our crazy legal system are the reason for spiraling healthcare costs in the US. Germany has a much more rational legal system based on judges rather than lawyers; according to the "Economist" (magazine), the US has ten lawyers for every one lawyer in Germany on a per capita basis.
Unfortunately, the Democratic Party is completely owned by (and run by) lawyers -- just look at their recent presidential candidates. So don't expect them to fix the real problem.
Or maybe it's local artificial price controls that externalize most if not all R&D costs onto the United States, the only country not smart and cunning enough to dump its healthcare costs on someone else.
Sodium and Chloride are being investigated for possible prosecution under the federal RICO laws.
Why do I suspect the ponzi will collapse before this becomes too widespread? Oh yes, what's that phrase: "The market can stay irrational longer than you can afford it"? Or something like that.
Also, we start paying now and it kicks in in 2014. Most likely, the useless eaters will have been cleared away by then.
After decades of study of humans and rodents and many other animals, we come up with salt? Do we really know anything about the health?
this country is seriously fucked up.
Will the salt put on main street's wounds by Wall Street, the banks, and the government likewise be regulated? What does that do for one's daily intake?
ah, knuckles....you don't want to end your discounted healthcare ride, eh?
I guess violence against women and children is alright to, so long as the abuser was himself abused?
Fuck you. Don't like how expensive your insurance is? Blame the fucking government. They are the ones who made it that way. Increasing their involvement is only going to lead to infinite costs for everyone, and zero care for anyone.
"I never promised you a rose gar-den..."
Haven't seen a doctor in two years? I haven't seen one in twenty, so what?
You're advocating a system of force on your neighbors against their will, and that's never okay, no matter how "dire" the situation is with your medical insurance. Bottom line.
Factors affecting hypertension and heart disease include lack of exercise, STRESS, age, gender, race, weight, DRUGS, smoking, alcohol, salt intake/diet. Indirectly, the University of California has concluded that if you lose your job (stress), which could lead to home foreclosure (more stress), which could lead to drinking, drugs & smoking and family break ups ... that salt is the culprit !
OTOH, I contend that interupting my daily televsion viewing or radio listening with teleprompting lies, laced with campaign-stumping rhetoric, contribute way more to failing health than salt.
It's now a matter of waiting for a multi-million dollar grant from the government to prove that I am right.
This is what we get from an intellectual, statist, secular, left-wing, reactionary government. Been tried throughout history, and don't work.
Invest wisely, offshore.
well, quint, look at this from another perspective.....
there are some of us -- due to the price discrimination freely practiced here for individual plan holders -- we are already paying thru the nose to help subsidize these services for all the folks on company benefit plans, along with all the other fun things, like plastic surgery, lipsuction, etc.
you see, here in the states, the doctors and hospitals are free to "make their margins up" by billing individual plan holders over 30% or more than they charge company plan holders or Medicare.
And they do. So we have the dubious distinction in my state of having the profitability of our entire healthcare structure now resting on sucking a tiny percentage of the population dry.....a group that is insured, but, given what they have to pay for actual medical services and the astronomical deductibles, they can't afford until they are almost at death's door.
so, let's talk about some pullback on some of these services, eh? I mean, I have a friend whose 93 year old husband had a brain tumor removed at the cost of something like 325K, which was picked up entirely by medicare and his cheaply priced supplemental plan. He paid $732 for the operation.
Me, a total schmuck individually insured, I made the mistake of going to the hospital with a broken ankle. Forty three minutes later, I had an ankle wrapped in gauze and the name of an orthopedist. Bill? $2317 dollars. None covered.
You want to talk change? Let's talk about ending the free ride that all of you anti-change folks are taking.
unwashedmass,
It is VERY simple. Cancel your coverage. Just like all the others, the coverage you are paying for makes absolutely ZERO economic sence. You are paying 8k per year for medical coverage that is providing you $0 in benefits. You are being a sucker.
Cancel your coverage - Take the same payments you are currently making and place them in a savings account. When you have a medical condition, pay cash from the savings account. If you have a medical emergency, goto the emergency room. Let them bill you, wait 90 days before even responding, then go down and start negotiating. If you dont like the price, dont pay it, eventually they will reduce the emergency room bill to something reasonable and you pay it.
You are whining about your own abject economic foolishness. There is a reason your medical insurance provider is hemoraging subscribers so fast - Increasing costs and lower benefits cause people to wake up to the fraud.
If you are worried about accidents and those potential costs, up the medical payment portions of your auto and home-owners (Or renters) insurance.
But it is up to YOU to be informed. It is up to YOU to do the cost benefit analysis. It is up to YOU to stop being an idiot and blaming YOUR costs on others.
Guess he will be fined soon for not being insured! Unless he becomes part of the "exempt" group: Amish, Islamic, Christian Scientists, etc.
Can I be all three?
http://mises.org/daily/4276
This is exactly what we see in the UK. Since the Government (via the National Health Service) notionally pays for most people's healthcare, that gives them a vested interest in how you conduct your life since they want to minimise their expenditure on you. The populace is therefore bombarded with government messages to eat more of this, less of that, do more of this, do less of that.
There also appears to be a growing trend of refusing operations to people who suffer health issues perceived as self inflicted, due to smoking, drinking, obesity etc. Need a heart op? Sorry buddy, not till you can prove you've quit smoking for at least a year.
Basically, the authorities seem to feel that since they pay for your care (with your own tax money of course) they have the right to make you behave in a manner that helps them keep their costs down.
The government has unlimited ways to prevent you from becoming all you can be. Serfs up!
Serfs up is right.
Hey, isn't congress exempt from this healthcare bill? I mean, I think they get to keep their cushy health plans. Good for them! They've been working hard after all...
I am very suspicious about this warning.Yes more salt is bad, but anything more is bad not only salt.
FDA is a corrupt institution.
Where is the FDA warning for SUGAR ? CORN SYRUP ? and on giving corn instead of grass to livestock and causing e.coli in our meat ? Killing Children like Kevin ?
Where is Kevins law ? did it pass ?
For many years they played the deaf.
Sugar and Corn syrup are the bigest poison in this country and because of their strong lobby they do nothing. All country produces corn and it has to be consumed, so we are getting fat, even 6 month old babies getting obese due to corn syrup in their baby food, sugar turns into fat in liver.
Watch the Sugar Bitter Truth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
And also find and watch the movie "Food inc." , you can watch by netflix online.
Eating fructose (which is processed in the liver) causes the body to retain water. This in turn causes the body to retain salt to maintain the salinity balance. This combination drives up blood pressure. Go on a low-carb diet, and the first thing you do is piss out vast quantities of water, along with the excess salt. After that you can eat as much salt as you care to without driving up your blood pressure.
The evil is fructose, courtesy of high-fructose corn syrup. Too bad for salt that it doesn't have a multi-billion dollar lobby pimping its consumption by the masses.
Agreed, but don't forget the third horseman of the obesity apocalypse, palm oil. It's the palm oil used in processed foods, with added fructose to kill the bitter taste and salt to balance the sweetness that makes the killer combination. I wonder why they would attack salt, which is the most benign of the three, but I assume one or more of the big food companies own patents on corn syrup and palm oil, so would challenge any attempts to limit usage.
Treaty obesity related issues costs in the region of $150 billion per year, or just under 10% of total health spending...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/27/health/main5190909.shtml
Thank you...
Oh, and by the way...
What's the odds that there just happens to be a new 'salt substitute' waiting in the wings to be pimped..?
You pegged it exactly shargash. Anyone suffering from diabetes, high blood presure would be advised to re read your post.
I love these blanket statements on salt intake too.Do they think the salt requirements of someone working outside in the south will be the same as someone who sits on their but in AC? Ever run out of salt??? I did, in the desert some 20 years back.(my fault. It was 116 degrees that day and I should have kept up with salt intake) Not fun....very painful
Since salt is naturally occurring and has been consumed for millennia, it is "evil." Unnatural man-made abominations with big industry lobbies, like corn syrup, are good and (of course! haha) consumed only in moderation. Get with the program, Komrade.
You know, i'm getting seriously sick of this constant ranting against the changes in healthcare.
I'm one of the poor suckers who has been literally drained dry by the vampire squidlet that operates a monopoly in my state. There is NO choice currently. The only individual policy available for a family costs over 8K per year, and carries a 15K deductible PER INDIVIDUAL.
And let's not forget that the poor saps like me carrying this "insurance" get billed at the highest rates possible by the doctors and the hospitals because we have no negotiating power.
So, now we're down to 15K people carrying individual plans in my state, and Anthem is going for a 22% raise in premiums.
All you guys so smug with your company plans, you dudes objecting to any changes...
well YOU BEEN TAKIN' A RIDE ON ME! I'm fed up with it.
the current healthcare bill is no solution, EXCEPT that its going to mean that everyone is going to share some pain, not just the schmucks with individual plans....
and that's great. CAUSE AGAIN< all you guys have been free riding, and if you can't see it.....you're as bad as the great vampire squid itself.
You should be a big supporter of the Republican solutions then! Obamacare won't help you out dude!
Yeah...suffering under government-sanctioned monopolies is very trying
Nobody has been free ridin' on you.
Stop blaming the rest of us for something that is your responsibility.
You, that's 'you' and not me, live in a state that has Stalinist policies regarding health care.
How is that my fault?
I'm not forcing you to live in that state.
Either move out or send me your address so that I can send you a box of cheese to serve with that whine.
When I worked in New Jersey I had to listen to people whine about having to pay $14,000 in property taxes per year.
Well, that's the system buddy, move out or stop complaining, or do something to change the system.
It's your responsibility to make the changes, not me.
So having been robbed gives you the right to rob someone else? I think not. If you want to find who's truly at fault for your situation, you need look no further than your own government.
http://mises.org/daily/4276
I too pay for my own healthcare "insurance," to the tune of $12k a year, and also in a state where there is little real choice. I agree with you on the problem, but you are looking in precisely the wrong spot for a solution. The "reform" just passed will only make things worse for anyone who can possibly afford to pay for private insurance and doesn't have it given to them by their employer. If you're dirt poor or in a union, "reform" may be good or neutral, respectively, but for the rest of us, it's very bad.
Insurance is a scam. Can anyone ever actually insure your health? What if you get hit by a bus?
Or what if you have hit-by-bus insurance but a tree falls on you?
I agree that we need to fix the system but what we've done is fix it in the worst possible way. Kind of like trying to stop a leaky pipe by wrapping it in tissue paper. It might work for a few minutes but you'll have a drippy mess on your hands before too long.
Here is one potential way of doing it differently: we coulud have had each state come up with a way to give everyone healthcare. This would have left us with 50 competing markets. As long as we made provisions for allowing people to buy insurance from another state if it would be cheaper, and allowing any doctor from any state to see any patient from any state, the market might be able to help reduce health care costs, and we wouldn't have to resort to outlawing salt for the love of Mike! (just 1 suggestion)
They're trying to take away my favorite spice?
Freakin-A!
Why don't we just make water illegal to consume based on supposed scarcity. Then I'll be dead in 3 days and I won't have to deal with any more of this Orwellian bullcrap every day.
"Or what if you have hit-by-bus insurance but a tree falls on you?"
Just like health insurance usually only pays when you don't have your health, hit-by-bus or hit-by-falling-tree insurance is called life insurance, which only pays when you don't have your life, aka your death.
It's one of the ways we are conditioned to ignore irregularities and out right nonsense.
You don't like the previous system, but the new system with national healthcare is worse. Higher costs, less care, more death.
Tort reform, remove restrictions on "mandated" coverage, permit purchase of plans across state lines, health savings accounts, ... Good Lord, there's an infinite amount of sensible things, most of which were absent from the previous system and none are in the new system (the new system makes it worse, since HSA's will now be illegal, and attempted "cost controls" ensure providers will shut down).
Sorry you don't like the health payment system and cost shifting. I don't either, but it's not my fault the government is stupid enough to cut checks to everybody that manages to ask for something.
Finally, it's not health insurance -- it's prepaid medical coverage. That's got to be one of the dumbest things on earth .... we don't do prepaid gas-tank-fillups for our cars, or pre-paid oil changes, or pre-paid replacement of fan belts.
You want a good system? No employer provides health care, people only purchase "insurance" (major medical, high-deductible -- that's actual insurance), and everything else is paid for directly by the consumer, who is happy to use the HSA/retirement account. As always, somebody showing up in the ER needing medical attention will continue to get it.
removing restrictions to buy across state lines is nothing more than a panacea. the state next door is notorious for recission, and has yet to outlaw it. if you used acne medicene in high school, you can -- and people have -- been dumped the minute they need their policies.
there is no appeal process.
so that's a joke.
the thing is, you guys need to understand that the current system is absolutely destructive to the medical structure. in my state, because the situation with individual insureds has become so dire at the same time the medical infrastructure has become so dependent upon them for any profit, its on the verge of complete collapse.
pretending that the current set up serves us well, or that anyone wanting change is some sort of freeloader is absolute malarkey.
to my mind, you guys are the freeloaders. Me, I haven't seen a doctor in two years and won't unless there's a bone peaking out of the skin, or blood is pouring from my eyeballs....
and i'm insured. i just can't afford to pay 30% more than you do for medical services any longer.
It promotes efficiency. Currently, there is no competition, so no efficiency.
Ditto with state "mandated" coverage -- you are forced to buy coverage you don't want (increasing costs), and companies are forced to manage risk for things they can't (or don't want to) manage. That increases costs.
The pre-Obamacare system was almost the perfect system to increase costs. The post-Obamacare system is almost the perfect system to reduce care.
What you need to understand is that there are two systems: The care-provision system, and the payment system. Everybody is worked up over (upset regarding) the payment system, which is dominated by inefficient cost-shifting.
The pre-Obamacare system was very good for the provision system, and problematic for the payment system (due to cost shifting).
I understand you can't afford the payment system, and the cost shifting makes it an unbounded risk. Sorry, but you won't benefit from the new system either: Costs will be contained by shutting down care provision.
I understand the economics of all of this far better than you obviously do, and frankly, from the ground level as well as the management level of a small business. in addition, my wife is a physician....who understands the price discrimination situation very well indeed.
frankly, your statement that opening up state lines for cross purchasing shows your naivete here as far as exactly how far the insurance companies are willing to go to ensure they have ever accelerating profits.
far from increasing efficiency, it will fire the starting gun for a race to the bottom as to who can deliver the very least care for the most dollars.
the cost shifting situation has maxed out. that, and that alone, is why we are now being pushed to the wall for change.
all you people on the mega-company plans, and the medicare plans, will have to ante up and pay....and yes, it will mean that you will find services cost a good deal more, and you may not get everything you want when you want it....
you'll be in exactly the same situation the individual insureds have been in for quite some time now.
too damn bad. i've had it with you freeloaders. stop whining.
Sorry you're having a bad day. We agree there are problems, and disagree regarding your economic assertion of "free rider" (the proper economic term in reference to your usage of the phrase, "freeloader").
Welcome to Massachussetts, where there are no profits, and soon to be no insurance companies. However, I don't have a problem with that, since IMHO it's possible to have a steady-state system without *any* insurance companies (e.g., everybody pays providers directly, I'd still not prefer a single-payer system).
No, it will be who can tread water (and the answer is "very few").
No. They will not, "ante up and pay". They are already paying record costs, and their response will be to drop coverage, reduce costs, and even drop healthcare entirely as an employee benefit.
Companies don't exist to provide healthcare. Companies will not increase their costs -- indeed, all trends for years have been to attempt to "cap" costs. Obamacare will not add new money to the system: It will lower the money currently spent in the system.
I make clinical observations. You can perceive it as you wish. My observations are the provision system was pretty good, and will get worse; the payment system had a lot of problems, and will get worse.
You want to set the price of eggs. Good luck with that. Too high, and the consumer is screwed. Too low, and there are no eggs. You think you can set the price exactly right? I don't trust you to do that.
dude,
i am not having a bad day, i am just fed up with people like you thinking the past system was pretty good.....no, it wasn't, except for an extremely small group of people. I'm also sick to death of the folks here tarring anyone who wants any sort of change as a freeloader. As a person paying a good portion of their costs, excuse me if I don't want to pay any more.
also, excuse me for not sobbing about the people on company plans paying record costs. add 30% to that, PLUS the unique "facilities fees" billed to the individually insured, and you get a very good idea of exactly how bad this system is for anyone NOT on a company plan or Medicare and forced to subsidize everyone else.
sorry dude if I'm not crying for you. as far as I'm concerned, lines? limited choices? high costs? I've already got them. If you tell me that I'm going to have to pay the same as everyone else, even if it is more, and I might have to stand on a line...
show me where the line is. I pay 8K per year now, and I have NOTHING. NOTHING.
The "provision" portion of the past system was pretty good. This assertion is easily supportable: People come to the USA from all over the world for the best healthcare treatment in the world. All people in the US use the same provision system, regardless of how they pay. (That will now change.)
My entire complaint is that I don't like the fiddling with the "provision" part. It's fine with me to fiddle with the "payment" part, as that does have demonstrable problems. Unfortunately, the current fiddling makes both provision and payment worse.
You don't need to sob. Reality dictates there is a limit, beyond which companies will pay no more. We have reached that point as a society -- as have you, since you clearly can't/won't pay more than you already do.
No problem. Society decided the answer is to reduce care. Problem solved.
again, your naivete, and willingness to repeat the mantras of the obstructionists is staggering.
we do not have the best healthcare system in the world any longer. are you aware of the infection rates now from hospitalizations? they are staggering...2x more than France, and the UK. look it up.
do you know that our infant mortality rates are close to the levels of some of the better off third world countries?
i am so fed up with this crap and misinformation....
where do you get your info on the "best healthcare in the world" ? it is so outdated now that it is simply pathetic.
jesus.....did you know that many hospitals in costa rica are now equipped with more sophisticated equipment than some of our best hospitals?
and, if you have the money, the US is no longer the place to go....India is, for a wealthy person, quite nice. If you want the best healthcare in the world.......
you go to France.
turn off FoxTV, clearly its lethal.
Unwashedmass, I'm hoping you're not a troll. You're rather new around these parts. We tend to try and be civil with each other, critique each other's ideas, and stay away from ad hominems - hence the anonymous nature of this site. You're directing plenty of anger towards Mikla, but I'm afraid it's a bit misplaced.
I can understand if you're fed up with paying $8k per year and getting stuck with a $15k deductible per individual. That makes zero sense. You know what else makes zero sense? Having a third party payer for our medical services. It completely inhibits price discovery. Most people don't care what medical costs are because they dont' pay for them directly, although you certainly have a better idea than most what the true costs are. The third-party insurance model is the main reason behind the explosion of medical costs. If it weren't for it, doctors wouldn't be making as much money and medical costs wouldn't be as high.
You know which medical services have seen increasing quality and lowered costs? All of the non-insured services like lasik, cosmetic surgery, and other elective procedures. You know why? Because people shop around like mad for those services, and doctors have to compete to get the business. Lowered costs and increased quality. By God, who would have thought that people spend their own hard-earned money wisely?
Myself, I've used maybe $1,000 of medical care in the decade since I've become a full-time insured worker. I am very fit, and I stick to a paleolithic diet. I don't and probably won't need any substantial medical care, barring any serious low-probability accident, for the next 20 years. You complain about how much you subsidise medical care for others? Let me tell you, I've been subsidising A LOT of slob's bad habits, and it will continue that way with our lovely new system. I much prefer putting my own money away each year, and having castatrophic insurance for the slim probability of serious injury.
Mikla is making the argument that the provision of care was decent before, but the payment of care was terrible. You are very keenly aware as to how messed up the payment system was. However, your answer to the monstrosity we had before is to welcome with glee this new monstrosity because it will make every less well off, and in your eyes more fair? Way to feed the beast unwashedmass. I don't need an overlord. I can take care of myself just fine. Unfortunately for people like me, and many people on this site, the great masses just seem to love the comfort, stability, and security that indentured servitude provides.
I assert the same to you.
I agree that infection rates in hospitals are always problem, but disagree with the assertion that I'd be better off in a hospital in another country.
Despite the wailings and gnashing of teeth, others agree with me, as people don't go to Canada to get healthcare; yet, people *do* come to the US to get healthcare.
You misunderstand data collection, mortality rates, and adverse selection regarding medical statistics. Definitions vary. The only reason you can cite infant mortality as higher in the US is because premature babies overseas are not infants, and their deaths don't add to the statistics. Similarly, people in socialist countries at some level avoid socialist medical institutions (due to rationing and other concerns), and thus don't reflect all of what's going on regarding care. Your sensationalist statistics are not normalized to societal demographics and behaviors. More street gangs and urban centers in the US result in more teenage deaths in the US, as compared to Norway. Those statistics have nothing to do with the quality of healthcare, and everything to do with social behaviors.
Clearly you need to have your next child in a third-world country, if you think they provide better care.
We agree on the rise in "medical tourism", where individuals will go to quality facilities outside the US for care (which the patients pay for themselves, not through insurance). There will be more of that outside the US, because we refuse tort reform *within* the US.
Most importantly, medical tourism is *not* an example that foreign healthcare is superior; that merely shows the damage within the US regulatory structure (which will now get worse). Further, medical tourism works *because* people opt out of the collectivist solution, and those well-stocked capitalist hospitals overseas exist only because people don't like what the government provides.
A comment on Canadian healthcare: The only way to get prompt, highly competent (bear in mind the minimum competence level actually seems to be pretty decent here) medical treatment in Canada is to be related to somebody in the medical field. If, say, your aunt is an RN you're set because RN's who've been in the field for over a decade know everybody. You can bypass waiting lists if you know enough doctors.
Mikla, I'm beginning to think we're just feeding a troll here...
mindlessly repeating mantras about medical tourism. are you at all aware of the type of medicene available to the average Frenchman?
obviously not. you know, its the ignorance of other cultures and other ways that is absolutely killing us. killing us.
1. Yes, the existing system is busted. (We agree.)
2. Replacing it with something worse is not a solution. (We disagree.)
Did the existing system need to change? Hell, yes, in dozens of ways. But this is straight out of the frying pan and into the fire.
I have to say that I was disappointed that neither side in the current debate bothered to seriously research what other countries have done. Germany is an excellent example with the oldest universal health care system in the world, and more importantly, the vast bulk of it is privately run, not run by the government. And they do this spending about 10% of GDP versus 17% for the US and they cover about 92% of the population. There are definitely lessons for the US to learn from elsewhere in the world. It's too bad that Congress has a bad case of Not Invented Here syndrome coupled with addiction to corporate campaign money.
No solution will ever be perfect and people have to realize this but yes, we can do better than what we do today and definitely better than Obamacare.
mindlessly repeating mantras about medical tourism. are you at all aware of the type of medicene available to the average Frenchman?
obviously not. you know, its the ignorance of other cultures and other ways that is absolutely killing us. killing us.