Skip to main content

View Diary: Engaging A Couple of Tea Party Petitioners (157 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Medicare is more (6+ / 0-)

    of a payment system.  Private insurance is insurance.  Insurance has been around a long  long time and it is not a cost effective mechanism for financing healthcare - really isn't supposed to be when you look at the model.  It is only supposed to insure one against heavy financial loss - like a warehouse burning down or a ship sinking.

    "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

    by newfie on Sat Aug 10, 2013 at 07:04:45 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  As in all legalized gambling... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the house always wins.

      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing
      he was never reasoned into” - Jonathan Swift

      by jjohnjj on Sat Aug 10, 2013 at 10:40:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not really. More like origins as a coop to (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dave925, newfie

        Spread the risk of seaborne commerce.

        That didn't mean premiums couldn't go through the ionosphere.

        In both the American Revolution and especially the War of 1812,  American privateers made insurance almost unobtainable. And that put pressure on the British govt.

        Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

        by dadadata on Sat Aug 10, 2013 at 04:48:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Well... (0+ / 0-)

        wouldn't be much of a business model if it didn't make money.  However, despite popular opinion, there are many instances where the insured receives far more than he/she gives.

        But whether insurers providing coverage for health is profitable enough is not really the question.  The question is why do we continue to use this model of financing that is poorly suited and (ultimately) untenable?

        We need to continue to move towards a nationalized healthcare.  Our national arguments about health care should be over whether my voodoo care for curing baldness should be paid for or not.  We should not be arguing over whether I receive relatively simple and absolutely necessary care that is the difference between life or death solely based on my ability to pay for it.  We should be far morally advanced than we are - especially when those who are against that model also profess supreme moral superiority over those of us whose approach more closely resembles that of Jesus the Nazarene.

        "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

        by newfie on Sun Aug 11, 2013 at 05:50:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site