Actually, the regulations that are a part of the health reform will require that insurers accept people with "pre-existing conditions" and outlaw lifetime caps and other such practices. Essentially, the industry will become so regulated that there will be little room for them to game the system. In return they get a nice fat paycheck from 10 million plus young people that are forced to buy coverage but could care less about having insurance.
They do? Hahahahahaha. Go gov't. Good then maybe they will die. Because they add no value to healthcare at all.
So by that argument the government should take over food production... thats a pretty damn essential industry.. more so than health care I'd say. Nothing better than government cheese provided for the masses...
Well, the difference is that people can afford food. Healthcare insurance is pretty much required being as though catastrophic debts that are ruinous to individuals can occur. You don't have to buy food insurance.
Hell, I flip this one on you just for recreational purposes.
Lets say for ****s and giggles that there was a worldwide drought. There was only exactly enough food to sustain every individual in the US. Should we just let all of the rich people buy all the food highest-bidder style? Or should the gov't step in and assure that everyone's nutritional needs were met by equally distributing the food so that everyone can remain healthy rather than some getting more than they need with others starved? Call me a pinko, but I'm going to have to say the gov't should do something about it.
I mean...if you want to compare it to healthcare and all...
The benefit of having many insurers in the marketplace is that it leaves room for choice..e.g. a single adult has different insurance needs than a family of five or a senior... and what's ultimately good for the consumer is that these insurers will come up with different ways to slice the risk and provide a better insurance product depending on your situation... With anything that's government run its gonna be "one-size fits all." I think you'll find that in many countries with single payer systems people still end up buying additional private insurance policies to fill in the holes of thier government plan.
So if the gov't plan can fit all...and you can buy secondary insurance...isn't that still kinda having customizable insurance options? I really don't buy this argument. They just manipulate money...and restrict as many people as possible from getting care. Profit-driven healthcare is bloody ****ed up.
This is not to say that private companies won't try to game the system - that's where strict regulation comes in and strict regulation is exactly what is being proposed. Car insurance is a pretty good example of this...LOL, I think right now it would be unheard of for a car insurance company to cancel your coverage because of some stupid omission you made when you initially applied. I'd thats due to regulation. The funny thing is that health insurance companies are doing this right now- because of a lack of regulation. In the big picture I think government should always strive to act as a referee by setting rules or regulations and not as a player.
If they decide to continue to allow capitalists to collect money for doing nothing, then, yes, they need regulated. Capitalists always need regulated. History has proven that they can't be trusted with pretty much anything.
Capitalism rocks... I think that question was settled sometime ago when the soviet union collapsed and millions waited in bread lines.
Not really. All the USA vs. CCCP thing proved was that a heavily mixed economy tended to be more stable than an economy based upon the flawed economic and social ideology of a few optimistic Germans. And, hell, it's not like they didn't achieve much...they pretty much beat the US's ass in the space race...and their actions in WWII on their Eastern Front was among the bravest and passionate performances as a people in the history of the world. Honestly, the US had more resources and better allies going into the Cold War...the Soviets were kinda the underdogs in that one.
But my point is that we have a bizarre societal assumption that "capitalism" is what defines the US economy. That's bull****. The only pure capitalist country in the world is Somalia. It's an anarchist country. War lords (Somali capitalists) have all the power, there are no gov't restrictions, and it is 100% Laissez-Faire.
Economic ideologies are idiotic. Especially when people think that all decisions need to be made based upon the "tenets" of said ideology. They are all unsustainable. Rah, rah capitalism? **** that. Capitalism is dangerous. If left unchecked, it always tends to consolidate power into the hands of a few *******s. If you don't believe in a heavily mixed economy, you are a *******. And I do mean that. I don't mean specifically you...the royal "you", if you will....I have no idea what you believe.
I do agree that this plan will end up costing waaaaayyyyy more than whats being presented... whats interesting is that Obama declared that there will be a "deficit-neutral' requirement that comes with a trigger for reducing costs. If the health care reform ends up costing the country more than expected, CUTS will have to be made... I'm not really sure where those cuts will come from.. but Obama claims that the savings that will be realized from a "more efficient" system that will pay for reform. Sounds like snake oil to me - somethings gotta give! - either coverage or subsidies for the uninsured or reimbursements...we'll see I guess.
Well, the cuts would be from administration fees...which are ridiculously huge. There are so many places we could cut corners it isn't even funny. tort reform, doing something with the asshat pharmaceutical companies, insurance reform...and on and on...
But I'm not really worried about reform costing too much...because of this:
Compare that to countries with single-payer systems...it looks nothing like that.
I mean, hell...you can debate the merits of super-magical, pie in the sky capitalism all you want...and pretend that insurance companies actually add value to the equation (they don't)...the stark reality is that single payer is going to be the only affordable option in time...not to mention that it's the right thing to do in a humanitarian sense...which is odd that I say that being as though I am pro-abortion. Meaning that I think more people should get abortions...not just that they should have the right to have them...but if *I* think something is ****ed up, then jesus h christ...it has to be pretty ****ed up...
