"Why We Must Ration Health Care" -- no, I am most definitely not suggesting that we should let the government take over health care and tell us what treatments we can receive. However, this article does make a good point-- there must be some limitation to what the public purse is going to spend on health care. A line has to be drawn somewhere.
"Budget Analyst Assails Cost of Congress' Health-Care Proposals" -- This should come as no surprise. The House bill does little more than increase the federal government's responsibility to provide health insurance to everybody, at the sole expense of higher income people. Aside from the repugnant redistributionism of the bill, it in no way changes the incentives of healthcare consumers or providers.
"Massachusetts Takes Big Step Away from Fee for Service" -- An excerpt: "A commission recommended this afternoon that the state turn away from the traditional "fee for service" model of paying for health care -- piecemeal payments for each procedure delivered. Instead, the commission said, the state should shift toward a system under which health-care providers would receive a sum to care for a given person or family, thereby providing an incentive to deliver care in a cost-effective way."
Sound anything like my "health membership" idea that I mentioned in a previous post?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment