The fallacy is thinking insurance can be fixed through competition when it needs to be regulated

[dkf]

Forcing people to buy insurance makes it a public service. Competition requires a vast number of choices and transparency to the nth degree which we don't have and will never have with these bought and paid for representatives. Without those characteristics the industry must be strictly regulated. This is so basic it beats me why our congress is so clueless about monopolies.

This bill is such an invitation to gouge the public it is appalling.

[AllentownJake]

1. Yes and Howard pointed that out quite effectively

The two nations that use private insurance mandates have a strong regulatory framework in place.

[Armstead]

2. Absolutely correct

[Xipe Totec]

3. It's like thinking that competition between gambling casinos will increase your winnings n/t

[Ozymanithrax]

4. Actually, it needs both.

Health Care companies should not be allowed to set up private fiefdoms in specific states. They should be free to operate in any state under an umbrella of regulation that keeps them designed to keep them from trampling over the rights of patients while pursuing profit.

[gravity]

5. They did increase regulation

You are just focusing on all the negatives of the bill while completely ignoring anything positive it does.

[dkf]

6. Oh is there a process for approval of premiums by a public commission?

Didn't think so. Fail.

[Armstead]

12. Because there are so many negatives that outweigh the positives in the big picture

[WT Fuheck]

7. 'competition' is a euphemism for deregulation,

which is an unmitigated disaster.

[dkf]

8. Actually competition in Health insurance means inefficiencies in delivery anyway

The more companies a doctor has to consider with their different referral practices along with preferred drugs procedures and paperwork makes for bureacracy hell.

[jgraz]

9. Fuck regulation. It needs to be eliminated.

Taking care of each other in times of need is exactly why we have a government. Get rid of this private protection racket and start treating the General Welfare as it was intended: as the obligation of a democratic society toward each of its citizens.

[dkf]

10. I used to worry about these peoples jobs but now I say screw it.

Yes it needs to be eliminated. It's a parasite.

[jgraz]

11. I'm all in favor of a jobs program. We just need one that doesn't directly kill people.

[blueworld]

13. As usual, I don't get it.

Forcing people to buy insurance, IMO, makes it a disaster, not a public service which I think of as something provided through taxpayer dollars. I feel like they've handed me a life jacket before tossing me into the North Atlantic & sternly suggesting I swim hard if I want to survive. Public service???

Although I agree that regulation is extremely important it is not possible to regulate anything such that a determined con artist can't find a way around it.

Speed limits bring laws & speed traps & radar guns & radar detectors. Computer viruses bring tighter code, virus protection software & more hackers. Prohibition didn't stop drinking, it made the Mafia rich & killed thousands of people drinking antifreeze in Scotch bottles. There's no regulation that ultimately can't be gutted, although again - I agree the regulation can & should be stricter. Particularly to stop the formation of mega-monopolies.

True competition does force even crooks to compete & contain costs if they want to survive & steal again another day. I hope I have enough money to pay for my life jacket.

[Armstead]

15. Regulatrion is not perfect -- But a hell of a lot better than we got and will get under this bill

The idea that "market competition" is always preferable to regulations is at the core of tyhe GOP philosophy, and why they have gotten away with so much.

Ideally this bill should have included at the very least a public plan that would not toss us overboard but would have actually provided an affordable option for people.

But since Obama and Cingress failed to do that, the next best thing would be to clearly and strongly regulate insurers to force them to offer affordable rates and good coverage.

This bill does not.

[Martin Eden]

14. The biggest fallacy is the notion that individuals should be purchasing health insurance

In the "free" market, older people with medical problems simply couldn't afford to purchase health insurance unless they are rich; only healthy young people (those least likely to need medical care) could afford it. To be practical, effective, and equitable, health insurance needs to be provided to members of much larger groups in which the costs are spread out among the healthy and the sick.

Competition could play a role among the choices available to larger groups, but ultimately, any system that leaves people uninsured is deeply flawed -- and there is no way for everyone to be covered without significant government intervention.

Forcing individuals to purchase private insurance makes no sense because it ignores the fact that it is prohibitively expenseive for those who need it most (the sick and elderly). If the government is going to subsidize these people, why should we also subsidize the profits of private insurance corporations that have demonstrated time and time again that they put profits ahead of people?

Health reform without a public option is a give-away to insurance corporations, and forcing levying fines against people who can least afford to buy that insurance is just plain wrong.

[dkf]

17. Damn you are right.

Wow they went at this all wrong didn't they?

[Martin Eden]

19. This bill was crafted under the terms of a fallacy

And it just doesn't work -- at least not for the American people. Works pretty well for the big insurance corporations, though.

Our elected representatives are not stupid. They know on which side their bread is buttered, and they know the fallacy of how they went about this.

[Armstead]

24. It's trying to fix a lemon

[TheKentuckian]

16. There is no competion either. Most folks just have to take whatever work dishes out (nt)

Almost no regulation or competition makes for an ugly mess.

[Odin2005]

18. K&R

[Blasphemer]

20. Absolutely... nt

[Vidar]

21. K&R.

[Orsino]

22. Well, real competition might help, a little.

Simpler to regulate, though, to have the courage to have one's vote counted for or against what needs regulating.

Congress is promoting whatever it fails to ban.

[johnaries]

23. The idea in both bills is to do BOTH. There are many regs included

in both bills.

Honestly, I would prefer a single-payer system. But that simply is not possible. It's been presented in every session of Congress for 60 years, and never even brought to a vote. It ain't happening. So we have to do what we can.

[Kablooie]

25. The fallacy is thinking insurance is competitive.

They've had an explicit exception to antitrust laws since 1945.

They are able to get together and fix prices all they want.