| Posted: 18 September 2008 at 9:27am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I understand that insurance companies are a major player, but their well-being cannot be allowed to be a factor in the decision as to what health care solutions to adopt.
It is immoral to adopt an inferior health care system because picking the best system would ruin those who profit from providing inferior health care.
Far better then, if the insurance companies fail, to go in and asset strip them so that one can carry on the non-healthcare components of the insurance business. I'm sure that's possible.
Seriously, can anyone think of a convincing argument as to why the government should continue to heavily subsidize the private insurance business (which is what the case would be if, as argued here, private insurance is an inferior solution that cannot be tampered with for fear of the consequences to those who benefit from it.)
|
Topic Closed)
