Zombie Public Option Puts Stake In Heart of Health Care Costs?

I'm not sure if the US will manage to put up a good healthcare system because it still bears the taint of McCarthyism. Which makes it terrified of any form of 'socialism' even though very few Americans even have a clue what socialism ACTUALLY is.

Once America buries Joseph McCarthy. (And that idiotic rugged macho nonsense whilst it's at it.), it'll do worse then many other countries in this sort of thing. (And other things.)

Will the public option remain? I hope so. Will it help with rising health costs? That is the bigger question. How do we deal with the fact that US hospitals and patients pay more for drugs and medical equipment than other countries? Maybe, this is a good first step. Campaign finance reform, so these same corporations that over-charge us cannot control our politicians, would be the next step.

Without a public option there is no reform.

What's stopping you from doing it?

Many things in our lives are 'universal' or 'socially' funded, it's just that people don't think about them. Libraries, Public Schools, Fire and Police stations, not to mention the mailing system and public parks and such. I do not see how one more publicly funded thing would do any harm. If it truly did harm then all our Fire, Police, Parks, Schools, Libraries, Public Transportation ect. in this country would've failed or been turned into some form of Private Funded systems by now.

It seems that people are willing to ignore the evidence of the current system's abject failure and the success of universal healthcare systems in the developed world.

You'd think they'd at least be amenable to the fact that we pay twice as much for our second-rate results as they do under the superior methods.

these "socially funded" things you speak of, are community based only. and your local tax dollars go to these things, to help support the local community. like giving spare change to a bum or giving a few dollars to the "church plate" to help support your church. schools are technically socialism because its on a national level (federal government regulates education) i and others hate it, but its been around for so long, its, forgotten and accepted. point still not made, but ran out of space.

I differ a bit. I agree Congress has been bought. But the health industry has been bought by Govt as well. The industry has what Govt doesn't have: economic power - the ability to produce. And Govt has what the industry doesn't have: political power - the ability to coerce by legislation, taxation, inflation, "legal" confiscation and force by the military and police. They trade with one another. Its a quid pro quo.

I definitely agree over-regulation as part of the problem. Govt money printing and subsidies definitely figure in.

Ludwig Von Mises outlined Govt intervention: It causes problems. Trying to fix it with more Govt intervention causes more problems, and eventually a socialist state emerges. Reasons for socialization could be politicians assuring appropriation of wealth for themselves and their friends, or belief in strong Govt and central planning and therefore Govt's massive ignorance of itself.

Sorry for the confusion. From the "oh yea" comment, tort reform and insurance competition are the only things I agree with.

I'm not Democrat or Republican either. I'm an Austrian Economics advocate and libertarian leaning. Libertarians have been arguing for tort reform and insurance competition for years. But sharp prices increases in general are a result of a Govt/Bank controlled fiat money (i.e. legal counterfeiting) and regulatory privileges, both which appropriate and redistribute wealth.