Marta Russell wrote:
> Disabled interests do appear quite vividly in the development of the health care
> system though. They appear and get squashed ......
>
> There is a movement now to demand mental health parity, Carrol, maybe that is
> something you could get behind even though it will not solve all the problems.
I of course agree with Marta's arguments here. I just wanted in my earlier post to focus on that one point. Parity probably has a chance in part because some fairly powerful elements (psychiatrists, physicians in general, drug companies) would gain by it.
The power of the insurance companies lies partly, it seems to me, in the "too big to fail" category. Could any of the economists on the list comment on what the repercussions would be if the insurance companies lost at one blow all their health-insurance business -- as they would if we won national health service.
Carrol