"Massachusetts legislature is set to enact the strict cost controls that GOP Tea-Baggers described as 'death panels' during the Obamacare debate. Gov. Deval Patrick has promised to sign the bill."I actually don't have a problem with that. There is a limit to how much the government can afford to do. I'm not sure it's worth it to give someone a drug that might keep them alive for a month or two more and then they end up dying anyway, especially if that month or two is spent lying in a hospital bed racking up more costs. Not quite sure how to say this.... I think government healthcare should have strict guidelines about how far they can go to save someone's life? There might be some procedures that would be prohibitively expensive that just wouldn't be worth it to save someone's life? Like if someone is a vegetable with limited chance of recovery and they have to be cared for and fed intravenously and rolled over and all that for years. Or heart transplants? Stage 4 cancer where they know the person is going to die anyway in a few months, etc.? Another words if the individual wants more care than what the government can afford to provide then can buy additional supplemental health insurance to cover these end-of-life health care issues that the government can't afford to cover? Art
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra