The only solution is to pass major lawsuit reforms to cut malpractice insurance by a few hundred percent, eliminate all health insurance to force doctors and hospitals to charge only what people can afford, and change the status off all non-profit hospitals (we don't need 3 $250 million medical centers in every damn suburb).

Any solution that shifts the burden of payment away from the individual will only increase the cost of healthcare. Helthcare was far cheaper when people did not have health insurance.

Once the government mandates that everyone must have health isurance the average person will spend more than 80% of thier income on government mandated insurances (homeowner, auto, and health) and taxes. How are we supposed to live on what is left.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/07/05/healthy_examples_plenty_of_countries_get_healthcare_right/?page=full

What on earth is the problem with Americans and more influence of the goverment? I read this 'creepign socialism' / 'communism' talk so often. It is nothing but putting fear in the minds of Americans. I think it would be a good thing to actually look at how other countries are handling things. You don't have to copy everything, but you can learn from it.

Part of the problem with the system is the fee-for-service nature of the American Health system as whole. Providers are compensated for more imaging, diagnostics, testing,etc. It is now clear from several studies that more healthcare is not necessarily better healthcare Aligning incentives with quality care and prevention instead of just more care is critical to containing costs

Yeah we know, the Italian people are still living under a government-run health care system. But then again they had 10% unemployment before this whole economic collapse happened last year.

Granted the left loves universal/single payer health care; this has been their holy grail for well over 70 years. Then again they can't see the long term picture, which is the incredible job loss that will occur if we have a "public option." When you're taking a sector out of the economy and transferring it over to the government, that essentially shoots any growth and innovation right between the eyes. Medical research would come to a screeching halt if this happened.

I've read Lazzaro in the past, and he's championed for public health care. Heck most people who write for NYtimes.com and CBS agree as well (especially when they always refer to UHC as the "ONLY solution.") Keep health care private, my great-great-great-...-great grandchildren cannot afford another government entitlement.

My (large corporate employer-provided) heathcare has a $1200 deductible *per person in the family* before it covers anything.

Don't make no difference to me if i pay that directly to a doctor or to the gov't. It's the same cost either way.

With due respect, but the "Italian people lives on" argument is awful. The reason? You can apply this to just about any group, even those who suffered and are suffering greatly.

Let's see, the Ukrainians live on, despite tens of millions of them were starved to death by Stalin. You can say the same about the Chinese, they even flourish, at least in terms of population. The Jews live on, despite being slaughtered in gas chambers. I can go on, but you've probably gotten the idea.

American's do not want to live like the Italian, that's the whole point. Sure, the Italians live on, but we want to live better.

BTW, there was a comment linked to a Boston Globe article praising the merit of the French health care system. The author had probably forgotten about this episode:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2003-09-25-france-heat_x.htm

and especially this paragraph in the article:

The new estimate comes a day after the French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a complex health system, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and chronically insufficient care for the elderly.