The health-care bill has no master plan for curbing costs. Is this a bad thing?

This article is worth a read before making bland comments about the tagline.<p>Edit: To provide a little value, the article digs into some history of how the US managed amazing increases in productivity in agriculture in the early 20th century. That portion of it alone is fascinating. Whatever version of the healthcare bill the article's using includes similar techniques to how the government approached agriculture.

In the long run the only ways to control health care costs are to let old people die, or cure aging. I'd prefer the second.

Yes. This is the major problem with leaving out a public option. There is no way to control costs without one. Preventative medicine has been shown to improve patient outcomes but has also been shown to increase, not lower, costs.