Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (215026)	1/26/2007 2:09:43 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

You have offerred zero reasons for why a non-profit system is going to work so much better in health care. Are you actually reading my posts or are you just skimming them and then replying? I have offered you many reasons including ACTUAL RESULTS. 1. Medicare's administrative and overhead costs versus that of private insurance. 2. The growing number of uninsured which, according to your theory, should have been gobbled up by insurance companies by now. 3. The very real concerns of people like Schultz, founder of Starbucks, who is alarmed that health insurance costs him more than the coffee he peddles. Ditto GM and steel. Exactly how is the for profit model working for either company? 4. The denial of care routinely practice AS POLICY by insurance companies. 5. The US's enormously expensive health care costs without the enormously beneficial outcomes in said health care. This is very poor ROI for the health care system. Why, as a capitalist, doesn't this bother you enormously? 6. The corruption in the health care system including the monopoly of the AMA resulting in fewer physicians and the peddling of very poor and often dangerous physicians. Why, as a capitalist, doesn't this bother you enormously? I'm perfectly open to any well reasoned argument about why this would be the case. No you're not. You provide none other than to rant about the evils of for-profit companies. I have said nothing of the sort. Now you're just making things up which is usually the point at which people with no supporting evidence for their opinions fold up the table and walk away in a huff. :) Because they don't sign up until they need it. Why can't you understand something so basic? Now you're making absolutely zero sense. I'm talking about why the insurance companies SPECIFICALLY and PURPOSEFULLY exclude the high risk people whenever and however they are legally able. My claim is that I see no reason why for-profit or non-profit, multi-player or single player is uniquely critical in health care as opposed to any other field. Do you work for an insurance company? What I'm saying is that, with a stroke of the pen, Bush could make every single person in the US of A covered....tomorrow. That's what I understand. Try getting that to happen with the current system of for-profit, deny-care insurance companies. TRY IT.