Prev: Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
Next: Insurance companies are there to help us. Yeah, right.
From: Jack Hollis on 18 Oct 2009 11:36
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:21:24 -0700, "gray asphalt"
>Where can we find a copy of the law? If you are right we
>can all right off MSNBC, if we haven't already.
It's not that hard to find.
From: Jack Hollis on 18 Oct 2009 11:48
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:23:30 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard(a)brazee.net>
>>The insurance business would love to get out from under 50 different
>>state regulatory agencies and become federally regulated. Of course,
>>this wont happen because it would put too many lawyers out of
>Some of this argument is whether we're better off with states doing
>the regulation or whether the states are continuing to be more
>irrelevant. It was just in the last decade or two that my state
>(Colorado), legalized branch banking. Big businesses likes having
>only one place to spend their lobbying dollars, and don't care for
>small business competing with them.
Most of the problems are created by the state regulators. If they
would allow people to buy insurance from any company in the US, health
insurance prices would go down. Right now, in many states, people are
forced to buy high priced coverage that they would rather not pay for.
In NY State I have to pay for things like acupuncture, treatment for
autism and a host of other benefits I neither want or will ever need.
If they get rid of mandated coverage everyone can buy the insurance
that they want and not be forced to pay for things they don't want.
From: bknight on 18 Oct 2009 11:51
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 11:27:41 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com>
>On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:15:52 -0700, "gray asphalt"
>>Didn't you say that your wife works in the health care
>>industry? And you are willing to state that there is no
>>anti-trust exemption for health care, along with major
>>league baseball, the only two exemptions in the entire
>The insurance industry are subject to state anti-trust laws.
Columbia? English major I presume. :-)
From: Frank Ketchum on 18 Oct 2009 12:04
"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> My point is that the libertarians here go on and on about the magical
> properties of free-market capitalism as it applies to big healthcare,
> when in fact big healthcare is completely free to game the system at no
> risk to itself. Obviously there is no legitimate competition in the US
> healthcare system. It's a cartel.
The problem is that you apparently think we have a true free market system
in healthcare. We don't, we have bits and pieces of a free market operating
underneath massive regulations and protections. Remove the laws that
interfere with free market functioning of the healthcare system, let me as
the consumer buy any level of health insurance I want from any company
willing to sell it to me (you know, like we do with auto insurance,
homeowners insurance, disability insurance, life insurance etc), change the
tax code so that the only realistic way for insurance to be provided is
through employers and you will be closer to a true free market. You will
have better health care as well.
The current proposals all just heap on loads of new regulations further
removing the healthcare system from market forces.
With your comment that we don't have legitimate competition, are you
implying that you wish government to enter into the game to compete with the
private sector insurance providers?
From: Frank Ketchum on 18 Oct 2009 12:06
"Kommienezuspadt" <NoSpam(a)NoThanks.net> wrote in message
> I'll take that as a no.
Why does this matter so much? Republicans have no power to stop any of this
legislation in the house, senate, or white house. Why does the left care so
much about what Republicans are doing when they don't need a single
Republican vote to implement their policies?