What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos


Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers


Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge


Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more

To Roger Ebert, On Why Universal Health Coverage Saves Us All Money

July 27, 2012, 3:34 PM

Today Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times has posted a thoughtful blog about universal health coverage, inspired in part by the tragic events in Aurora, Colorado.  I've been involved in the debate about universal health coverage since the days of the Clinton national health plan in 1994, most recently with this paper for the Council on Foreign Relations.  Here's what I wrote in response to Ebert's blog:

Hi Roger,

It's important to point out that "we" are already paying for "their" health care, and we're doing it in a very inefficient way. 

Everyone gets healthcare in the US - it's just a question of how and when.  For people without insurance, it tends to be 1) when they're really in trouble and 2) in an emergency room that can't turn them away. 

There are two big problems with this situation.  First, we're completely losing out on all the benefits of preventive care.  Preventive care costs much less than hospital care and helps to reduce expensive hospital visits.  If people wait until they're really sick to get care, then their care is going to cost much more.  That's why private insurers heavily subsidize preventive care. 

Second, emergency room care is scarce and very costly.  It should really only be for urgent cases, rather than serving as a free-of-charge adjunct to the regular healthcare system.  When we force uninsured people to use emergency rooms - their only option - we waste valuable resources and incur unnecessary costs. 

All of these extra costs have to be paid by someone, and that someone is us.  Because hospitals can't recoup any of their costs from the uninsured, they end up charging insured people more.  As I said, "we" are *already* paying for "their" care. 

Instead of paying for "their" care this way, we could do it by bringing "them" into insurance pools, either via taxes or cross-subsidies.  This is Obamacare in a nutshell.  By getting "them" into private insurance or Medicaid coverage, we have an opportunity to 1) take advantage of the benefits of preventive care and 2) treat people in appropriate clinical settings. 

The cost of doing things this new way will be a lot smaller than what we're doing now.  Making the change will eventually *lower* our insurance premiums and our tax burden, because hospitals will no longer have to shift the high cost of free care onto paying patients with private insurance and Medicare. 

It's a question of efficiency.  "We" are already paying for "their" care - let's just do it the right way. 

Best regards,




To Roger Ebert, On Why Univ...

Newsletter: Share: