Debating the pros and cons of single-payer health care.

“The false promise of singlepayer,” May 21 editorial.

Your editorial on single-payer health care raised a number of good points. It is easy to believe that a single-payer system will not by itself control or reduce health care spending in the U.S. As The Post points out, our costs are much higher than other countries’, and it is often reported that outcomes are not commensurate. Why is it that we never try to learn from best practices in the developed world? Are we forever doomed to ever higher costs by our “not invented here” problem?

Although Obamacare has slowed the rise in health care costs, costs will continue to rise until a breaking point is reached. The entire paradigm of employer-supported health care is reaching the end. To paraphrase Lincoln, we must think anew, we must disenthrall ourselves of old thinking.

We need to figure out how to build a health care system that directs resources to where the people are, rather than where the money is.

Bernie Sanders’ health care proposals may have their flaws, but your argument against them, like most arguments against them, are based entirely on dollars and not on human lives. The United States ranks 36th in life expectancy in the world, and it is not a coincidence that the nations we trail have largely government-funded health care systems.

Ask 100 Americans if they would rather pay higher taxes and live five years longer like the Japanese, or even three years longer like the Canadians, and I think almost all of them, if not all, would gladly take a longer life.

BBB We were saddened and disappointed after reading your editorial. It is not true that the savings realized under ColoradoCare will come from reducing services and lowering compensation to health care workers, nor is it true that health care for all Coloradans will cost more than predicted. ColoradoCare has been based on multiple economic analyses. Provider compensation is not a major cost driver. The primary savings (that will more than balance expansion of coverage) will come from a reduction in redundant administrative costs, waste and profit-taking by large insurance companies.

By taking a position against ColoradoCare, The Denver Post is de facto supporting the current fragmented, dysfunctional, costly system. We hope you will further consider the injustices and inefficiencies of this system.

Longmont The writer is co-chair of Physicians for ColoradoCare.

BBB Any discussion of U.S. health care costs, under any type of payment plan, needs to include hospital accounting systems and tort reform. Ever tried to get a detailed final bill from a hospital stay or operation? Ever do a survey of doctor liability insurance costs? At this point, I’m not sure we can afford any type of payment plan. Send letters of 150 words or fewer to openforum@denverpost.com or 101 W. Colfax Ave., Suite 800, Denver, CO, 80202. Please include full name, city and phone number. Contact us at 303-954-1331.