Add new comment

1) Sorry I missed the quip. Proof again that sarcasm doesn't work on the Internet.
2) Also sorry on the statistical citing; a more recent report from the World Health Organization has moved the U.S. from #42 to #37--hooray for Obamacare! :) Also, the Commonwealth Fund has named the U.S. the worst provider among 11 prosperous nations--for the fifth time. I'm sure the sources can be disputed...but I'm also pretty sure there isn't a conspiracy involved here. In any case, that's the essence of my 'to' question: how do we close the gap between the level of expenditure and the level of care?
3) My anecdotal evidence matches yours--at times. A young person very close to me avoided death due to the efforts of the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance and the UW. I will forever be in their debt. On the other hand, I have seen incompetence to a level that was shocking on two different occasions from a highly-regarded (and extremely well-funded) hospital in our region (which shall remain nameless). So of course, I want to keep all the good stuff! But I wonder how many would agree that the 'good stuff' isn't going to enough people?
4) Paternalism: nothing new in this fear. It's the same warning sounded about Social Security when it was enacted (along with complaints about early implementation SNAFUs). And all that led ultimately to that guy in the audience in South Carolina during the last presidential election warning the speakers to 'keep government hands off my Medicare!'
5) You seem a little surer about my stance on single-payer than I am. I'm honestly conflicted. Which led to my sincere question to Grumpy (and others) to hear their perspectives.
But to repeat my earlier point, I think Oliver Wendell Holmes had it right when he complained about a critic: "I could smash him if he would say what he thought and not only what he didn't believe!"