This New England |
I wonder how much of that is from panicky for-profit health-insurance companies seeking to bribe GOP legislators to stop single-payer universal health care, which the public wants but obviously an important industry and the pols it supports don't. The Republicans tend to be on the side of such health-insurance companies. So the money may in part be to solidify that support. That health indices are much better in nations with single-payer, universal health coverage than in our own collapsing "system'' is a fact that far too many citizens are still oblivious of. CommentsLeave a comment |
|
|
|
Republicans mantra is now, do you want the government between you and your doctor?
You bet your fanny I do, better than having Blue Cross in there as they raise their rates by double digits.
Must need more money to overpay some of the hacks that run the place.
Cmon Obama, do the right thing, single payer
Report Abuse
THE LOGJAM - I believe I know why it's so difficult for the U.S. to have national health while other developed nations have implemented it years ago. It's that in the developed nations of Europe and Canada medical doctors are professionals. While they want to make a decent income, their desire is to practice their profession and cure people of their illnesses or relieve their pain. In the U.S., however, I believe many, and too many, medical doctors are, rather than medical professionals, ENTREPRENEURS! That is, they use their medical education and skills to make money to invest and buy nursing homes, hospitals, condos to build wealth. In the U.S. medical professionals are about wealth, to a large extent, while in the developed nations its about medicine as an end, and a noble end, in itself. I have a niece who's a Canadian MD and is interested in healing people, and not in making a fortune. Perhaps she'd comment for you. TRC
Report Abuse