- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,706
- Reaction score
- 1,400
- Location
- Ventura California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Because one should not have the bottom line as the end product.
The insurance companies hire people to figure how to get away with the least amount of care for people in order to save dimes, even when those kinds of care are included in their package. It's a way to find loopholes in the structure so that the company can profit on people's pain.
I don't know why people are for profit health care. It makes no sense at all. Many of the arguments from the right in this regard are incredibly disingenuous. It's an immoral system.
I think profits are great in many sectors. People should be able to do the jobs they want, own businesses, and become rich if they can. But, when it comes to health care, no. Health care is a different thing altogether.
Because? ..............
Just because the American system has flaws doesn't mean it needs to resemble the same failed systems in Europe and Canada.
I had an argument the other day with a Canadian who, in their defense of waiting times, chimed that someone needing lesser care should have to wait because perhaps the Doctors have more pressing diseases/operations to deal with and this could wait.
My response was; "say what?" Why does ANYONE have to wait for ANY level of care if a system is working correctly?
You see my Liberal friends, government managed healthcare systems control the never ending increases in costs by limiting services, demanding lower pay for doctors and nurses which results in decline in such professions as they go where their services demand more pay and the Government won’t allow you to sue them.
People die every day for surgery that in this great nation they would have gotten immediate treatment for.
Do we need reform; you betchya. But the notion that the ONLY option is to allow the most incompetent and inefficient organizations on earth, our Governments, take them over defies common sense.
Folks, these are the people who have spent us into a $1.8 trillion hole without any idea how to pay for it and you want them to manage your health? You have GOT to be kidding me right? :roll:
As earlier stated, the efforts of NPR are to promote "liberal" agendas and distort the facts to fit their narrow and closed minded views about what "reform" constitutes.
The best definition of reform is to put or change into an improved form or condition, or to amend or improve by change of form or removal of faults or abuses and not to destroy it.
Companies exist to make a buck. What's wrong with that?Nurses, doctors, images tech's etc should be able to pay for more than their necessities I guess....
Companies exist to make a buck. What's wrong with that?
Regarding health care, is that more or less sinister than the government taking over?
Everyone should be able to make a buck.
What I was getting at was that nurses, doctors, imaging techs etc all make a profit and they are in health care.
These silly people don't take that into account when saying that there should not be profit in health care.
Well, you know, Health Care is SO important that the private sector cannot be trusted with it.
It's sad that people who support government nationalizing this almost never review the actual laws and government mandates in Europe.
What I have found out is that all the European countries with some sort of government health care make a point to deny people care to save money.
That is why it is cheaper, they deny care.
You DO know that this whole Health care thing is all about gaining and maintaing power for the Democratic Party, and little else- right?It's sad that people who support government nationalizing this almost never review the actual laws and government mandates in Europe.
What I have found out is that all the European countries with some sort of government health care make a point to deny people care to save money.
That is why it is cheaper, they deny care.
You DO know that this whole Health care thing is all about gaining and maintaing power for the Democratic Party, and little else- right?
You DO know that this whole Health care thing is all about gaining and maintaing power for the Democratic Party, and little else- right?
I think everyone KNOWS this but Liberals still like to pretend that it is all about "caring."
I don't think you understand who runs this country!? The reason that H.C. reform is hung up is due to the friction between the industry gorillas and the accountants in gov't. The AMA, Insurance companies and Big Pharma are happy to have reform proceed as long as their particular government sheltered share of H.Care profits remain intact. Insurance companies are eager to expand their customer base. A public option gets in the way of that goal. Unfortunately, it is near impossible to reform H.C. without crossing some of these powerful entities.
A public option would be a large insurance pool administered as a non-profit. What do for-profit insurance companies add to the system? I know what they do for themselves- The profits of the 10 largest publicly traded health insurance companies rose 428% from 2000 to 2007.How will a public option help, esp. in the long run?
I don't think you understand who runs this country!? The reason that H.C. reform is hung up is due to the friction between the industry gorillas and the accountants in gov't.
The AMA, Insurance companies and Big Pharma are happy to have reform proceed as long as their particular government sheltered share of H.Care profits remain intact. Insurance companies are eager to expand their customer base. A public option gets in the way of that goal. Unfortunately, it is near impossible to reform H.C. without crossing some of these powerful entities.
A public option would be a large insurance pool administered as a non-profit. What do for-profit insurance companies add to the system? I know what they do for themselves- The profits of the 10 largest publicly traded health insurance companies rose 428% from 2000 to 2007.
A public option would be a large insurance pool administered as a non-profit. What do for-profit insurance companies add to the system? I know what they do for themselves- The profits of the 10 largest publicly traded health insurance companies rose 428% from 2000 to 2007.
I find the notion that a Government run option would create a larger pool of insurance. How does anyone with a modicum of common sense and facts arrive at such a conclusion?
Government intervention does only ONE thing; reduce competition which then creates LESS choice and when they attempt to control costs they will indeed cut your options and choices even more.
I want someone to name ONE thing the Government does that is cost effective, actively encourages more competition and creates better services and more choice. Go ahead; rack your brains out on this one.
My goodness, You would think , from these posts that Americans receive H.C. from insurance companies. For profit insurance companies add competition? Where do you get this stuff? In what way do insurance companies provide efficiency? And "in a proper manner"?For-profit adds competition, something that can be stymied with addition of non-profits backed by government funding. Competition is useful in maintaining efficiency in institutions, and ensuring long-term. Who cares if profits rose, as long as business is being conducted in a proper manner?
Which is why the marriage of the profit motive and the administration of H.C. should be divorced. It is a really bad (accidental) idea.The problem of course is that the healthcare industry is full of bad regulations, misaligned incentives that cause faulty business practices from all parties.
You may have missed this, but Health Insurance companies have ALREADY consolidated - they call it merging and say it promotes "efficiency". For those of us living in small states, it means there is MacDonalds or Burger King when you go health insurance shopping.Instead of calling it a market failure and increasing consolidation and control, the government should find ways to promote the healthy competition. This could be rules or restrictions on how for-profit firms operate, legal issues on patient care, altering the business model to align a doctor's profit model with quality of care, or allowing for information access and free-flow of information.
My goodness, You would think , from these posts that Americans receive H.C. from insurance companies. For profit insurance companies add competition? Where do you get this stuff? In what way do insurance companies provide efficiency? And "in a proper manner"?
Did you hear or witness the House hearings with insurance execs on the practice of recission?? That is how insurance companies compete. But it is nice to know that some Americans are happy to throw their H.C. $$ into the maw of investors as long as it has nothing to do with government
Which is why the marriage of the profit motive and the administration of H.C. should be divorced. It is a really bad (accidental) idea.
You may have missed this, but Health Insurance companies have ALREADY consolidated - they call it merging and say it promotes "efficiency". For those of us living in small states, it means there is MacDonalds or Burger King when you go health insurance shopping.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?