Re Timothy Noah's "What to read about the health care policy debate": As a primary care doctor in America, I liked Porter/Teisberg's Redefining Health Care. Basically, it says markets work best, value drives markets, value is outcome per cost, and the crisis exists because no one in the current system knows true long term outcomes or costs. The authors then outline suggetions for the myriad stakeholders to work towards publically defining outcomes and costs.

but as a primary care doc (as i am as well), you know that its also tough because no one values prevention because its so hard to measure, and individuals can't value something that hasn't happened... only on the macro level do those 'savings' (lives, quality of life, dollars) materialize... making individual values hard to square with the general populations needs... i liked the pbs doc on this- i think a hybridized system should succeed in the US; basic health care/preventative care is covered across the board, all else is available, but private insurance can be purchased over and above (i've not heard a realistic argument which says you can maintain current care levels/malpractice levels/etc for ALL citizens at all times, ie i want care- ill get it NOW, without bankrupting the system). this is the basics of the australian system, and it works well, and uses market forces to drive elective procedures, timing of non-emergent services (mri for back pain, etc.)