Insurance reform MUST have cost controls — whether Obamacare or single-payer Vermont

Whether it's Obamacare, one of whose biggest failings is the lack of cost control outside of the mythical savings from the highly overhyped electronic patient records, or a single-payer system, such as the one that Gov. Peter Shumlin had proposed for Vermont and has now pulled off the boards, successful insurance reform in the United States MUST, MUST, MUST have effective cost controls as part of it.

Period and end of story.

Now, on single-payer, that's probably harder to do within a single state than nationwide, especially a small state like Vermont. But, impossible? No.

Sadly, it appears Shumlin didn't tackle that part of the issue early enough, or head-on enough.

Obama? Hell, we all know that O-care is neoliberal "trust the market" tinkering on one end and a candy cane on the other. It doesn't even require standardized insurance forms, which would be a simple, and effective, cost-saver right there.

Any insurance company that says "you have to use our forms" will change its tune soon enough if you totally cut it off from the hog trough. Period and end of story.

But, the issue of funding it through taxes? Especially since taxes are theoretically more "progressive" than the current private care system? Yeah, that might make rich folks upset. Well, that's where you sell them on effective cost control — assuming you have effective cost control.

The whole bulk of our current health care system, taken en masse, is a piece of shit, all in all. And everybody's afraid to call it that, then flush it as it needs to be flushed.