Medicare isn't about 'helping the poor'...rather, its an "anti-poverty" program, i.e. it was created to prevent older americans from being forced into poverty by their medical costs.

Its going to take fundamental change in the way that health care is delivered to prevent Medicare from bankrupting the country -- and in the way that we think about health care. The costs involved in increases in 'life extension' through health care for older Americans are simply unsustainable -- and there will be a huge gap between what is possible technologically and what we can afford to do.

change the subject, instead of delivering health care for all, all of a sudden the subject changed to balancing the budget and income transfer.

Never mind the policies of George Bush are what caused our fiscal problems, and never mind it is the insane American health neglect system that is driving costs through the roof.

'Nuff said.

At Wikipedia you can find a lovely photograph of Professor Cowen looking well-nourished and smug. You can also read the revealing titles of some of his publications, like "books on fame (What Price Fame?), art (In Praise of Commercial Culture) and cultural trade (Creative Destruction: How Globalization is Changing the World's Cultures)." My personal favorite, however is Discover Your Inner Economist: Use Incentives to Fall in Love, Survive Your Next Meeting, and Motivate Your Dentist.

Mark V. Pauly is quoted in the article as saying "Medicare as we know it today cannot be sustained over the next 50 years and probably will run into financial difficulties within the next 15" (this as far as I know is admittedly true). His distinguished person can be viewed at The Wharton School, where you can see that he has recently published with AEI Press.

The well-fed Peter H. Schuck has expertise, not in health care, but in law, and apparently, as author of the inspiringly titled Targeting in Social Programs: Avoiding Bad Bets, Removing Bad Apples, in the identification of human beings as "bad apples".

Richard Zeckhauser's cheery mug can be viewed here, where we see that he is a co-conspirator with Professor Schuck in the removal of those bad apples.

There are so many things wrong with this article that one doesn't know where to begin. Probably the very very worst, most dishonest statement is this:

The argument is often made that single-payer health care systems in Canada or Europe are cheaper than health care in the United States. But Medicare is already a single-payer plan, yet its costs are unsustainable.

Great God almighty, a "health care expert" must know that single-payer, by definition, covers everyone. Medicare covers only the part of the population that needs the most medical care.

Never before in post or comment have I wanted to resort to this, but Duh!

clearly we are being marginalized, I am trying to come up with strategies to put us into the conversation. So far the best I can come up with is public access cable. Most community access cable have talk shows, you don't have to be a huge muckety muck to get on. At least some of use should think about checking out the various shows on cable access and see is there is a good fit for a single payer panelist.

Is John Conyers going to speak? Should we ask the Democratic National Convention to give Conyers a chance to speak? If he does speak, we should definitely promote it.

Something short like, I sure hope you will find a spot for John Conyers to talk about health care and his vision for America. In a situation like this numbers are more important than eloquence. Keep is short and polite.