Why Can't Candidates Promote Regulating the exorbitant Cost hospitals..?

Question

charge for regular procedures and testing rather than try and pass the buck to the American tax payers to support a NAtional Health Care policy or some other free ride program for people who don't have insurance. You wouldn't need insurance at the cost it is if the State's regulated them. They regulate other county and state and city services. Why not hospitals and testing costs. It's crazy that simple tests that we have perfected still cost tens of thousands of dollars. No one believes the Health care margins are that slim that they HAVE to charge that much to cover their side. I know...please. I've heard the argument that doctors cost xyz..blah blah blah. Well, if a doctor wants to have hospital priveldges, then I guess they'll have to suck it up and be a little less rich if they want to send their patients to the hospital. I know there is laready a fee, so please don't say that either. You don't need insurance!
We need health care the regular guy can afford!

HOSPITALS AREN"T privately owned businesses. They are County Hospitals! Please people, I am not promoting Socialism. Read the Whole question.

NOT THE federal government---STATES! Governing its citizens. I agree the FEDs can't find their as--ss with their hands.

Answer 1

some do.

the political pundits who take money from hospital corporations call them socialists and communists for favoring this very sane idea.

investing in medical schools won't help, since the AMA gets to decide how many doctors will graduate each year and they purposefully restrict the number to make sure that there will always be a shortage of doctors.

oddly, they also dictate that a certain percentage of the doctors who graduate from american medical schools are foreign born.

Answer 2

Wow. Where to start. Govt. regulation of health costs? I have a question for you. When has govt. regulation of anything improved a situation? Telling doctors to "suck it up and be a little less rich?" How about torte reform so malpractice insurance doesn't eat the lion's share of their salary? How about eliminating free care for those not legally entitled to be here? That by itself would lower costs by several billion a year. If you institute govt. regs you also get govt, rules. Like wage setting. How many people would still be doctors if they were guaranteed never to make over 50,000 a year? Because as a govt. employee, it won't be much more than that. How about affirmative action, which would eliminate many better qualified doctors in favor of less skilled candidates simply to fill an artificial quota? The government always seeks the lowest bidders in equipment, supplies, and service. Is this what you want in your health care? Be careful what you wish for.

Answer 3

Yes.
But just look at some of the Candidates!!!

JOHN EDWARDS made millions of dollars with frivolous lawsuits against doctors & hospitals.

Edwards has gotten the costs higher on all Health Insurance and all Health Care Bills.
He is an evil man.

Answer 4

When government puts price controls on privately owned products and services they restrict capitalisms ability to solve its own shortage (limited supply) problems. If government really wanted to help the situation they'd increase the supply of services to help decrease the costs of the same services - government could do this by investing in more medical schools for nurses, aids, etc.

Answer 5

You want to wait a week to be treated for a minor emergency, such as a cold? Then we'll put your plan into effect.

Answer 6

because that would be a form of socialism and most people are scared of socialism

Answer 7

they have a vested interest