tjcmd
Retired
I bet medical leeches are not cheap now. But then, they have advanced so much since the '60s.
It cost four or five bucks to see a doctor then. Today the copayment is 35 bucks.
Just received notice of another 20% increase in health insurance premium. Thanks Obama.
RJ, If the government had almost completely taken over fast food, you would now have to have insurance for a plain, tiny McD hamburger with only ketchup on it
You got to be trolling with this dumb shit. Bread used to cost a nickel - too much government intervention in the bread market?It cost four or five bucks to see a doctor then. Today the copayment is 35 bucks.
You got to be trolling with this dumb shit. Bread used to cost a nickel - too much government intervention in the bread market?
Hell, when we were at Wake the most expensive pot was $250 a pound or $25 an ounce and that only happened once. Most of the time is was $15/ounce. According to the ads in weekly papers pot seems to cost about $40-55 for 1/8 of an ounce. That's $320-440/ounce.
Health care is much more expensive relative to everything else than it was before wholesale government intervention, handjob.
You are speaking specifically of the United States only, right? Because health care is less expensive relative to everything else than it was before central control in most of the rest of the world. Is it possible we've just done a shitty half assed job?
The difference our system and theirs is that we have accepted a middleman business structure. Our middlemen add nothing but costs to medical outcomes. We also don't effectively negotiate prices for services, medications or equipment.
You are speaking specifically of the United States only, right? Because health care is less expensive relative to everything else than it was before central control in most of the rest of the world. Is it possible we've just done a shitty half assed job?
why would anyone think that a system in which marketing plays such a large role is likely to be more effective, to lead to better treatment, than the kind of process of expert review that governs grant awards at NIH or publishing decisions at peer-reviewed journals? Why do we think that a system in which ads for Claritin are all over the subways will generate better overall health results than one where a national review board determines whether Claritin delivers treatment outcomes for some populations sufficiently superior to justify its added expense over similar generics? What do we expect from a system in which, as ProPublica reports today, body imaging companies hire telemarketers to sell random people CT scans over the phone?