Some are advocating “Medicare for all”, partly because of the low-interference such a system will provide. Can this stay true in the future?
As Medicare expenditures rise, this illusion of non-interference will become much harder to maintain and indeed Medicare itself may become less popular. I am always curious to hear — from single-payer proponents — which interest groups they think will have a decisive say over the system, and how those interest groups differ in America vs. Western Europe.
(via Health Care Renewal)
Related posts:
- Why do the world’s richest come to the US for health care?
- The real Medicare myth
- Medicare and single-payer
- PNHP zealotry
- The danger of Medicare for all
- Rumble in the health reform jungle
- Single-payer supporters, be careful what you wish for
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 1 comment }
Medicare survives as a parasite on the private market. Payment is viable only when the cost basis of treating medicare patients is considered only on a marginal cost basis rather than a prorated share of actual cost. If they were the only payor, the bottom would fall out of quality.
Comments on this entry are closed.