The chocolate ration is being increased to 25 grammes per week.

Pennywise pound foolish?

Maybe this is part of the healthcare problem? Because $80 of healthcare was not available, a boy is dead and various medical providers will eat $250,000 (or more) of costs.

In the debate about universal healthcare, I really don’t understand one thing: when I was on a PPO, the amount of time I spent hassling with my insurance company was amazing. I was constantly getting bills from people I’d never heard of (after some routine visit or procedure), and it always took me lots of my time to figure it out and pay the right amount. All this work is definitely not efficiently delivering healthcare. If there were universal healthcare, even if the agency that ran it was much less efficient than the current system, it would have to win hands down on efficiency. That is, a very simple system that is inefficient has to be cheaper than a grossly complex system that is inefficient. Why do critics of universal healthcare point to how badly the government would manage such a system when what we have now is a complete and utter joke, in terms of efficiency?


3 responses to “Pennywise pound foolish?

  1. Anonymous March 11, 2008 at 6:35 pm

    PennyWide? (not wise?)What does that mean?www.pennywide.com???

  2. Anonymous March 11, 2008 at 6:36 pm

    sorry, i thought it would autolink…www.pennywide.com

  3. e40 March 11, 2008 at 11:23 pm

    It was a typo. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: