3 ms·
Best case: they're not kept on as 'No men' (contrast, 'yes men' for underlings who are just empty enablers), but transferred to scientifically evaluating and se
by mjevans 4y ago
Best case: they're not kept on as 'No men' (contrast, 'yes men' for underlings who are just empty enablers), but transferred to scientifically evaluating and seeking the best treatments.
Worst case: we go back to what things were before the ACA where if you had a preexisting condition you were screwed.
- ok_dad 4y agoYea, I'm thinking that there might be a lot of administrative work that could be eliminated by a centralized electronic system for single payer care, but the way I see this going right now is the government adding another layer of administration on top of the current system to operate it (literally privatising it), and then adding a centralized directory of service charges and moving towards eliminating the parts of the system that are unnecessary under this scheme while also working with the same companies as currently exist to merge all EHRs into one common system. I expect most of the cruft of the current system to remain for several decades or more, plus more government cruft, but the upside is that we can eliminate the profit as a goal and probably balance half or more of the government cruft with eliminating inefficiencies. If they privatized pharma and the EHR software companies, too, then that would probably immediately lower prices due to the insane profit motives for investors in those areas, but that would never happen. I think we might save some money right away, but more likely we'll lose a bit, gain the ability for our citizens to not have to worry as much about their jobs being their literal lifeline, and over time we'll save more and more versus the current system due to an increased quality of living due to better health outcomes and longer lives.