For-profit Insurance in Universal Health Care is Absolutely Unacceptable.

[L. Coyote]

And totally illogical. Why have insurance companies in the middle
if government is paying the bill and everyone is receiving health care?

Any time for profit gets inserted, it is in the interest of a few rich owners
to deny services to the people in need. It is completely unacceptable.

Prioritizing health care reform:

1. Universal. Health care is a right and any person should have access.
2. Public. Society assumes the burden, not for-profit entities like business. American products do not need the disadvantage of price inflation to pay retiree health care.
3. Non-profit. To the extent possible, remove all profit incentives.
4. Choice. Individuals have to play a role in selecting care providers. This is a market force that places pressure on ensuring quality care.

Imagine how many people will have to do something productive,
instead of sitting on a telephone fight against or for insurance companies?

Imagine how many people will have to do something productive,
instead of micromanaging the billing for every damn pill handed out!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

1. but but who would own our congressmen then?

The insurance companies paid good money for them.

[L. Coyote]

3. The Military Industrial Complex. They create lots of cripples, you know!

Can't say they don't do their part to support for-profit hospitals.

[DesertFlower]

6. exactly.

[L. Coyote]

15. Sen. Max Baucus, Top Contributors, opensecrets.org

2008:
Pharmaceuticals/Health = $852,813
Health Professionals = $851,141
Insurance = $784,185
Lobbyists = $470,774
Hospitals/Nursing Homes = $466,826
Health Services/HMOs = $465,750

Top Contributors, opensecrets.org /politicians/summary
Out of State = 90 percent
NY = $845,542
DC-MD-VA-WV = $757,634
LA LA = $267,500
SAN FRAN = $227,400
CHICAGO = $162,000
59601 (HELENA, MT) = $49,106
90210 = $44,100

[Cleita]

2. I agree, however, since the members of Congress who are actively

working on this legislation are bought and sold by the industry, don't look for a logical conclusion to this.

[L. Coyote]

4. We have to repeat what Obama did. Take over the politics of the Nation and rule the elections.

And, we need to let them know that they will have to face primary challenges, in both parties, if they don't get on board.

[sandyd921]

5. Absolutely. If we should have for-profit health insurance companies

should we have for-profit fire departments (we actually used to have this but this was eliminated because it was not in the interest of the safety of the larger community)? How about for-profit police departments? For-profit state transportation departments?

Besides the inefficiency of paying a cut to a middleman for a non-essential service that does nothing to contribute to the public good, why the hell do we want for-profit health insurance?

[frebrd]

9. WE don't want for-profit health insurance......

but our Congresscritters do.

:grr:

[regnaD kciN]

7. Because government WON'T be paying the bill...

Don't you realize that the proposal nearly certain to clear congress is an "individual mandate" plan similar to Hillary Clinton's proposal last year? Government won't be paying the bill, they'll just be requiring by law that you pay the bill...with insurance companies reaping the profit. :-(

After all, as Clinton supporters put it last year, we require people to carry auto insurance, why not require them to carry health insurance? Ignore for the moment the facts that a) if you don't drive or own a car, you don't have to pay for auto insurance, and b) auto insurance rates are generally less than $100/month, while health insurance rates for a family are over $1,000/month. At least it isn't -- gasp! -- socialized medicine!!! Right?

:grr:

[L. Coyote]

8. Also unacceptable. That's why I listed priorities, Universal, Public-funded, Non-profit.

[Fumesucker]

10. Unacceptable to us, yes...

Unacceptable to those who make the rules, nope.

[DURHAM D]

12. Are you forgetting the fact that Hillary said UHC is a step to single payer.

She made it clear that single payer was the ultimate goal but sees "mandated" as an intermediate step. I am afraid she might be correct. Just ask Obama.

[Oregone]

18. Its a step towards bullshit

Forcing people to buy private insurance (a forced public subsidization of a for-profit industry), which is shown to not even effectively pay out on claims (in an attempt to maximize profits) is a shitty step to single-payer health care. Its a step in the wrong direction, and only creates laws that entrench private providers that much more.

You want a step? Start a public funded, non-discriminating, public-owned, non-profit insurance company. Then a second step would be making private insurance illegal. Thats it, end of story.

[Q3JR4]

11. A couple billion dollars and you too can own your own congress critter!

It's what the insurance industry does.

Q3JR4
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[sandyd921]

13. Corporate personhood

It's what stands in the way of eliminating the insurance industry and it's apologists. Challenge the legal interpretations of so-called corporate personhood once and for all and the idea that money = free speech and finally put in place true publicly funded campaigns. Then presto, magic, congress critters will no longer be owned by corporations but by we the people. Easier said than done, but that's what's standing in the way of real universal single payer health care and lots of other things that would greatly benefit the people of the US and move us toward the nation our founders envisioned. Do-able? I don't know. But that's it in a nutshell.

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/articles/2007/supreme_court_speech_lazarus.php

[Q3JR4]

20. Could do all that too,

if it didn't depend on the very people who are compromised.

Q3JR4.
Damn congress critters.

[rhett o rick]

14. k & r

[bvar22]

16. K&R X 1000

Every other developed country in he World has managed to implement some form of Government Guaranteed Health Care where Health Care is a RIGHT, NOT a commodity.

Do NOT allow our politicians tell us that this is "Too Hard for Americans".
Do NOT let them tell us that we will "just have to Settle for Less".

[L. Coyote]

17. Indeed. We do not have to settle for less. We can all boycott mandated too!!

[bvar22]

21. I'm with you.

:patriot:

[Oregone]

19. Universal Health Care? Dont you mean "Mandated Private, For-Profit, Claim-Denying Health Insurance"?

Im furious when people use the term "Health Care" to talk about a government scheme that forces people to buy into these legal scams.

[L. Coyote]

22. I'm with you on that.

[dem mba]

23. i like the parallel systems concept

where there is universal non-profit coverage for everyone, but to get the very high-end care you would indeed have to pay high premiums, probably through a for-profit insurance company.

i suppose it would be modeled on our primary school system - there is public education available to all, but if you want the best education possible (or if you just don't like your district's school) you can send your children to a private institution for a price. I think health care should work in a similar manner. Full coverage but with choice.

[LWolf]

24. Agreed. nt