There is an irecconsilable conflict at the heart of free market capitalism and health care. Essentially, profits are contingent on people who pay premiums never actually needing health services or not receiving health service when they need them.
it's really a miracle of propaganda that you americans believe you have "free market capitalism". the way it appears to me is that you have had a succession of governments that are radical statists. almost every form of technology that has arisen since WWII has been heavily government subsidised.
the free market is a ideological weapon used against the poor.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
i live in a country with universal health care. i don't pay extra for private health care, although next year i will purchase it due to government tax incentives (i.e. the government forces you to pay around $500-$600 if you earn over $70g and don't take out private health cover). rockadelic, i think this is a more sensible incentive structure rather than basing it on consumer goods like iphones and kicks.
btw, i know several doctors, and the ones that work in bulk-billing agencies (i.e. they don't charge above the what medicare pays) and they are rich.
this whole public health insurance = broke doctors, does not hold up.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
ER and Free Clinics are the minor leagues for doctors....where they earn their stripes....so they can make the big money.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
ER and Free Clinics are the minor leagues for doctors....where they earn their stripes....so they can make the big money.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
ER and Free Clinics are the minor leagues for doctors....where they earn their stripes....so they can make the big money.
I don't think we're just talking about CEO's. I'm betting even at middle management those dudes are making $250,000+
In the link you posted above the median salary for a cardiac surgeons makes under $500,000.
So that 1 CEO alone made the same as 50 doctors who you know... Repair peoples hearts.
While a part of the CEO's job is to get his company to deny claims for people to get their hearts fixed.
But it's not just the effects that the corporations have. You can't put aside wall streets role in all this.
Rock, hypothetically speaking. What do you think you would be paying in extra taxes a year to have your family covered under a public health care system?
My wife had a brain tumor a couple of years ago. She took medication for it, and eventually had to have an expensive surgery- we had every reason to believe we were fully insured. When we consulted our insurance company (and the teaching hospital that she would receive the surgery from) they both said that there would be no way to tell how much the insurance would cover until the cost of surgery was known (read: completed). Now this was a teaching hospital run by a University that wifey was teaching at. After the surgery they repeatedly tried to argue about what they were required to pay- and eventually would bill us for varying outrageous amounts, basically $190,000+ with no coverage at all and claims of bogus undisclosed pre-existing conditions (we're sorry you took birthcontrol?) to in the end (and after we got legal counsel) covering the entire surgery.
Shades of Michael Moore for sure- and shit sucks when it's happening to you.
Because the Dr and the insurance company are both in the business of making money first and foremost.................
A public system that does not allow for profit making (above a certain small %) or expanding/astronomical salary benefits would totally destroy this system.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
ER and Free Clinics are the minor leagues for doctors....where they earn their stripes....so they can make the big money.
I don't think that's "big money" compared to what insurance middle/upper management and executives are pulling.
I mean Aetna's Ron Williams earned almost $25 million in total compensation for 2008 alone.
Plaese to be serious.....according to Forbes Magazine 9 of the top ten paying professions/jobs in America are in health care.....#7 is CEO.
I'd like to know those 9 other jobs.
Insurance big wigs make a LOT of money.
You're talking about 10-25 greedy ass CEO's.
Individually, outrageous.
In the big picture, peanuts.
This is totally false. Docs no longer make the big salary compared to business folks. I bet the top 100 docs wouldn't even make the list of top 10,000 insurance execs, much less what banker/investment dudes are pulling. The lead story on the NYT tonight is about Goldman's anticipated bonuses for this year. In 2007 they had 50 people who made more that 20 million. Their average salary is going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $770,000 this year.
When I said that docs are in it for the money, I should have said the organizations (clinics, hospitals) they work for are in it to make a profit. They are not the drivers of the insanity. They however do not favor reform because they could face further reductions in income. All of which would be fine by me.
Here's link to the highest paying MD salaries. $$$$$$$
My wife had a brain tumor a couple of years ago. She took medication for it, and eventually had to have an expensive surgery- we had every reason to believe we were fully insured. When we consulted our insurance company (and the teaching hospital that she would receive the surgery from) they both said that there would be no way to tell how much the insurance would cover until the cost of surgery was known (read: completed). Now this was a teaching hospital run by a University that wifey was teaching at. After the surgery they repeatedly tried to argue about what they were required to pay- and eventually would bill us for varying outrageous amounts, basically $190,000+ with no coverage at all and claims of bogus undisclosed pre-existing conditions (we're sorry you took birthcontrol?) to in the end (and after we got legal counsel) covering the entire surgery.
Shades of Michael Moore for sure- and shit sucks when it's happening to you.
The price they are charging in no way relates to the service they actually provide. And yet it is perfectly legal.
Rock, you need to watch this doc. It best distills the way "national" health care systems work. It shows that you can skin a cat many ways but he who sets the price controls the system.
A Dr does not make a profit unless she has ownership in the hospital/clinic/practice. She makes a salary. Which is determined by her employer. Her employer determines the wage based on the profits the Dr brings to the company.
Insurance executives don't get 25mil salary. They get a nice salary + all kinds of bonuses = 25mil. Those bonuses represent profits.
To achieve the kind of profits that insurance companies have realized since the 1980s requires insurance companies to charge ever higher premiums while denying more and more claims. This is often achieved by marketing aggressively to the young, while canceling policies of long term members.
The Dr makes money providing care. The insurance company makes money denying care.
What I am saying is, comparing someones profits to someone else's wage is not comparing apples to apples.
Profits.
A dr who works for a hospital or clinic gets paid a salary. The hospital or clinic makes a profit from the Dr's labor.
An insurance company employee earns a salary. The insurance company's owners make a profit.
"Let's take an example of how these low costs work. In Denver, where I live, if you get an MRI of your neck region it's $1,200, and the doctor we visited in Japan says he gets $98 for an MRI. So how do you do that?
Well, in 2002 the government says that the MRIs, we are paying too much, so in order to be within the total budget, we will cut them by 35 percent.[/b]
If I'm a doctor, why don't I say, "I'm not going to do them; it's not enough money"?
You forgot that we have only one payment system. So if you want to do your MRIs, unless you can get private-pay patients, which is almost impossible in Japan, you go out of business. ...[/b]
... The price of that MRI is so much cheaper in Japan. Doesn't he have to pay the same price, $5,000, for an MRI machine like the man in America?
Well, it depends on what kind of image density the radiologist wants. And the MRIs that are available in Japan are much less expensive than those that are typically found in the United States.[/b]
So the imaging machine is cheaper? ... To me that's another advantage of negotiating low prices: Then the supplying industry has to cut its prices, and the MRI makers met this need.
Right. And MRIs have now become very big in [the] export industry.[/b]
So the health ministry set a low price, the MRI makers make cheaper machines to help the doctors meet that price, and now Japan is exporting these around the world?
Right. ... This is a situation where the market does work in health care. ...[/b]"
This is sad - you really believe the only people making money in insurance are 10-25 greedy CEOs on the take?
Let me tell you about my time with one of the biggest commercial brokerage firms.
I came in as an ungroomed temp worker from a regular old temp service. At the time I left, I was making great money without so much as a major promotion or any employees in my charge, after a mere 5 years in. Had I stayed, I'd be making at least $150k/yr by now, probably more. My bosses - not CEOs, simply Vice Presidents of Divisions within Divisions - were making over $250k a year. Their bosses made much, much more. Our partners at AIG, the Hartford, the Travelers, St. Paul, Chubb - often made even more than that. At dinners and drinks, you were always supposed to let the Insurance Companies pay. After all, they got the premiums - we just got the commissions.
Imagine the company parties. You should've seen some of the expense reports turned in by *junior* brokers like me (let alone the big fish). We were routinely sent out on "business" trips - Acela trains, downtown hotels... after a 2 hour meeting, drinks and dinner on the house. I once went on a 2-week "advanced training" session that basically turned into a 2-week rolling party, written all off to the company's tab. It might as well have been monopoly money.
I hate to turn this all back to the personal shit which honestly is nobody's business but I want people to understand the difference between a Doctor's Office and an Insurance Company. They are not remotely the same culture, the same money, the same people. Most of my colleagues were being groomed for the big time and had relatives elsewhere in the firm. They weren't even particularly smart. Even the nurses at the local hospital knew more about medicine and injury. Shit, they probably knew more about insurance, too. It's absolutely not "peanuts". It is billions of dollars.
Insurance is part of the FINANCE industry, not the MEDICAL industry.
Outrageous? Yes. One of the reasons I got out, taking a huge cut in the process. Greedy ass CEOs? Not really. Greedy ass people. Thousands of them.
Rock, hypothetically speaking. What do you think you would be paying in extra taxes a year to have your family covered under a public health care system?
Fair question....Here???s the way I see it???.
I???m currently paying $8,000 for what everyone here seems to agree is overpriced and inferior health care/insurance.
If the new Health Care plan is going to make health care more affordable that would include mine as well.
So theoretically I should receive better health care for less money??????no?
I don???t care who I pay my eight grand to as long as I get care equal to or better than what I have now.
So if the new program, which is supposed to make health care more affordable, reduces what I pay for MY insurance plan by $1,000, $2,000, or whatever amount it may be, they can use the rest of my $8,000 to help pay for the overall program.
So the answer to your question is I don???t think it will cost me any more money, nor am I agreeable to spend any more money than I currently do???.if someone thinks I should I???d like to hear an argument why?
I???m currently paying $8,000 for what everyone here seems to agree is overpriced and inferior health care/insurance.
I never said that.
But honestly, you're still looking at it from the perspective of YOUR insurance. It's not about YOUR insurance.
What part of the above do you not agree with....are you saying my coverage is not overpriced or it's not inferior to all the other plans that are being discussed here?
Well I don't know your coverage. I can't say if it's inferior. I will say, on a broad basis, that insurance companies are in the business of denying claims. So it's quite possible there is some dusty corner of your policy that might prevent you at some point for being made whole after a significant health loss.
As far as the price... I dunno, it seems fair by market standards. When I was self-insured - and later, uninsured - it was costing me $3-400/mo for just me. So for a family of four, that sounds like a fair market rate. Obviously, I think these prices should - and, hopefully, will - go down across the board.
Rock, hypothetically speaking. What do you think you would be paying in extra taxes a year to have your family covered under a public health care system?
Fair question....Here???s the way I see it???.
I???m currently paying $8,000 for what everyone here seems to agree is overpriced and inferior health care/insurance.
If the new Health Care plan is going to make health care more affordable that would include mine as well.
So theoretically I should receive better health care for less money??????no?
I don???t care who I pay my eight grand to as long as I get care equal to or better than what I have now.
So if the new program, which is supposed to make health care more affordable, reduces what I pay for MY insurance plan by $1,000, $2,000, or whatever amount it may be, they can use the rest of my $8,000 to help pay for the overall program.
So the answer to your question is I don???t think it will cost me any more money, nor am I agreeable to spend any more money than I currently do???.if someone thinks I should I???d like to hear an argument why?
Since you like your insurance, and your care, would you be happy if they just left things alone?
Are there any changes you would like to see to the health care system in the USA?
And folks like AIG just got bailed out by our government which is insane and makes them somewhat complicit.
This must brun your ass.
I would like to reiterate that I opposed the bailouts from the start.
We have antitrust laws to prevent companies from becoming too big to fail. If they are too big to fail then those laws need to be applied retroactively and the companies broken up and sold off. It's what I said then and what I say now.
To be fair to the insurance industry. AIG is a famous example of abuse and excess. Your typical strip mall insurance broker in Anytown America is not making the same loot.
Dan - most strip mall insurance brokers flow into the same system that still gets bundled up all the way to the top. It's like consumer debts and leases. Premiums get bundled the same way.
AIG is just one example of the kind of shit MANY companies in the insurance industry do, once you get above "the street". Most major insurance companies have very diverse interests, from international reinsurance, big business risk management programs, down to small consumer life, auto, health, and workers comp.
Dan - most strip mall insurance brokers flow into the same system that still gets bundled up all the way to the top. It's like consumer debts and leases. Premiums get bundled the same way.
AIG is just one example of the kind of shit MANY companies in the insurance industry do, once you get above "the street". Most major insurance companies have very diverse interests, from international reinsurance, big business risk management programs, down to small consumer life, auto, health, and workers comp.
What I meant was the guy working in the strip mall was not going to the parties you were going to, or on track for the really big $$ your co-workers were being groomed for.
I didn't mean the policies he sold or the companies he represented were any different.
On a tangent, AIG runs their business very differently than Kaiser or Legacy. Kaiser and Legacy are much less diversified and they own their hospitals and most of the staff work directly for them. I think Legacy might call itself not for profit. Doesn't mean the executives and sales staff are not getting paid. Just less excess than AIG and the brokers that feed AIG.
I know its long, but it details why a hospital in Texas (!) spends on average 15k per patient per year, while the well-ragarded Mayo Clinic spends less than 6k. And why another Texas hospital, just a hundred miles away from the first one, spends around 10k per patient. Check the article for the reason why, but I'll just say its not because one provides better care, or has better facilities. Read it.
Comments
it's really a miracle of propaganda that you americans believe you have "free market capitalism". the way it appears to me is that you have had a succession of governments that are radical statists. almost every form of technology that has arisen since WWII has been heavily government subsidised.
the free market is a ideological weapon used against the poor.
Now we're talking.....I stated doctors were in it for the $$ and some folks wanted to throw some idealistic Hippocratic Oath BS at me.
btw, i know several doctors, and the ones that work in bulk-billing agencies (i.e. they don't charge above the what medicare pays) and they are rich.
this whole public health insurance = broke doctors, does not hold up.
Maybe for docs doing boob jobs and such. But I highly doubt family doctors or ER docs got into the field because they wanted to make crazy money top priority. Or docs that work in free clinics, etc etc etc. If that was the case, they would have jump into specialized medicine.
ER and Free Clinics are the minor leagues for doctors....where they earn their stripes....so they can make the big money.
http://www.cejkasearch.com/compensation/amga_physician_compensation_survey.htm
I don't think that's "big money" compared to what insurance middle/upper management and executives are pulling.
I mean Aetna's Ron Williams earned almost $25 million in total compensation for 2008 alone.
Plaese to be serious.....according to Forbes Magazine 9 of the top ten paying professions/jobs in America are in health care.....#7 is CEO.
Insurance big wigs make a LOT of money.
You're talking about 10-25 greedy ass CEO's.
Individually, outrageous.
In the big picture, peanuts.
I don't think we're just talking about CEO's. I'm betting even at middle management those dudes are making $250,000+
In the link you posted above the median salary for a cardiac surgeons makes under $500,000.
So that 1 CEO alone made the same as 50 doctors who you know... Repair peoples hearts.
While a part of the CEO's job is to get his company to deny claims for people to get their hearts fixed.
But it's not just the effects that the corporations have. You can't put aside wall streets role in all this.
Rock, hypothetically speaking. What do you think you would be paying in extra taxes a year to have your family covered under a public health care system?
Shades of Michael Moore for sure- and shit sucks when it's happening to you.
This is totally false. Docs no longer make the big salary compared to business folks. I bet the top 100 docs wouldn't even make the list of top 10,000 insurance execs, much less what banker/investment dudes are pulling. The lead story on the NYT tonight is about Goldman's anticipated bonuses for this year. In 2007 they had 50 people who made more that 20 million. Their average salary is going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $770,000 this year.
When I said that docs are in it for the money, I should have said the organizations (clinics, hospitals) they work for are in it to make a profit. They are not the drivers of the insanity. They however do not favor reform because they could face further reductions in income. All of which would be fine by me.
Here's link to the highest paying MD salaries.
$$$$$$$
The price they are charging in no way relates to the service they actually provide. And yet it is perfectly legal.
Rock, you need to watch this doc. It best distills the way "national" health care systems work. It shows that you can skin a cat many ways but he who sets the price controls the system.
Which is determined by her employer.
Her employer determines the wage based on the profits the Dr brings to the company.
Insurance executives don't get 25mil salary.
They get a nice salary + all kinds of bonuses = 25mil.
Those bonuses represent profits.
To achieve the kind of profits that insurance companies have realized since the 1980s requires insurance companies to charge ever higher premiums while denying more and more claims. This is often achieved by marketing aggressively to the young, while canceling policies of long term members.
The Dr makes money providing care. The insurance company makes money denying care.
What I am saying is, comparing someones profits to someone else's wage is not comparing apples to apples.
Sick Around the World
Interesting stuff. I was just reading about Japan's system from Frontline.
Percentage of GDP spent on health care: 8
Average family premium: $280 per month, with employers paying more than half.
Co-payments: 30 percent of the cost of a procedure, but the total amount paid in a month is capped according to income.
In an interview with Naoki Ikegami (Japan's top health economist.) in Oct. 2007, they go into MRI's specifically.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/interviews/ikegami.html#1
"Let's take an example of how these low costs work. In Denver, where I live, if you get an MRI of your neck region it's $1,200, and the doctor we visited in Japan says he gets $98 for an MRI. So how do you do that?
Well, in 2002 the government says that the MRIs, we are paying too much, so in order to be within the total budget, we will cut them by 35 percent.[/b]
If I'm a doctor, why don't I say, "I'm not going to do them; it's not enough money"?
You forgot that we have only one payment system. So if you want to do your MRIs, unless you can get private-pay patients, which is almost impossible in Japan, you go out of business. ...[/b]
... The price of that MRI is so much cheaper in Japan. Doesn't he have to pay the same price, $5,000, for an MRI machine like the man in America?
Well, it depends on what kind of image density the radiologist wants. And the MRIs that are available in Japan are much less expensive than those that are typically found in the United States.[/b]
So the imaging machine is cheaper? ... To me that's another advantage of negotiating low prices: Then the supplying industry has to cut its prices, and the MRI makers met this need.
Right. And MRIs have now become very big in [the] export industry.[/b]
So the health ministry set a low price, the MRI makers make cheaper machines to help the doctors meet that price, and now Japan is exporting these around the world?
Right. ... This is a situation where the market does work in health care. ...[/b]"
This is sad - you really believe the only people making money in insurance are 10-25 greedy CEOs on the take?
Let me tell you about my time with one of the biggest commercial brokerage firms.
I came in as an ungroomed temp worker from a regular old temp service. At the time I left, I was making great money without so much as a major promotion or any employees in my charge, after a mere 5 years in. Had I stayed, I'd be making at least $150k/yr by now, probably more. My bosses - not CEOs, simply Vice Presidents of Divisions within Divisions - were making over $250k a year. Their bosses made much, much more. Our partners at AIG, the Hartford, the Travelers, St. Paul, Chubb - often made even more than that. At dinners and drinks, you were always supposed to let the Insurance Companies pay. After all, they got the premiums - we just got the commissions.
Imagine the company parties. You should've seen some of the expense reports turned in by *junior* brokers like me (let alone the big fish). We were routinely sent out on "business" trips - Acela trains, downtown hotels... after a 2 hour meeting, drinks and dinner on the house. I once went on a 2-week "advanced training" session that basically turned into a 2-week rolling party, written all off to the company's tab. It might as well have been monopoly money.
I hate to turn this all back to the personal shit which honestly is nobody's business but I want people to understand the difference between a Doctor's Office and an Insurance Company. They are not remotely the same culture, the same money, the same people. Most of my colleagues were being groomed for the big time and had relatives elsewhere in the firm. They weren't even particularly smart. Even the nurses at the local hospital knew more about medicine and injury. Shit, they probably knew more about insurance, too. It's absolutely not "peanuts". It is billions of dollars.
Insurance is part of the FINANCE industry, not the MEDICAL industry.
Outrageous? Yes. One of the reasons I got out, taking a huge cut in the process. Greedy ass CEOs? Not really. Greedy ass people. Thousands of them.
Fair question....Here???s the way I see it???.
I???m currently paying $8,000 for what everyone here seems to agree is overpriced and inferior health care/insurance.
If the new Health Care plan is going to make health care more affordable that would include mine as well.
So theoretically I should receive better health care for less money??????no?
I don???t care who I pay my eight grand to as long as I get care equal to or better than what I have now.
So if the new program, which is supposed to make health care more affordable, reduces what I pay for MY insurance plan by $1,000, $2,000, or whatever amount it may be, they can use the rest of my $8,000 to help pay for the overall program.
So the answer to your question is I don???t think it will cost me any more money, nor am I agreeable to spend any more money than I currently do???.if someone thinks I should I???d like to hear an argument why?
I never said that.
But honestly, you're still looking at it from the perspective of YOUR insurance. It's not about YOUR insurance.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
And folks like AIG just got bailed out by our government which is insane and makes them somewhat complicit.
This must brun your ass.
What part of the above do you not agree with....are you saying my coverage is not overpriced or it's not inferior to all the other plans that are being discussed here?
As far as the price... I dunno, it seems fair by market standards. When I was self-insured - and later, uninsured - it was costing me $3-400/mo for just me. So for a family of four, that sounds like a fair market rate. Obviously, I think these prices should - and, hopefully, will - go down across the board.
And yes, AIG bruns my ass in no small way.
Since you like your insurance, and your care, would you be happy if they just left things alone?
Are there any changes you would like to see to the health care system in the USA?
I would like to reiterate that I opposed the bailouts from the start.
We have antitrust laws to prevent companies from becoming too big to fail.
If they are too big to fail then those laws need to be applied retroactively and the companies broken up and sold off.
It's what I said then and what I say now.
To be fair to the insurance industry.
AIG is a famous example of abuse and excess.
Your typical strip mall insurance broker in Anytown America is not making the same loot.
AIG is just one example of the kind of shit MANY companies in the insurance industry do, once you get above "the street". Most major insurance companies have very diverse interests, from international reinsurance, big business risk management programs, down to small consumer life, auto, health, and workers comp.
What I meant was the guy working in the strip mall was not going to the parties you were going to, or on track for the really big $$ your co-workers were being groomed for.
I didn't mean the policies he sold or the companies he represented were any different.
On a tangent, AIG runs their business very differently than Kaiser or Legacy.
Kaiser and Legacy are much less diversified and they own their hospitals and most of the staff work directly for them.
I think Legacy might call itself not for profit.
Doesn't mean the executives and sales staff are not getting paid.
Just less excess than AIG and the brokers that feed AIG.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/bernie-sanders-va-socialized-health-care-system
Cost Connundrum from The New Yorker
This is really good.
It is required reading for White House staff and should be required reading for soulstrut.
I printed it out because I can't do 9 pages on line.
The set up is a little slow, but once he gets into it...
It touches on one little corner of health care.
The people who are arguing about Drs and profits need to read it then revisit their positions.