Lost in much of the debate over health care is the fact that there are tremendous disincentives in the system for market-based approaches built into the tax code. The National Taxpayers' Union agrees, and has a proposed solution.

It makes so much sense, don't expect it to happen any time soon.

It was the pernicious combination of the income tax and the World War II leftover wage and price controls that gave rise to pervasive medical insurance. One of those factors is still in place in its original form; the other has mutated into the Diagnosis Related Groups of Medicare and Medicaid -- which two programs are themselves major drivers of the explosion of medical costs.

There will be no reform of our medical mess until those two deadly diseases have been cured.

What's an individual to do? After being denied by my insurance on diagnostic tests ordered by my doctor for a really nasty bug I had last March I'm fit to be tied. I'm thinking of telling my boss to cancel my insurance in protest. It's a risk, but I'll be damned if I'm going to continue feeding this corrupt system.

Perhaps I'll get lucky and die young... uh oh, too late!

Mr. Anthony points out another pernicious effect of job related health insurance, the fact that as long as the insurance company makes your employer happy, it doesn't have to give a fig about you. It's strange that alledged "consumer advocates" don't view this as a problem.

Mr. Anthony and AOG have hit it right on the head. The problem with our current system is too much central control,not too little. Since plans must please employers, not the actual consumers, they have become very generic and aimed only at providing a reasonable set of benefits at a good price. If plans had to be sold directly to consumers, you'd see much more variety in what was covered so people could pick plans more tailored to their needs.

Ask anyone with an autistic child (who doesn't live in a state where the state mandates coverage for autism) how they feel about having insurance. It's useless. We're paying between 10,000 and 15,000 a year out of pocket for treatments since they won't cover autism.

We brought this up to our state insurance commission and they told us, "You should have checked coverages before you bought your insurance." Would have been a fine answer for a free-marketeer like myself, except for the fact that I didn't buy the insurance, my employer did.

Bob