The Gaming Den

I've been researching Texas's tort reform, and, unfortunately, it appears to have had little effect on the cost of insurance premiums in the health industry. There are more doctors per capita now, but insurance premiums are still rising drastically.

Oh, well, back to the drawing board with that one.

Psychic Robot wrote:I've been researching Texas's tort reform, and, unfortunately, it appears to have had little effect on the cost of insurance premiums in the health industry. There are more doctors per capita now, but insurance premiums are still rising drastically.

Oh, well, back to the drawing board with that one.

Hold onto that gem. Every time someone mentions "tort reform", swallow the bile and tell them it's been tried and it doesn't work.

There was an interesting article in the Atlantic (I think) while the health care debate was going on, and the most interesting thing I took out of it was that there were certain districts where healthcare costs were a fraction of other, on-the-surface demographically-identical districts. The article had the (briefly explored) bias that it was due to kickback references between GPs and specialists and labs, but there wasn't any hard data to back that up at the time (simply due to the study not being undertaken).

I've been thinking about this, and there is a certain malicious glee within me at the prospect of Reaganites cutting Medicare funding. All the Baby Boomers who voted for Reagan's economic values will have their chickens come home to roost as they understand the moral failings of greed. And I will not shed a single tear as they lie withering in their beds, perhaps wondering if the socialism they fought against tooth-and-nail was a better idea than they had once imagined.

Let's not go into generational genocide again, shall we?

I suppose.

Psychic Robot wrote:I've been thinking about this, and there is a certain malicious glee within me at the prospect of Reaganites cutting Medicare funding. All the Baby Boomers who voted for Reagan's economic values will have their chickens come home to roost as they understand the moral failings of greed. And I will not shed a single tear as they lie withering in their beds, perhaps wondering if the socialism they fought against tooth-and-nail was a better idea than they had once imagined.

Yeah, it's not very compassionate, but I agree that there's a certain sense of irony. What'd be weird is to see the majority of an aging demographic suddenly lean decidedly left.

Problem is between hail & hearty and withering in their beds they have a few years to change the legislation. The elderly are the most reliable demographic when it comes to actually voting so politicians will go out of their way to appease them.

Juton wrote:Problem is between hail & hearty and withering in their beds they have a few years to change the legislation. The elderly are the most reliable demographic when it comes to actually voting so politicians will go out of their way to appease them.

So... they change their minds and decide they want a lot of really good UHC, and the government appeases them by giving them that, and America has good UHC? How is that a problem?

Koumei wrote:

Juton wrote:Problem is between hail & hearty and withering in their beds they have a few years to change the legislation. The elderly are the most reliable demographic when it comes to actually voting so politicians will go out of their way to appease them.

So... they change their minds and decide they want a lot of really good UHC, and the government appeases them by giving them that, and America has good UHC? How is that a problem?

Because in the states the only people who'll get UHC are the over 65ers.

Juton wrote:The elderly are the most reliable demographic when it comes to actually voting so politicians will go out of their way to appease them.

So, why is this? Is it because they have more time, or did people just used to vote more decades ago?

RobbyPants wrote:

Juton wrote:The elderly are the most reliable demographic when it comes to actually voting so politicians will go out of their way to appease them.

So, why is this? Is it because they have more time, or did people just used to vote more decades ago?

Probably both.