If the private sector is so much better/more efficient than Government...

why are Republicans afraid to allow that sector to compete with the Government via the public option? Republican Party philosophy for years has been that private industry is superior to Government in providing goods and services. As such, we should just get out of their way. Republicans have also said time and time again, that the private sector can do things cheaper than the US Government. Now, they say that having a public option will put private health insurance providers out of business. It seems they contradict themselves?

:shrug:

*edited for grammar*

That's like asking GWB to spell "strategy".

s.t.r.a.t.a.r.g.e.e?

:hi:

That's their "religion", but many are smart enough to know that it's not really true for many situations. Healthcare is a great example where absolute free market will be problematic.

:hi:

Remember Enron, and all those other companies and their debacles
and the shaft to the workers.

That did not teach them a lesson (Smart?) we have now ended up
with a Meltdown.

The Private Sector has driven Globalization andpart of the
unemployment is due to Globalization Crisis. There are
a spinly handful who will admit it.


Puh--leeeez do not forget. Why is Health Insurance Reform in such
Demand??? Because many health insurance companies are putting the
screws to American Citizen.

How can people with a straight face tell us We want the People
who have put our country in jeopardy make our Health Care Decisions.
The Democrats need to use one talking point.

Government can't do----.

You want the people who have been denying coverage unreasonably,
hiking up premiums, made it impossible for 47 Million to have Insurance
Fill in the blank.

:hi:

Yeah, how can it do both? They have two opposing themes, but the one is true: it will prove the private sector charges far too much and will show citizens that government can do it cheaper than the disaster we now have.

that the government run option will run huge deficits that will be made up by the taxpayers. The President has said he will not accept the government option running deficits, but what's he supposed to do once it does? Is he going to throw the uninsured off insurance again? Not very likely. The general budget will just pony up whatever the deficit is.

How can a company which needs to make a profit compete wiuth a government option which can run gigantic deficits year after year.

Also, it's assumed that congress will add benefits to the government package each year.

So, how can a for profit organization compete against a competitor who can constantly add benefits without raising premiums, and can run endless deficits?

My answer is that they can't, and it will lead to single payer which is what I think is the best idea available so the public option is good with me.

I assume that the President is correct. With the money we save negotiating costs, and by letting the Bush tax cuts for millionaire program expire, we'll pay for health care.

As for companies needing to make a profit ... If as Republicans say, the private sector is vastly superior to the public sector, who in their right mind, will choose Government run option just to save a buck? Why this is our health we're talking about! ;)

My question is, how can companies who need to make a profit do a BETTER, job for consumers in regard to health care? We should leave big profits to non-essential programs. All I request is that they make a little less of a profit, given health care is a matter of life and death, not a luxury.

Lastly, while I'd love a single-payer program, I don't think including a public option is an automatic slide into single payer, I think that's a corporate driven talking point.

:shrug:

I don't think there should be profit in healthcare.

I can see why a private company can't compete with the public option though.

For one thing the congress can vote to include better and better benefits each year without raising the costs. I can see psychiatric care added to the package, then dental, then glasses. And every year the general budget subsidizing the option more and more.

Of course a private company wouldn't be able to compete with that.

is made available to those within a certain income bracket?

"MinnesotaCare is a health care program for children, adults and seniors who don’t have access to affordable health care coverage, but do not meet the income limits for Medical Assistance. Working adults who are unable to get health care coverage through an employer may qualify.

You will need to pay a monthly premium (fee) for health care coverage. The amount depends on your income and family size."

http://www.mnhealthnetwork.com/MN%20Care_new.htm

More on funding: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/ssmncare.htm

"In fiscal year 2007, the MinnesotaCare program paid $434 million for medical services provided to enrollees. Sixty-one percent of this cost was paid for by the state, 31 percent by the federal government, and 8 percent by enrollees through premium payments (this last category also includes copayments and prescription drug rebates).

State funding for MinnesotaCare and other health care access initiatives is provided by a tax of 2.0 percent on the gross revenues of health care providers and a tax of 1.0 percent on the premiums of nonprofit health plan companies.

The state receives federal funding at the MA match rate for health care services provided to enrollees who are children, parents, or pregnant women. The state receives federal funding at an enhanced match rate (under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program) for parents and relative caretakers with incomes between 100 percent and 200 percent of FPG, through January 31, 2009. Beginning February 1, 2009, this group of parents will receive the regular MA match, and the enhanced federal match will be applied to MinnesotaCare children age 18 or younger with incomes greater than 150 percent of FPG."

Our family took advantage for a while and it was really a stellar health care plan from our stand point. That said, I've not done extensive research on the cost to the state and I have no idea if this model would work nationwide.

and yet time and time again this failed.

but the private sector can do some things more cheaply than gov't mainly because the private sector can cut employees' wages and benefits, increase hours, implement layoffs, bust unions, etc.
In many cases, these are tactics that governments cannot or will not resort to.

One of the many specific ways in which private health insurers might do things more cheaply, on average (and generate big profits), is by doing dastardly things such as
denying coverage on trumped up charges, etc.

Assuming the rethugs are sincerely afraid that gov't competition will harm these profit-mongering health corporations, it might be because profits will likely be reduced, since the corps might not get away with committing so many crimes when people can choose the gov't plan.

The main reason they're afraid, though, might be because the private insurers have a sort of monopolistic cartel going, don't they? They can more or less fix prices, etc....The consumers have to take it or leave it. When the gov't gets in the act, the gov't would not be participating or colluding with the cartel, and wouldn't this destroy the cartel's monopoly position?

through a bit. ;)