Quote:
Originally posted by LessinSF
You should reread what I said. I am opposed to a national health care system. All I said was that if there was going to be additional governmental involvement in an effort to control skyrocketing costs, the analysis applied should be a cost-benefit one akin to what Oregon is trying to do, not whatever fucked-up approach would actually be pushed or applied.
|
2. The Oregon plan was one of the most innovative and honest plans out there. It acknowledged limited resources for a very large population and did a good job of allocating those resources accross the entire population, instead of deciding that half the population should go without healthcare just so we're not accused of "rationing."
Fuck the first Bush administration for denying the Medicaid waiver on that one.
Also, there needs to be a shitload more outcomes research in this country. It's ridiculous how conventional wisdom, without any research to back it up, becomes protocol in the delivery of healthcare.
