# Dancing on the grave of health care "reform" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 3, 2010, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487 "2010-02-03T04:17:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/461 "2010-02-25T17:35:57Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I think, in the abstract, if there were a magic pixie dust that would allow us to cover everyone with the same excellent care, it would bother you that your lessers were receiving the same care as you. They should suffer for their faults. If he truly is an Ayn Rand follower, I think the answer would be yes. Based off the plot lines of Atlas Shrugged, where (hopefully this isn’t too much a spoiler) a brilliant inventor decides to NOT reveal his free energy machine to the world, because those evil socialists would just let people have free power without paying for it! Rest assured, if Rand Rover invented Magic Health Care Pixie dust, he’d keep it to himself unless he could be sure that he’d become a multi trillionaire off of it. Otherwise we don’t deserve it, because we were too stupid not to think of it ourselves. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/462 "2010-02-25T17:38:01Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Yes, I know; you’ve said it, I’ve said it, you’ve now said it again, I’ll now say it again: _ **that** _ bit of governmental interference with the free market makes things _ **worse.** _ It’s a wretched abomination. We’re on the same page with regard to this point; if you like, we can each keep mentioning it in every post. Again, you were commenting on a statement I made and I explained it to you, because you didn’t understand it. > [@](#): > > So you say – but we haven’t given it a try. Instead of competition, we’ve had monopolistic behavior fostered by the antitrust exemption and barriers to selling across state lines – and it’s that wretched abomination, rather than a free market, which has only led to upwards of 80% of folks being satisfied with their policies. You agree that governmental interference has made things worse, but want to assume more governmental interference is the solution. I agree that governmental interference has made things worse, and want to assume less governmental interference is the solution. And you’re wrong, for the reasons I mentioned above. > [@](#): > > I want to see whether the free market works first. You don’t. You want to assume that the free market will magically work. Paying other people’s medical bills isn’t building widgets. Medical Insurance doesn’t respond to the same market forces as a widget factory. > [@](#): > > And, in your proposed system, ‘the sicker they are, the more they cost the country’. The way insurance works is by having what they call a _risk pool_. Most people are healthy, young people are healthy. By having a mandate that means everyone needs to be insured you make the risk pool as large as possible. Also, look up Adverse Selection. > [@](#): > > So let’s hit the taxpayers with it instead. I get it. See above. > [@](#): > > No, we could just keep the existing system We are modifying the current system, not removing it. Haven’t you done even one iota of research on this before you started making grand proclamations about this? > [@](#): > > and authorize government compensation for insurance companies who accept high-risk people at the same price as low-risk ones. If you only cover the sickest people it will cost you a huge amount because there will be no padding in the risk pool. > [@](#): > > Er, if we do want insurance to cover _ **everyone.** _ Maybe the population is okay topping out at only covering 95%-99% of the people. I don’t know. Maybe we should find out. The current bill doesn’t cover everyone. Honestly, are you even paying attention? > [@](#): > > I believe in politics as the art of the possible. I believe the Senate bill doesn’t have the support to pass. It has already passed the senate. The house can pass it unchanged. But for that to happen the senate has to pass (via a 51 vote threshold reconciliation) modifiers to their previous bill to make it more attractive to the house. It can happen, as to whether it will, I don’t know. > [@](#): > > I believe there _ **is** _ support for killing the wretched abomination we both agree makes things worse. I believe there’s support for killing the restrictions on sales across state lines. State lines will make things worse unless you have strong federal regulations. Like eliminating pre-existing conditions. Which requires a mandate. Which requires subsidies for the poor. Which is pretty much the Senate bill. I’ve clipped here since you then go to saying the federal regulations are okay. But one of the main regulations would have to be the elimination of pre-existing conditions. Which means you have to have a mandate. Which means you have to have subsidies for the poor. Which means you pretty much need the Senate bill. I don’t get what you’re so against in the Senate bill. I’d rather have single payer personally, but this is better than leaving it as it is. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/463 "2010-02-25T17:55:33Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > The “numerous long-term difficulties” you speak of is simply more of your ideology of “government = bad”. > > It’s simply a way of saying “bad things will happen in the future if we do this - I have no idea what these bad things are, but they’ll be bad because my ideology says they will be bad” > > “They” are not being ideological, because they can point to countries that have government involvement in universal health care. Many of these countries have been doing this for a number of years, and the only “long-term difficulties” for these countries have been better health outcomes, longer lifespans and bitching about wait times for non-urgent surgeries. None of them have gone bankrupt yet. So “They” actually have evidence to point to, rather than your hollow ideological theory. > > Of course you can always fall back on the American Exceptionalism argument; even though other nations around the world can do it with no “long-term difficulties”, you can always try to convince us that the USA is particularly inept. I don’t happen to agree with this line of reasoning. You are simply mistaken about the facts. Many countries with UHC and other large government programs are right this very minute experiencing many of the long-term difficulties that are the results of big government. They have high tax rates, which reduces innovation and causes mobile productive people to leave. They have high permanent unemployment. Their economy is weaker and less robust because it is saddled with long-term liabilities to fund entitlement programs. Their people are so dependent on government programs that they strike and complain about any movement toward less government influence on the market and come to expect the government to take care of every aspect of their lives, which further aggravates these problems. People with government influence are able to obtain better health care and lower taxes and more stuff from the government in general. They have cultural issues caused by increased immigration by people looking for free health care. The list goes on and on. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/464 "2010-02-25T18:09:41Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > …I’ll respond to the rest of your inane post later. I doubt it, but wait with bated breath. ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/465 "2010-02-25T18:13:39Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You are simply mistaken about the facts. Many countries with UHC and other large government programs are right this very minute experiencing many of the long-term difficulties that are the results of big government. They have high tax rates, which reduces innovation and causes mobile productive people to leave. They have high permanent unemployment. Their economy is weaker and less robust because it is saddled with long-term liabilities to fund entitlement programs. Their people are so dependent on government programs that they strike and complain about any movement toward less government influence on the market and come to expect the government to take care of every aspect of their lives, which further aggravates these problems. People with government influence are able to obtain better health care and lower taxes and more stuff from the government in general. They have cultural issues caused by increased immigration by people looking for free health care. The list goes on and on. Did you get your knowledge of economics out of a fortune cookie? If I search the Heritage Foundation website, will I find this same rant? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/466 "2010-02-25T18:16:56Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > If he truly is an Ayn Rand follower, I think the answer would be yes. Based off the plot lines of Atlas Shrugged, where (hopefully this isn’t too much a spoiler) a brilliant inventor decides to NOT reveal his free energy machine to the world, because those evil socialists would just let people have free power without paying for it! > > Rest assured, if Rand Rover invented Magic Health Care Pixie dust, he’d keep it to himself unless he could be sure that he’d become a multi trillionaire off of it. Otherwise we don’t deserve it, because we were too stupid not to think of it ourselves. Hey smart guy, you are once again conflating health and health care and health insurance. SB was speaking in terms of magic pixie dust that would cover eberyone with an excellent level of care. Whatever the hell that means. He was just trying to get at the idea that I am evil because I actually want people to suffer. You are talking about something different–an actual product that cures all health problems. If I had invented that product, you bet your ass I would attempt to make as much profit as possible from it. And that fact has nothing to do with the point SB was getting at. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/467 "2010-02-25T18:24:08Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I doubt it, but wait with bated breath. You still haven’t responded to my post to you upthread (in which you officially GOT TOLD). Respond to that or stay told, see if I care. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/468 "2010-02-25T18:25:54Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > Did you get your knowledge of economics out of a fortune cookie? If I search the Heritage Foundation website, will I find this same rant? In other words, you got nothin’? ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/469 "2010-02-25T18:29:23Z")
You totally nailed me, troll. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/470 "2010-02-25T18:33:05Z")
Aha, but you missed the “takes one to know one” defense. I win. Go sit in the “I got TOLD” box with luci. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/471 "2010-02-25T18:34:39Z")
I think whatsisface is wrong because I checked. > [@](#): > > [Employment increased by 43,000 in January, all in part time, pushing the unemployment rate down 0.1 percentage points to 8.3%. January marks the fourth employment gain in six months.](http://www.statcan.gc.ca/subjects-sujets/labour-travail/lfs-epa/lfs-epa-eng.htm) > [@](#): > > [The number of people seeking unemployment benefits in the US rose by 22,000 to 496,000 for the week ended February 20. > > Even though the pace of job losses has come down in recent months, the country’s labor market continues to remain shaky. > > “In the week ending February 20, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 496,000, an increase of 22,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 474,000,” the US Labor Department said in a statement today. > > The four-week moving average stood at 473,750. > > Currently, the unemployment rate is around 10 per cent. > > In the wake of the raging financial turmoil, many companies had resorted to massive layoffs, as part of their efforts to cut down on costs. > > Meanwhile, the count of Americans receiving jobless benefits went up by 6,000 to 4,617,000 for the week ended February 13]([http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/us-initial-jobless-claims-rise-to-496000/86891/on](http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/us-initial-jobless-claims-rise-to-496000/86891/on)). ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/472 "2010-02-25T18:36:34Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Aha, but you missed the “takes one to know one” defense. I win. Go sit in the “I got TOLD” box with luci. “I got TOLD” box? Are you 19? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/473 "2010-02-25T18:44:48Z")
My brother was like Rover.He thought he was above such petty problems. He lived in New York ,had an apartment in NYC and a house in the Catskills. He was doing quite well. When he got to 65 ,I suggested he get into Medicare. He felt no need because his insurance was so good. He did not want to bother. Now that he needs it, his Cadillac insurance plan is treating him like any other customer, an annoyance. He has to squabble to get them to pay. They just routinely refuse to pay. The Greeks were correct. One of the worst traits of man is arrogance. It will bite you in the ass. The gods will get you in the end. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/474 "2010-02-25T18:47:19Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You are simply mistaken about the facts. Many countries with UHC and other large government programs are right this very minute experiencing many of the long-term difficulties that are the results of big government. They have high tax rates, which reduces innovation and causes mobile productive people to leave. They have high permanent unemployment. Their economy is weaker and less robust because it is saddled with long-term liabilities to fund entitlement programs. Their people are so dependent on government programs that they strike and complain about any movement toward less government influence on the market and come to expect the government to take care of every aspect of their lives, which further aggravates these problems. People with government influence are able to obtain better health care and lower taxes and more stuff from the government in general. They have cultural issues caused by increased immigration by people looking for free health care. The list goes on and on. Let’s look at some facts then, instead of simply believing what you post above. Let’s compare Canada and the US. High tax rates - certainly rates in Canada are higher - does this lead to reduced innovation and loss of productive people. No. Higher taxes are more than made up for by healthcare NOT being tied to employment. It is far easier for a Canadian to start up their own business because they are not tied to an employer to get healthcare. High permanent unemployment - Simply untrue. Jan 2010 unemployment rates at currently 8.3% in Canada vs 9.7% in the US Economy weaker - also untrue. IMF growth predictions for 2009. 2010 are -1.6 % and 1.6% for the US, and -1.2% and 1.6% for Canada. We weathered the recession better than you did. Debt/GDP ratio (CIA Factbook 2009) is 72% for Canada, 83% for the US. Canada is in better shape for debt. > [@](#): > > “People are so dependent on government programs that they strike and complain about any movement toward less government influence on the market and come to expect the government to take care of every aspect of their lives.” This is just an example of your theology and a fantasy world that you have constructed. Strikes by unionized or other workers are on the decrease in both Canada and the USA. > [@](#): > > “People with government influence are able to obtain better health care and lower taxes and more stuff from the government in general.” This is simply a falsehood. Show me an example of someone in Government in Canada who gets better healthcare than someone with an equivalent salary in the private sector. Give me an example of someone in Government in Canada who pays a lower tax rate than someone in the private sector > [@](#): > > “They have cultural issues caused by increased immigration by people looking for free health care.” This is absolutely untrue in Canada. I do not know of ANYONE who thinks immigrants to Canada are simply looking for free healthcare. Maybe I don’t hang out with bigots though. You are simply re-figuring reality to fit in with your pre-conceived notions that form your entire world view. You speak of facts in your post above. Perhaps instead of spouting ill-informed opinions, you should look up some facts. Countries with universal health care are doing just fine, and do not exhibit the “problems” that you think they do. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/475 "2010-02-25T19:03:54Z")
There are a significant number of Americans who stick with a job they hate rather than starting their own business solely because they have health care through the job and would be uninsurable by the rules of our insanely idiotic health care system. How the hell does that NOT stifle innovation and entrepreneurship? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/476 "2010-02-25T19:37:09Z")
LB, I agree that it does. It is also an example of a negative effect of government involvement. Health insurance is tied to employment because of tax laws. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/477 "2010-02-26T00:00:37Z")
Actually health care was a benefit that unions fought for and won. Once they got it, other corporations started to offer it. It was back when we had competition. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/478 "2010-02-26T04:22:12Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > **The Other Waldo Pepper** : your faith in removing the antitrust exemption as being a significant step forward in making health care more affordable is not shared by the Congressional Budget Office, which is a pretty good impartial arbiter of these kinds of matters. > > CBO commented on the bill to eliminate the antitrust exemption: So if your preferred solution is not expected to change anything, what is your plan B? > > ETA: [http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10673/hr3596.pdf](http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10673/hr3596.pdf) My preferred solution is to eliminate the antitrust exemption _ **and** _ eliminate barriers to competition across state lines; possibly I haven’t yet been clear enough about that. We’ve had far too many decades of that detestable one-two punch against genuine competition; I’d like at least a _ **little** _ time actually watching free-market activity play out before we let anyone declare that it won’t work. We’ve let government interference make things worse for the better part of a century, and now want to transition directly to bigger governmental interference without actually giving fair play a chance in between. Does that make sense? Should the prediction of a government entity preclude us from running the experiment in a free market? In fact, let me digress for a minute. The truth is that I sympathize, in a way, with the anti-corporation sentiment the other side is displaying in this thread; I merely take it one step further, is all. Mind you, I don’t _ **actually** _ have anything against Coca-Cola – in part because Pepsi is out there keeping them honest; the former will keep its pricing and products competitive so long as the latter stands ready to outcompete them – sure as I can take my business elsewhere, or just stop buying soft drinks. But now imagine someone comes along to say that Coca-Cola deserves a new power: the ability to _ **make** _ me purchase stuff. Plus the ability to make me _ **sell** _ my stuff. And they should be exempt from minimum-wage regulations; in fact, they should be able to make this or that _ **other** _ corporation exempt from assorted laws, if Coke ever want to create a little monopoly instead of letting free-market forces apply. I can only imagine the response from those who currently decry corporations. It’s my response to the government; in a word, _ **skepticism.** _ Not enough people have enough access to health care? Well, we could address that by having the government step in to provide health care. Or we could address it by having the government step in to provide health insurance. Or we could give the free market a chance. Lobohan’s entire argument – aside from oddly dwelling on a quibble we’ve both agreed on throughout – seems to boil down to (a) accusing me of assuming the free market _ **will** _ work while (b) flatly stating that it _ **won’t** _ respond to market forces the way everybody’s favorite widget factory. He’s wrong about both, and on various other points; I _ **don’t** _ assume it’ll work, and am open to seeing how the experiment plays out. The other side wants to assume it _ **won’t** _ work, and thus prefers to jump straight back in with all-new all-different interference from the biggest and scariest corporation of them all. They’ve had most of a century. Can’t we get a shot? We can _ **all** _ agree that the government has a valid role to play: enforce the agreements so people can get what they contract for, shut down collusion and price-fixing, attack false advertising – you know, the usual stuff of corporate regulation. All the posts in this thread about people who merely thought they had a good policy but then got stymied when they tried to use it? Let the government step in like they would to police a restaurant that only claims to serve healthy meals. Solve each problem one by one, as we would for any other industry – and if that’s not enough, _ **then** _ go for the full takeover; it should be a last resort after trying the alternative. Instead, the government is in a position to get _ **rewarded** _ for decades spent screwing up the system, because, hey, what else but a sweeping government takeover could remedy this screwed-up system? As someone once said, government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force: like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/479 "2010-02-26T05:16:29Z")
Allowing the health insurance companies to sell across state lines will just wind up like financial institutions. They will convince some state to pass horrible rules allowing them to do whatever they want. Then they will all set up a presence there and gyp the consumers. You don’t think the health companies have got that all worked out already? ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487/480 "2010-02-26T05:35:59Z")
Your ignorance is terrifying **The Other Waldo Pepper**. The notion that government is to blame for the mess that the private sector has made of our health care is Orwellian. The only fucking part of our health insurance that works is medicare or the part that is run by the government. The notion that there are private health insurance companies just lining up to provide care for cancer patients or diabetics or asthmatics or those with MS at a huge financial loss is completely laughable. How can you possibly believe this? Even after all the posts in this thread illustrating this fact? Heart attack patients don’t sit there carefully studying which hospital will take them. They don’t negotiate with the local doctor while trying to get their arteries to work. It is completely bizarre that you feel otherwise. Please go worship the free market somewhere else. The rest of us need health care that will cover our medical emergencies, help us maintain our health, not tie us to an employer and potentially bankrupt us should we actually need to use it. None of those goals are achieved by the free market. None ever will be. The solution is the sanity that the rest of the world has embraced. They live longer than we do and they pass less for it. Any other assertion is simply untrue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dancing-on-the-grave-of-health-care-reform/527487.md?page=25)