Unlike some of the automatons that respond in these threads, you are an actual person who thinks, feels and believes. That's pretty clear to me, if not to everyone. This statement, "...only know one solution, increase the size of the government bureaucracy." tells me quite a lot about you thiinking toward government. It's understandable, especially if you are dealing with the private, capitalist, medical bureaucracy which is as close to 100% self-captured by government regulation as I suppose it is possible to get. We are not going to agree on the solution to this problem.
Think about this though. If we can accept that the medical bureaucracy that we hate is due to extreme regulatory capture by the medical sector, it become possible to recognize that by contrast what Warren and Sanders are proposing would result in less bureaucracy; not more. Most everything would be simpler with way less paper work, and fewer rules. Still bureaucratic, but much less so than present. It's an ironic conclusion, but I believe it could be demonstrated by comparison with our sister countries that all have single payer medical care. Bureaucracy, with regard to medical care, in these other countries is dramatically less apparent. Paperwork is monumentally reduced, access to medical care is less multilayered and circuitous and cost dramatically lower! What Buttigieg and Biden are proposing would result in a less dramatic, immediate break, and therefore might be a more practical in that there would be less initial disruption. There would also be a much slower reduction in bureaucracy, as the current medical "system" would be left, initially, more intact. It's assumed, and it is probably a correct assumption, that what they propose, i.e., the public option, would lead to nearly the same place ultimately as the Warren and Sanders proposal.
Last edited:
