I read it as “We spend 6-7%, which is more than…” rather than “We spend 6-7% more than…”. I don’t know how I did that. My apologies.

Still, the new 1.6T USD is on top of that, so this will only increase our expense, not decrease it.

I don’t think it’s impossible to do better. In fact, I can think of several ways to do better. The Shakespearean response would be one way to cut health care costs, by cutting down on malpractice insurance. I’m also unsure on drug patents, but I admit that’s there’s not a clear better solution there. The one thing that Giuliani did during his campaign that I really liked what his health care plan.

What I do think is impossible is that the government can cut healthcare costs. And I don’t feel like I need to explain why in any more detail than I already did. More beauracracy, more inneficiency, less desire for innovation always lead to government options costing more and doing less than private options.

As I said, nothing our government ever touches has gotten better or less expensive. And, if you somehow believe that this time will be different, then I suggest that the burden of proof is upon you, not me.

But just because we are industrialized and so are other nations doesn’t mean we’ll have comparable outcomes in spending…few nations spend as much on defense as we do, either, but we have to, for obvious reasons (obvious to me, anyway)…

But I refuse to blame the fact that we have private health insurance for our high costs. That shows a distrust of the market that I do not share. The REGULATION of the market may be flawed, but as you know, I’m a capitalist, and I believe that left to their own devices, markets will reach the right price. It may just be that we expect too much health care as a birthright.

I don’t have the answers. And if we weren’t sitting on over $11 trillion in debt, I would be more open to a bigger government role in ensuring that the uninsured get insured (say that three times fast).

My argument here is not ideological, believe it or not…it’s based on sheer terror of the consequences of taking on more debt at a time like this…

It is no good saying other countries pay “x% of GDP” for their care, and we somehow must magically conform.

It’s not a matter of “magically conforming” to what other countries spend.

There’s a wide range of what other industrialized countries spend: from 6.4% of GDP in Korea, to 11% of GDP in France. But note that the difference between us and our next-most-expensive competitor (France) is nearly as large (4.3%) as the difference between them and their least-expensive competitor (4.6%).

If we achieved better healthcare outcomes for our extra trillion dollars/year, that would be one thing.

But we don’t.

Other countries face a different set of challenges than we do.

What unique challenges do we face, that no other industrialized country in the world faces, that cost us an extra $1 trillion/year to meet?

(The obvious answer: a private, for-profit, health insurance industry, is not an allowed response.)

It is no good saying other countries pay “x% of GDP” for their care, and we somehow must magically conform. Other countries face a different set of challenges than we do.

My opposition to this bill is quite simple and has been consistent from day one. We can’t afford it.

More later from Megan McArdle…

So, sorry Chris, we are wasting $1 trillion/year on our inefficient and dysfunctional healthcare system.

If you think it’s “impossible” to do better, you’ll have to explain why every other industrialized country manages to do the impossible, year-in, year-out.

Steve:

I don’t know whether the (constantly shifting) proposal on the table will bring about the kind of efficiencies that are commonplace elsewhere.

Perhaps (with Mark cheering them on), the Senate will eviscerate the proposal to the point where it does absolutely nothing to bring down costs, and is merely another wasteful boondoggle, like the Medicare Drug Benefit (which George Will now chooses to praise).

6-7% of GDP translates into $10 trillion over the 10 year period you’re talking about. That is (objectively) the amount of money we are wasting on an inefficient and dysfunctional healthcare system.

It’s only the amount of money we are wasting, if you somehow believe it could actually be done on 0% GDP. The amount of money that we are wasting is surely significantly less, isn’t it?

If we could recapture a fraction of that wasted $10 trillion, healthcare reform would more than pay for itself.

Well, as I already have shown, we’re not wasting $10 T, but something significantly smaller than that. As for the other point, I’ve seen no indication that the President’s plan or the Senate plan would save a single dime.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

Nothing our government touches has ever gotten either better or less expensive. Yet, somehow we’re supposed to believe that this time it’ll work. What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

As has been brought up many other places, why not fix Medicare and Medicaid first? If those are trial runs for government run/assisted healtchare, the results are not encouraging to say the least.