Olden McGroen wrote:
=====================================
You chose to purchase insurance for your family prior to the ACA. It wasn't manditory. Whether you deemed it a "need" is of no consequence to the rest of us, nor the insurance company.
Yes, I understand that. Just like I understand that your "neediness" is of no concern to me... or the insurance industry. And I know you have needs, we all do... equally disregarded - and that's just touching on the part of the problem you don't seem to understand... I'll just call it a general disregard for human needs. Let it all be handled by the invisible hand of the free market, right? All that pie-in-the-sky theory that even John Adams himself said was less than realistic.
Olden McGroen wrote:
They provide a product and service with a price just like anything else. You signed on and agreed to the terms. That was your choice, not a mandate.
Stop whining about it.
Yes, just like everything else... that's what I'm saying... health care should not be like "everything else"... Does it take a certain level of intelligence to understand that paying to watch a movie and paying to save your life on an operating table are not the same damned thing?
And yes, before ACA I *did* sign agreements and I *made* the choice to cover my family and I will continue to bitch about the fact there isn't a better option... I'm sorry to dis your happy choice of shit or nothing, but I've seen better options. So why the hell would I want to settle for shit when I know better options are are out there, working for millions of other people? Since when does being American mean you have to settle for shit or nothing? You know why we don't have a better option? Because despite almost a century of Americans asking for it, the insurance industry ultimately compromised our democracy AND managed to brain wash the dim-witted half of the population into thinking it's profit or communism. Well, that's BS.
Olden McGroen wrote:
That ACA changed what was once a choice into a mandate. Did you vote for the Democrats that crammed this POS legislation down our throats without Republican input whatsoever? If so, you have nothing to complain about. Take your "medicine" and deal with it.
I voted for the Democrats that spent about a year going over all the details with the Republicans. I read about all the back-and-forth between them. I was tuned into the final draft of the the ACA, which was drawn up by the House after LOTS of Republicans input. I saw the results of the votes that were cast during normal business hours with only one or two representatives absent. Then I laughed my ass off at all the whiny drama weezing out of the radio talk shows about how the law was crammed down the throats of the Republicans. Comedy like that is all the medicine I need.
I thought it was a step in the right direction from the perspective of establishing to regulations to improve the quality of our options but since then it's become very clear to me that the insurance industry will do everything possible to resist and despite my outrage I realize that they can't be blamed... They are themselves slaves to investment demands. It's just a very bad approach to health care.
Olden McGroen wrote:
You claiming that the government is more efficient than the private sector is laughable. "Go sell crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here."
Yes, I know you folks are all stocked up with crazy. That's very obvious to the rest of us. Look, I'll give you one more chance to see this and if you want to laugh it off that's your choice...
A government is a non-profit organization. Non-profit organizations provide services at cost. If the service cost $10, they will charge $10.
So... price = cost
A corporation is a commercial business built on debt. The debt has to be serviced hence the need for profit, so if the cost of service is $10, they will need to charge $10 + the cost of the debt.
So... price = cost + debt
All else is equal... (Governments and corporations are not that different when it comes to daily operations) Whether a specific government office is "efficient" or a specific corporate branch is "efficient" is not only irrelevant but it's practically impossible to measure conclusively. That example I gave you with the admin overhead costs was just one specific case. I could just as easily find examples where corporations are more efficient than government. In the end it's about what is possible. Because, of the cost of the debt (to shareholders) is attached to the corporation, a non-profit has the natural cost advantage.
On the flip side there is the competition argument. But you have to realize that no amount of competition is going to drop a price below cost, which as I've said is lower for a non-profit. Just look at the way the insurance industry reacts to the "public option" They KNOW if the government wants to get in on the game with their price=cost... there is no way the debt laden insurance companies can compete and that's what scares them about ACA more than anything else.
The idea of Americans getting good health care at cost.