The author outlines problem after problem with private health insurance, then concludes somehow that they benefit the American public.
Nowhere in this article is any reference to the solution that works everywhere else in the world.
The benefits of insurance come from collective bargaining, but the author does not address that the ultimate bargaining position for the public is to pool our risk entirely.
The conclusion that private insurance keeps cost down is absurd. Private health insurance customers' costs increase every year, and the companies ONLY have to provide for the people who are CHEAPEST to insure. We as the public pay THEM for the privilege of taking profits on the only category of people that could reasonably generate profits, when that money should be used towards the risk pool paid by the public.
Not examining the public universal insurance option is like intellectual malpractice.
mekdoonggi•12m ago
Nowhere in this article is any reference to the solution that works everywhere else in the world.
The benefits of insurance come from collective bargaining, but the author does not address that the ultimate bargaining position for the public is to pool our risk entirely.
The conclusion that private insurance keeps cost down is absurd. Private health insurance customers' costs increase every year, and the companies ONLY have to provide for the people who are CHEAPEST to insure. We as the public pay THEM for the privilege of taking profits on the only category of people that could reasonably generate profits, when that money should be used towards the risk pool paid by the public.
Not examining the public universal insurance option is like intellectual malpractice.