[tptacek]

Pedantry:

That's because teeth and eyes have predictable and often high maintenance costs that general medicine doesn't. It's hard to cost-effectively insure teeth, for instance, because you're almost certain to incur routine and expensive costs. Expensive general medical interventions are much less predictable and frequent and so that risk pools nicely.

That's also why private dental insurance is often not a good deal.

[idlewords]

This is one reason why I think the concept of private insurance, vs state-provided health care, is insane. It's not like teeth and eyes are fancy upgrades that some of us blinged out on.

Clearly the first step towards nationalized health care is me commenting on a message board. Avanti!

[tptacek]

I agree that it's a stark illustration of the limits of the insurance model. Nationalizing the health care industry is itself fraught, though.

I remember a Gladwell New Yorker essay that related dental care to poverty and economic mobility, so I'll add right away that this isn't a small problem.

[mechanical_fish]

Nationalizing the health care industry is itself fraught, though.

I wonder: How much would our national dental health improve if we merely offered universal coverage for the simple stuff: cleanings, photographs, and X-rays?

The standard of care for these things doesn't seem like it varies wildly: Everyone should get a cleaning and inspection from a dental hygienist every six or twelve months. Obviously, once we get into treatments the judgement calls begin, and then it does become fraught.

But speaking as someone who might have saved a small fortune on fillings, crowns, and root canals if he hadn't just stopped going to the dentist regularly for several years – because, by the time your teeth start hurting, it is way too late for the inexpensive interventions – I wish we had national dental coverage for checkups, such that it was economical to station people in malls and on street corners begging passersby to step inside a door and spend thirty minutes getting their "free" dental cleaning. Yes, the hygienists would probably try to up-sell you. But that's a relatively nice problem to have.

[Alupis]

> The board has given me detailed instructions in how I should talk about Code Club sponsors. For instance, if someone asks me about x's involvement in corporate mass surveillance where x is a Code Club sponsor (eg Google), I should answer: "I do not want to get into the specifics of any particular corporation. Nonetheless, it’s worth restating that the Code Club board believe X are a tremendous partner. As a member of the board I am completely aligned with that view."

>I'm not comfortable with lying and so it is in my best interest to resign.

I fail to see how she would be "lying" here, in any capacity.

She may know more but refrained from stating it? As the Director, you are supposed to make a statement like this and not harm your sponsors. For her to speak out against them would be counter productive to her organization's goals.

Seems to me she just has some moral issues with some companies in particular and therefore was not comfortable working in any capacity with them. So, it was an appropriate choice to resign imho.