Naughty doctors

In an item on American healthcare, the Economist claimed,

the question is not so much whether to reform, but how. The Clinton plan a decade ago for universal coverage was defeated by doctors and insurance companies, as well as by Republicans.

Were the doctors against it perhaps because they'd get paid less? The article concludes,

The Bush team also attacks Mr Kerry for adding to the burden of regulation. Small businesses would have to offer costly benefits in order to join the federal employees' health-benefits programme. Overall, say the Republicans, the Kerry plan simply shifts the burden to the taxpayer. But given the unpopularity of the present system, this is a burden that taxpayers sometimes seem ready to bear.

羊毛出在羊身上！

In any case, universal health "insurance" would/will prove to be an unpleasant surprise for the people who discover(ed) that it means you can't cover everything.