Yesterday’s NY Times magazine preview had a thought-provoking article by Peter Singer on health care rationing. Singer clearly comes at this from an extreme position (this is a guy whose fame is due to weighing hypothetical lives against each other), but he raises some excellent points. I’m not sure where I come down on rationing, and how it might work, but it’s clear that spending $50,000 on new drugs that only extend life by a few months is not a sustainable system. As congress gets ready to debate the health care bills coming out of committee, we should all start thinking about how America pays for health care, and reading Singer’s article is a good place to start. You only really need to read the first half. In the second half he goes into his usual shtick about disabled people vs. fully abled and goes off point.
-
Recent Posts
Blogroll
Sites
Tag Cloud
america apple art auto bailout ayn rand bailout barack obama bonuses bubble Business citigroup congress consumerism consumption corporate culture corruption culture deficit democrats economics economy education entrepreneurs Environment equality facebook financial crisis financial meltdown food free market gitmo goldman sachs google GOP greed health care health care reform income inequality insurance internet john boehner john mccain libertarian lobbyists marketing McCain morals movies music Obama Philosophy photography politicians Politics Pop culture regulation Religion republicans richard posner sacrifice san francisco Sarah Palin silicon valley supreme court taxes tea party tech bubble Technology Ted Stevens terrorism Trends unions venture capital wall street wealthThoughtbasket\’s RSS feed
-
Join 53 other subscribers
Thoughtbasket 