I think we're really whistling past the graveyard here.

We have a huge problem with Medicare. As it is, the health care law starting in 2016 adds about a $2 trillion problem to that figure.

The health care law, it was supposedly funded for 10 years by about half a trillion dollars in taxes, fees and penalties, and about a half a trillion dollars, $500 billion, in reductions to Medicare and Medicaid, Medicare Advantage.

I'm afraid the system is going to be horribly broken because if we roll the budgetary window forward to when the health care law actually gets fully kicked in, about 2016 with full spending, the total cost of the health care law will be…

Roughly, I think he found, for a couple retiring today, basically a two average earner couple, that they would have paid in roughly about $116,000 into Medicare, with an expected benefit--and all these things are time-value-adjusted--of…

So would you say the cost savings you expect really come more from that coordination of care versus just a capitated type of payment system?

What about subtracting? What is the process?

In an earlier response to a question, you were talking about the financial incentives just weren't aligned properly between the two systems.

I appreciate that. We are working with CRS right now trying to--I am trying to get my head around the problem.

It drives me nuts that I cannot get information.

In terms of trying to limit the increase in costs, and I think that's about all you can really do in health care, unfortunately.