Unlike some people, I don't get paid to watch debates and particularly not when at a conference with friends and good food (and Abita!), but you really must read D.J. Tice's questions emanating from the Democratic debate concerning health care and the case of Nataline Sarkisyan. In short, Tice asks whether or not the American electorate can process and evaluate the health care debate when it involves discussing the value of a life. Who makes the decision whether to spend more than $100,000 to extend a teen's prospective life by six months? Would you prefer that done by the market or the state? Tice asks "What are the prospects for controlling the growth of health care spending if questions about the reasonableness of this kind of expenditure cannot be raised?" If we give in to emotion over reason, we may as well begin the death of a market-based health system.

Tice links to an article that does the cost-benefit analysis. There's a good chance John Edwards hasn't read it.

Labels: economics, health care