APP - The quest for knowledge.

Superfreak said:
If you had read the thread and their blatant inability to comprehend what was written to them, then you would understand. Personally, I will continue to call out the idiots when they are behaving like idiots.
Click to expand...

You are not really in a position to judge.
 
christiefan915 said:
Back in the '80's millionaires from the Middle East came here for organ transplants and there was an investigation because they were bumping others from the lists, due to the fact that they could pay hundreds of thousands without having to go through insurance paperwork. AHZ makes it sound like any old schmo just hopped a plane and got immediate care, when in truth is was basically the uber-rich who could do this.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. The same people kept Harley Street going.... and the Soho strip joints!!!!!
 
So.

In summary,

The concensus american opinion is

1. Rejection of ANY path that leads to state run healthcare
2. Tort reform
3. Breakup of state by state healthcare cartels
4. Remove employer companies from the mix completely
 
AssHatZombie said:
So.

In summary,

The concensus american opinion is

1. Rejection of ANY path that leads to state run healthcare
2. Tort reform
3. Breakup of state by state healthcare cartels
4. Remove employer companies from the mix completely
Click to expand...

You should add that all the HMOs, Blue Cross etc be turned into non profit organisations with no shareholders.
 
Last edited:
tom prendergast said:
You should add that all the HMOs, Blue Cross etc should be turned into non profit organisations with no shareholders.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that. They should be submitted to nationwide competition instead of the psuedocompetition of a state cartel. And the employer company should have NO ROLE in purchasing health care.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I don't believe that. They should be submitted to nationwide competition instead of the psuedocompetition of a state cartel. And the employer company should have NO ROLE in purchasing health care.
Click to expand...

All that will happen is that the big fish will swallow up the little fish and you will just end up with 2 or 3 giant companies running a cozy cartel.
 
AssHatZombie said:
We will just have to keep busting it up. Not a big deal. It's better than the full monopoly of a government run system.
Click to expand...

That probably is not practical. Do you really know who owns what in the US? Do you know, for example, whether Walmart owns any of its suppliers and if so how the profit on a product is divided? Do you know how you would discover true ownership, influential shareholdings, etc? I doubt very much if you or anyone does. Teams of lawyers are employed to hide inter company relationships. The world of business, you see, is not as simple as we like to think it is.
Insurance company A is 35% owned by ins company B which consists of banking and financial interests of several otherwise disconnected institutions. Some parts of such interests might be in private hands in in the form of trusts or companies where the beneficiary is not listed as a shareholder.
You ain't gonna bust nothing unless you can get sufficient numbers of similarly interested people and similarly interested lawyers and that just will not happen.
And, don't kid yourself on this, a monopoly is a real threat. Its easier to change your government than break up a business that doesn't wish to be broken up.
 
Lowaicue said:
That probably is not practical. Do you really know who owns what in the US? Do you know, for example, whether Walmart owns any of its suppliers and if so how the profit on a product is divided? Do you know how you would discover true ownership, influential shareholdings, etc? I doubt very much if you or anyone does. Teams of lawyers are employed to hide inter company relationships. The world of business, you see, is not as simple as we like to think it is.
Insurance company A is 35% owned by ins company B which consists of banking and financial interests of several otherwise disconnected institutions. Some parts of such interests might be in private hands in in the form of trusts or companies where the beneficiary is not listed as a shareholder.
You ain't gonna bust nothing unless you can get sufficient numbers of similarly interested people and similarly interested lawyers and that just will not happen.
And, don't kid yourself on this, a monopoly is a real threat. Its easier to change your government than break up a business that doesn't wish to be broken up.
Click to expand...

It's totally practical. You know, a negative attitude is not "rationality" per se. The hard things are worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top