For many of us, health care insurance is financed through our employer, at quite a cost. Many businesses pay from 30-70% of the cost of a policy for each of us. However, there are many businesses that don't offer insurance, but don't pay the employee more so they can go out and get their own. So, that money goes into the business operators' pockets, and the government (meaning the taxpayers) picks up the tab. The winners are the business owners, the losers are the taxpayers and those who work without health benefits, or reasonably available health benefits (Can you say Wal-Mart?).

In my opinion, the most reasonable way to finance national health insurance seems to be having ALL employers pay a per-employee premium for health care. That way, everyone who is employed gets coverage. We still need to pay for Medicare. The cost is spread over a wider berth, and insurance companies are not needed the way they are now (overhead drops because the paperwork and the CEO salaries go away) but are used to process paperwork for payment the same as the Medicare stuff is processed now by the government. EMR's would go a long way to help this out. Depending on private insurance industry, for-profits, and the pharmaceutical companies to help control costs is like throwing gasoline on a fire.

By the way, there was a post earlier about the VA systme being a mess. I would beg to differ on a number of points--their success with EMR's and reduction in errors is seen as an example of success. There just aren't enough facilities for the vets, and will get worse with all the soldiers maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan needing care. I feel for them.

Medical malpractice only takes up a small percentage of health care costs (less than 3%) and making a mountain out of this in terms of total cost isn't productive use of time.