Thought this was interesting reading, although the editor clearly didn't read it before making the title, as even the author admits not really knowing why it is so expensive here in the US. Hoover Institution - Hoover Digest - How to Cure Health Care How to Cure Health Care "Our mixed system has many advantages in accessibility and quality of medical care, but it has produced a higher level of cost than would result from either wholly individual choice or wholly collective choice." I found it interesting that his argument was that our mixed system of public/private is at least partially to blame for the huge cost here versus other countries. In a true public system you get better management of cost at the expense of rationing, while in a private system you get better treatment but limited access. It made me think about the idea of what would work better for me and for the general public (excluding the poor, who would need public support anyway); the current low-deductible system where I get paid less because my company pays for my insurance, or a high deductible system where I can choose a catastrophic insurance plan, and get more $ from my employer and put a % aside in a tax-free medical expense account and use that $ to pay for checkups etc. At the end of the year if I haven't used all the money in the account I pay my taxes on what's left and keep the rest. I wonder which would end up being cheaper? Anyone have any thoughts what would be better for them, or other comments on the article?