posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 02:20 PM
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
We seem to keep running into each other, I like that. Thanks for commenting.
It's the "they'll ration health care" scare tactic at work. Did they ration auto insurance when that became mandatory?
That's exactly my point. As you make clear, auto insurance
wasn't rationed. How could it be? All you need for that is a pen and some
forms. But, "They'll ration health care" is the scary thing. Someone has to provide the care, and each provider has a certain limit on the number
of patients he or she can work with, they have to sleep sometime.
Here, consider the baby boom generation, they're a big group of people. They're retiring, getting older and will make more visits to the doctor,
increasing the demand for care. But, remember, there are large number of doctors who also come from the baby boom generation. They'll be retiring
as well, thereby reducing the supply. Further reducing the supply are the number of doctors leaving because they don't want to deal with the ever
increasing requirements for paperwork and the multiplying regulations. Economics tells us that in a case like that you can achieve equilibrium by
raising the price or instituting rationing.
We're trying to increase the supply of doctors, but I've been told it takes 10 years plus to create a competent one. The ACA with it's cuts in
medicare spending will reduce the money sent to medical schools by $1 billion over the next ten years.
We're also trying to reduce the demand for doctors by using nurses and preventive medicine. It will help, but enough?
Hey, I'm not trying to go after either candidate, or party, or really attack anything. My worry is that some might believe that if everyone gets
cheap government health insurance, we will have taken care of our health care problems. I think there's a lot more to it than that.