The commodification of human health is fundamentally a good thing in that allows stakeholders to extract value from policy holders in exchange for truncated service
What have we hear? A bunch of rich bastards who think the working class aren't paying enough tax?
That's what it looks like to me. These people aren't interested in solution. Despicable. The solutions to high health costs are automation and research. To bad we didn't spend some of the stimulus money to speed up the modernization of health care. Reducing the cost is a solution, not passing the cost off on someone else. You want to tax something? Tax the churches!
Eugensdiet, without a strong gov, every market would be dominated by a single trust, we need anti-trust enforcement and we need rules and regulations to protect the consumer from things like lead additives.
In response to state laws trying to limit the scale of companies, Rockefeller and his associates developed innovative ways of organizing, to effectively manage their fast growing enterprise. In 1882, they combined their disparate companies ... under a single group of trustees. By a secret agreement, the existing thirty-seven stockholders conveyed their shares "in trust" to nine Trustees... This organization proved so successful that other giant enterprises adopted this "trust" form.
History points otherwise. Vanderbilt, who we all see as a monopolistic robber-baron, actually got his start by breaking a government-regulated monopoly on New York harbor trade. Friedman goes into detail about how government regulation is more harmful to competition than deregulation.
NikovK, regulation done wrong can be a really bad thing, not denying that. Airline deregulation in the 80s is proof of that. But the airlines are still regulated to a degree and I think that is a good thing.
@ndyt Well yeah, we need a society ruled by laws and laws need to protect citizens. However the way to do the most good for the citizens isn't to have the most regulation, but to have enough regulation that the power of monied people to do harm is held in check but enough liberty that their power to do good is still free. There's a balance to strike, and currently I feel we're missing the mark with too much control, and that excess of control is being used by people in power.
@ndyt The excess of control manifested itself in the government pushing banks to loan to the financially unreliable as the government strove for lower class home ownership. But sure, call me brainwashed. That furthers our discussion. In retort, I blow a raspberry at you, good sir. : P *thpppt*
So we can somehow "reform" health care just by taxing health benefits? Is anybody braindead enough to believe this crap? Oh wait, that's right. - there's also "tort reform". What a circle jerk.
"System" yeah, he he he, hardy har. Like buncha doctors, hospitals, nursing staff, clerical staff, and a separate(d) buncha medical insurance companies separately standing, and alla them overseen by government regulation & taxation entities and by private (non-government) professional affiliations (like AMA) on the one hand... and prospective patients on the other... constitutes a "system." Yuck yuck yuck, hardy har.
Reagan, Friedman, McCain??? Greenspan spent the last twenty years pushing this shit, and when it all fell apart he said "there was a flaw in my worldview." How long will the corporate owned republicans continue to push the same old bull.
Why stop there? Our government is the most massive, most inefficient, coercive monopoly on this planet. With no real competition, it has absolutely no incentive to serve the people effectively. 95% of it's employees are permanent, unelected, & can never be fired. Without competition they perform poorly & give themselves a raise every year. Like a cancerous tumor will always grow, so will government spending. the only way to reduce growth, is to cut out the tumor entirely.
I wish that were true, but why do you think government will stop wars? The congress funds the war, Bush started the war. Obama just moved the location. The only man that would have ended the war was Ron Paul, & he was marginalized throughout media & politics. The only way to stop massive decade-long wars is to get rid of the one thing that can afford to pay for them. The government. Only it can fund a war with taxes from generations that haven't even been born yet. End the state to end war.
truthadvocate, Ron killed himself by admitting that we asked for 911, which we did by supporting Israel. If the public gets tired enough of the war the gov will stop it, that is how Vietnam ended.
I agree with you on why Ron shot himself in the foot. How? By telling the truth. Politicians can only win by lying & making promises to powerful special interest groups in exchange for campaign donations.
I also agree with your neutral foreign policy. But the public has been tired of this war for a long time & the government doesn't seem to care that much. When this war finally ends, it will only be a matter of time before the next one begins.
There are a lot of things to be proud of as an American, but we owe very few of those things to the government system. When people compete to serve consumers their achievements are more useful & less expensive. If you follow that logic to it's end, there's no consumer need that cannot be provided by a free market.
There are all kinds of anarchists. I'm one that believes in private property, free markets, and voluntary interactions without coercion. Why do you think I'm misguided?
If human beings are "stupid / ignorant /close minded / fearful" why on earth would you give a group of them power over the lives of hundreds of millions of people? That's a disaster waiting to happen. That's precisely why there are stupid / ignorant / close minded / fearful politicians spending trillions of dollars they didn't earn to wage world wars with no exit strategy. That's how 174 million people were killed by governments in the 20th century.
and the ones in government wouldn't also be stupid/ignorant ,etc, if the electorates knew how to get off their asses and pay attention to their political systems.
not every gov is stupid and goes against their people's wishes.
don't prject the deficiencies of the US on the rest of the world.
You just said "we're all morons." Where do politicians & voters come from? Mars? No. They come from us, the morons! OK, 666norton420 says we should all get off our asses & pay attention, so everyone stop being morons! ;p
Without a state mistakes are smaller in scale. Morons become smarter because they're allowed to fail & learn lessons. All transactions are voluntary. Managers are naturally selected for their ability, not because their last name is Kennedy or Bush.
the point you're missing is that we're animals, evolved to have a leader/ Alpha. now, we are much more open to consensus than some of our cousins, but not there yet.
we always hand power over to the few. we hand it over cause we're stupid and lazy. throughout history, we hand it over.
your intellectual argument mean nothing in the real world.
now, i'm an anarchist myself, though i'm sure i differ a great deal from your views. i'm thinking to the future.
I agree. We've been naturally selected to listen to our parents, a behavior that's retained in adulthood. Plus for millennia rulers slaughtered anyone who dissented. Realistically in a national electoral process I am powerless to choose my leader. I do have complete power, however, to choose my employer. Naturally I'm much happier with the leader I chose (my employer). Why can't all leaders be voluntarily selected like this? Because humans suck? That just leads me back to my previous arguments.
It is time to separate health care from employment. That is the one major problem because it is big business that gets all the benefit for paying other business for the best discounts and loopholes.
"The problem with health care is it's not quite that bad."
What planet is this asshole living on? Health insurance CEOs make billions while thousands die every year because they don't have health insurance.
Shit like this: watch?v=lE6jRnQm4L8 is not uncommon. How is that "not quite that bad?" Battered women are denied coverage in some states. People have been rescinded for past occurrences of acne and back aches.
Thousands die every year because of national healthcare programs, drug regulation agencies, etc. Current government insurance programs deny a higher percentage of claims than major private insurers. National Healthcare is not the answer. Free competition is the best way to serve patients better at a lower cost. The more government intervenes the less competition there is to serve patients.
Hidden costs do not benefit patients. They benefit rich CEO's. Making them visible is a good idea.
Point out exactly where I said national healthcare was the answer to anything? You're spewing out tangential talking points to contentions I didn't make.
As it is, we don't have free competition. The health insurance industry is exempt from anti-trust laws and people aren't allowed to buy insurance across state lines. But even if they were, that doesn't change the 45,000 people dying every year from not having insurance.
Anti-trust laws are a scam. They do not benefit consumers. They benefit politically well connected corporations. Because the corrupt politicians get to pick and choose which companies they screw over and which companies they don't.
The answer is a free market. Free competition. The answer is no coercive centralized government. Any government reform is guaranteed to help the friends of politicians at our expense. We need reform designed by corrupt politicians like we need a hole in the head.
I'm uninsured and unemployed with a preexisting brain scratch. Its not all that bad. I get free sample packs from my doctor's office, they cut all the unneeded tests and appointments since they know I'm broke, and I pay the late-fee-free bills whenever I manage. I mean, if I got cancer I'd be SOL, but then, fifty years ago if I got cancer I'd be SOL. I really can't complain.
I'm uninsured and unemployed with a preexisting brain scratch. Its not all that bad. I get free sample packs from my doctor's office, they cut all the unneeded tests and appointments since they know I'm broke, and I pay the late-fee-free bills whenever I manage. I mean, if I got cancer I'd be SOL, but then, fifty years ago if I got cancer I'd be SOL. I really can't complain.
This has been flagged as spam show
The commodification of human health is fundamentally a good thing in that allows stakeholders to extract value from policy holders in exchange for truncated service
ConservativeHealth 2 years ago
What have we hear? A bunch of rich bastards who think the working class aren't paying enough tax?
That's what it looks like to me. These people aren't interested in solution. Despicable. The solutions to high health costs are automation and research. To bad we didn't spend some of the stimulus money to speed up the modernization of health care. Reducing the cost is a solution, not passing the cost off on someone else. You want to tax something? Tax the churches!
Eugensdiet 2 years ago
Eugensdiet, without a strong gov, every market would be dominated by a single trust, we need anti-trust enforcement and we need rules and regulations to protect the consumer from things like lead additives.
ndyt 2 years ago
single trust can only dominate with government support.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
LeGioNoFZioN, now you have gone of the deep end. You are telling me that Standard Oil became a trust because of the gov support?
ndyt 2 years ago
@ndyt
In response to state laws trying to limit the scale of companies, Rockefeller and his associates developed innovative ways of organizing, to effectively manage their fast growing enterprise. In 1882, they combined their disparate companies ... under a single group of trustees. By a secret agreement, the existing thirty-seven stockholders conveyed their shares "in trust" to nine Trustees... This organization proved so successful that other giant enterprises adopted this "trust" form.
NikovK 2 years ago
@ndyt
History points otherwise. Vanderbilt, who we all see as a monopolistic robber-baron, actually got his start by breaking a government-regulated monopoly on New York harbor trade. Friedman goes into detail about how government regulation is more harmful to competition than deregulation.
NikovK 2 years ago
NikovK, regulation done wrong can be a really bad thing, not denying that. Airline deregulation in the 80s is proof of that. But the airlines are still regulated to a degree and I think that is a good thing.
ndyt 2 years ago
@ndyt Well yeah, we need a society ruled by laws and laws need to protect citizens. However the way to do the most good for the citizens isn't to have the most regulation, but to have enough regulation that the power of monied people to do harm is held in check but enough liberty that their power to do good is still free. There's a balance to strike, and currently I feel we're missing the mark with too much control, and that excess of control is being used by people in power.
NikovK 1 year ago
@NikovK, if you think there is too much control over the banks then you are brainwashed.
ndyt 1 year ago
@ndyt The excess of control manifested itself in the government pushing banks to loan to the financially unreliable as the government strove for lower class home ownership. But sure, call me brainwashed. That furthers our discussion. In retort, I blow a raspberry at you, good sir. : P *thpppt*
NikovK 1 year ago
So we can somehow "reform" health care just by taxing health benefits? Is anybody braindead enough to believe this crap? Oh wait, that's right. - there's also "tort reform". What a circle jerk.
funkalunatic 2 years ago 2
"System" yeah, he he he, hardy har. Like buncha doctors, hospitals, nursing staff, clerical staff, and a separate(d) buncha medical insurance companies separately standing, and alla them overseen by government regulation & taxation entities and by private (non-government) professional affiliations (like AMA) on the one hand... and prospective patients on the other... constitutes a "system." Yuck yuck yuck, hardy har.
voyeurdug 2 years ago
Reagan, Friedman, McCain??? Greenspan spent the last twenty years pushing this shit, and when it all fell apart he said "there was a flaw in my worldview." How long will the corporate owned republicans continue to push the same old bull.
ONQproductions 2 years ago 2
Why not just stop spending money on useless wars and Israel?
ndyt 2 years ago 5
Why stop there? Our government is the most massive, most inefficient, coercive monopoly on this planet. With no real competition, it has absolutely no incentive to serve the people effectively. 95% of it's employees are permanent, unelected, & can never be fired. Without competition they perform poorly & give themselves a raise every year. Like a cancerous tumor will always grow, so will government spending. the only way to reduce growth, is to cut out the tumor entirely.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
truthadvocate, I already knew all that, but we cant make gov smaller, Bush was in office 8 years and only made it larger. But we can stop the wars.
ndyt 2 years ago
I wish that were true, but why do you think government will stop wars? The congress funds the war, Bush started the war. Obama just moved the location. The only man that would have ended the war was Ron Paul, & he was marginalized throughout media & politics. The only way to stop massive decade-long wars is to get rid of the one thing that can afford to pay for them. The government. Only it can fund a war with taxes from generations that haven't even been born yet. End the state to end war.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
truthadvocate, Ron killed himself by admitting that we asked for 911, which we did by supporting Israel. If the public gets tired enough of the war the gov will stop it, that is how Vietnam ended.
ndyt 2 years ago
I agree with you on why Ron shot himself in the foot. How? By telling the truth. Politicians can only win by lying & making promises to powerful special interest groups in exchange for campaign donations.
I also agree with your neutral foreign policy. But the public has been tired of this war for a long time & the government doesn't seem to care that much. When this war finally ends, it will only be a matter of time before the next one begins.
Why do we need a government at all?
truthadvocate 2 years ago
truthadvocate, I am not an anarchist, I think they are misguided. I think we (USA) as a great gov. system, we just need to keep our troops at home.
ndyt 2 years ago
There are a lot of things to be proud of as an American, but we owe very few of those things to the government system. When people compete to serve consumers their achievements are more useful & less expensive. If you follow that logic to it's end, there's no consumer need that cannot be provided by a free market.
There are all kinds of anarchists. I'm one that believes in private property, free markets, and voluntary interactions without coercion. Why do you think I'm misguided?
truthadvocate 2 years ago
"Why do we need a government at all? "
ummm.... because we're human beings, therefor most of us are to stupid/ignorant/close minded/fearful, etc, to govern ourselves.
i for one could govern myself, but i'm not an average human.
i hope i live to see the day where by genetic engineering, we can build brains that won't need such oversight.
;d
666norton420 2 years ago
If human beings are "stupid / ignorant /close minded / fearful" why on earth would you give a group of them power over the lives of hundreds of millions of people? That's a disaster waiting to happen. That's precisely why there are stupid / ignorant / close minded / fearful politicians spending trillions of dollars they didn't earn to wage world wars with no exit strategy. That's how 174 million people were killed by governments in the 20th century.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
if?
we are.
we're all morons.
and the ones in government wouldn't also be stupid/ignorant ,etc, if the electorates knew how to get off their asses and pay attention to their political systems.
not every gov is stupid and goes against their people's wishes.
don't prject the deficiencies of the US on the rest of the world.
;d
666norton420 2 years ago
Stop being close minded.
You just said "we're all morons." Where do politicians & voters come from? Mars? No. They come from us, the morons! OK, 666norton420 says we should all get off our asses & pay attention, so everyone stop being morons! ;p
Without a state mistakes are smaller in scale. Morons become smarter because they're allowed to fail & learn lessons. All transactions are voluntary. Managers are naturally selected for their ability, not because their last name is Kennedy or Bush.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
the point you're missing is that we're animals, evolved to have a leader/ Alpha. now, we are much more open to consensus than some of our cousins, but not there yet.
we always hand power over to the few. we hand it over cause we're stupid and lazy. throughout history, we hand it over.
your intellectual argument mean nothing in the real world.
now, i'm an anarchist myself, though i'm sure i differ a great deal from your views. i'm thinking to the future.
;d
666norton420 2 years ago
I agree. We've been naturally selected to listen to our parents, a behavior that's retained in adulthood. Plus for millennia rulers slaughtered anyone who dissented. Realistically in a national electoral process I am powerless to choose my leader. I do have complete power, however, to choose my employer. Naturally I'm much happier with the leader I chose (my employer). Why can't all leaders be voluntarily selected like this? Because humans suck? That just leads me back to my previous arguments.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
It is time to separate health care from employment. That is the one major problem because it is big business that gets all the benefit for paying other business for the best discounts and loopholes.
Luinreg 2 years ago 3
"The problem with health care is it's not quite that bad."
What planet is this asshole living on? Health insurance CEOs make billions while thousands die every year because they don't have health insurance.
Shit like this: watch?v=lE6jRnQm4L8 is not uncommon. How is that "not quite that bad?" Battered women are denied coverage in some states. People have been rescinded for past occurrences of acne and back aches.
"Not all that bad" my pretty pink uninsured ass.
Bobbiethejean 2 years ago 3
Thousands die every year because of national healthcare programs, drug regulation agencies, etc. Current government insurance programs deny a higher percentage of claims than major private insurers. National Healthcare is not the answer. Free competition is the best way to serve patients better at a lower cost. The more government intervenes the less competition there is to serve patients.
Hidden costs do not benefit patients. They benefit rich CEO's. Making them visible is a good idea.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
Point out exactly where I said national healthcare was the answer to anything? You're spewing out tangential talking points to contentions I didn't make.
As it is, we don't have free competition. The health insurance industry is exempt from anti-trust laws and people aren't allowed to buy insurance across state lines. But even if they were, that doesn't change the 45,000 people dying every year from not having insurance.
We need reform and we need it now.
Bobbiethejean 2 years ago
Anti-trust laws are a scam. They do not benefit consumers. They benefit politically well connected corporations. Because the corrupt politicians get to pick and choose which companies they screw over and which companies they don't.
The answer is a free market. Free competition. The answer is no coercive centralized government. Any government reform is guaranteed to help the friends of politicians at our expense. We need reform designed by corrupt politicians like we need a hole in the head.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
@Bobbiethejean
I'm uninsured and unemployed with a preexisting brain scratch. Its not all that bad. I get free sample packs from my doctor's office, they cut all the unneeded tests and appointments since they know I'm broke, and I pay the late-fee-free bills whenever I manage. I mean, if I got cancer I'd be SOL, but then, fifty years ago if I got cancer I'd be SOL. I really can't complain.
NikovK 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bobbiethejean
I'm uninsured and unemployed with a preexisting brain scratch. Its not all that bad. I get free sample packs from my doctor's office, they cut all the unneeded tests and appointments since they know I'm broke, and I pay the late-fee-free bills whenever I manage. I mean, if I got cancer I'd be SOL, but then, fifty years ago if I got cancer I'd be SOL. I really can't complain.
NikovK 1 year ago