
Origins of Employer-Sponsored Health Care in the U.S. - pj
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/355/1/82?ijkey=4MnhqQBve7qv.&keytype=ref&siteid=nejm
======
spakalavach
how much longer must this be debated? every year we debate, we spend more and
get more sick

the experiment is over, single-payer wins. the global healthcare experiment is
fifty years old. single-payer wins and the nations with single-payer have
better balance sheets than those that don't. they're also healthier.

whats the point of experimenting further? what else is there to learn that
will be of greater value than getting people healthy now?

healthcare is not a business. you care if other people are getting good
healthcare. you don't you say? well, do you go to the movies periodically?
better hope that person next to you doesn't have untreated TB, or something
else nasty, otherwise you're dead and your own health coverage won't
help...its only a billing system, not a cure-all. when people can't get sick
from sharing the air in a room, i'll admit i don't care about the healthcare
other people get.

and if single payer doesn't work, then lets get rid of it for the military,
because thats how their system works.

saw a reference to milton friedman and his thought on healthcare today on HN.
we're so dogmatic about being conservative capitalists that we cannot admit
that those nations that have embraced friedman the most tightly are also the
most indebted. USA, japan, etc. time to just admit that friedman was wrong,
his teachings have destroyed at least two great western economies. the further
away from friedman an industrial economy is, the less indebted it tends to be.
how paradoxical is that...the nations that have rejected balls-on capitalism
are showing better balance sheets than those that embraced it. live and learn

