Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So in other words, Serg, I want government to have less control over personal decisions that I make that affect myself..who I marry or have relationships with, whether I carry a child to term or not, whether to smoke or take drugs. I think we should be responsible for ourselves and our own families, but I think the provision of a good healthcare and education system will benefit everyone. I think there should be a welfare net, but some mutual obligation for using it.

---

Ahhh... but do you see how these two aims conflict? Setting up government in a caretaker role gives them a vested interest, and a powerful incentive, for exerting more control over society. The healhcare example is good case in point. If we're all responsible for our own health care, it's acceptable to take a live and let live approach to personal decisions affecting health - like dangerous hobbies, tobacco/alcohol/drug use or unhealthy diets and such.

But when we declare health care to be a right, that must be supplied gratis by the community, suddenly there's a compelling reason to control our personal decisions - since personal health is no longer a private matter, and very much the business of the state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I also see that the conflict is there with private insurance as well, and the capacity to sue when things go wrong, hence laws get made to reduce the chances of payouts being made.

---

Quote:

---

Regardless of who pays (public monies vs private monies), people have become very poor at taking responsibility for their own decisions regarding their lives, and seek to blame and receive due compensation when things go wrong.

---

Quote:

---

You and I have had this conversation many times before, serg. You are an idealist, I am not. I think the conflict exists but we can do the best we can, and sometimes it can work okay.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Geezer

"From what I've been reading of the government's involvement with GM and Chrysler reorganization plans ..."

Cites, references please.

---

Quote:

---

But private insurance companies don't have the ability to control people themselves.

---

Quote:

---

Health insurance industry consolidation a potential threat to providers
April 8, 2009

The nation's largest health insurance companies are poised to consolidate, although Aetna and UnitedHealth Group, among others, have not confirmed wide-held suspicions, reports the Chicago Tribune. Consolidation could provide already large players with economies of scale, and significant and arguably overwhelming leverage toward establishing reimbursement rates with doctors and hospitals. UnitedHealth is rumored to be interested in acquiring Coventry Health Care, while Aetna is reportedly keen to buy Humana. At the same time, smaller yet significant players such as Health Net are looking to divest themselves of some of their members that could be attractive to larger firms.

"In general, hospitals do worry if the super-insurers get bigger," said Melinda Hatton, general counsel for the American Hospital Association. The American Medical Association reports that one in six metropolitan areas in more than 300 U.S. markets is dominated by a single health insurer that covers at least 70 percent of patients enrolled in HMOs or PPOs.

"It becomes difficult for patients to have choice and doctors to get their patients the care that is needed because a monopoly has been created," Dr. James Rohack, a Texas cardiologist and AMA president-elect said. "Patients don't have as many other options."

---

Quote:

---

The Health Coach/Insurance Company – Employer plan to uses devices and phones for employees to prove their physical activity. So here we are thinking that monitors are only for seniors and children, well think again as here comes the health coach, reduced premiums for participating and showing proof of what you are doing, electronically. The Muve Gruve Device Measures your Inactivity –

... This device will even keep track of your sleep too, so how far will devices go?
The Human Audit Trail to automatically track your fitness and sleep and a few other things…It does sound a lot like big brother. The map is fine and pretty standard with many other sites and plans, but the human audit trail is still a bit scary, but if you go along, you earn a few dollars, so there’s an incentive to go along with the electronic umbilical cord and everybody gets to be friends with their running partners (in the video on the site). Many employers who still provide insurance are now requiring participation in their wellness programs for coverage. Risk management for the employer might reduce the rates if employees electronically connect to the audit trail.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
You're assuming that their ability to control people is based on competition

---

Quote:

---

Health insurance industry consolidation a potential threat to providers
April 8, 2009

The nation's largest health insurance companies are poised to consolidate, although Aetna and UnitedHealth Group, among others, have not confirmed wide-held suspicions, reports the Chicago Tribune.

---

Quote:

---

And while you're worried about theoretical intrusion into your life by government, the business is far ahead of you....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
It's funny how, whenever anyone complains about government intrusion, big-government fans start harping about the evils of corporate excess - as though that justifies the government doing it too. How's about neither?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
it is if the debt is based on a bubble, like a real estate or stock bubble. If I borrow $100,000 against a house which is valued at $500,000 and on which I owe a $400,000 mortgage, and the value of the house drops to $400,000, that $100,000 which I spent no longer exists.

---

Quote:

---

Banks routinely lend out money which does not exist. They lend out based on their capital (which is "real money"- typically about 5% of bank value) plus their assets- ie performing loans. If those assets should go under that money has in effect evaporated. I know its a screwed system, but that's the way it currently works.

---

Quote:

---

what sort of economic system could we possibly have where money can be made up?

---

Quote:

---

It's funny how, whenever anyone complains about government intrusion, big-government fans start harping about the evils of corporate excess - as though that justifies the government doing it too. How's about neither?

---

Quote:

---

What's really funny is how the same folk who are absolutely horrified at the government when it goes to war or tries to maintain national security are the ones who would absolutely trust it to perfectly run national health care or the national economy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
It's the one we have today. Speculative value forms an alternate currency with all the functions. The only difference is that the government has less control of it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
But you seem to always harp on the evils of government, and only when your nose is rubbed in it will you look at the mess corporations have made.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
It's funny how, whenever anyone complains about government intrusion, big-government fans start harping about the evils of corporate excess - as though that justifies the government doing it too. How's about neither?

---

What's really funny is how the same folk who are absolutely horrified at the government when it goes to war or tries to maintain national security are the ones who would absolutely trust it to perfectly run national health care or the national economy.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
One thing I notice every time this argument gets going:

Those opposed to universal health care always seem to assume that if you give government MORE control and oversight (not "total" control, but *more* control) over the insurance industry, it ALWAYS gets characterized as letting the government take over the entire insurance industry.

---

Quote:

---

Try it out, go into a shop and say "I'd like to buy that, I'm betting I'll have the money next week"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:

Quote:

---

Try it out, go into a shop and say "I'd like to buy that, I'm betting I'll have the money next week"

---

That is EXACTLY what happens. I buy it on credit with the idea that I'll have the money next month. And since people DON'T have the money, a lot of credit cards users go into default.

---

Quote:

---

I was listening to the Diane Rehm Show on single-payer healthcare yesterday (05/18). One of the guests was Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. He was proposing exactly that; letting the government take over the entire health insurance industry. When asked what would happen to the insurance industry, he said it'd go away and the employees would need to be retrained for other jobs.

---

Quote:

---

But there's no fake money there. YOU don't have the money, but the credit card company DOES. The shop receives real money. If you default on your informal loan, the credit company then takes steps to get back the real money that really exists that they handed over before. The money hasn't been invented.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Those opposed to universal health care always seem to assume that if you give government MORE control and oversight (not "total" control, but *more* control) over the insurance industry, it ALWAYS gets characterized as letting the government take over the entire insurance industry.

---

Quote:

---

... but shouldn't it, as a source of national pride if nothing else, be at least better than the system in place in Cuba?

---

Quote:

---

I AM bothered that we've allowed a cartel to control health care and essentially hold us hostage - that we've allowed corporations to hijack our government and use it to consolidate their control of our health care.

---

Quote:

---

Sarge wrote:

From my perspective, it's the "oversight" that's killing us. The most dangerous aspect of our current situation is the trend toward corporatism and national regulatory schemes only fuel that fire.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
Let's extend this to houses, because credit cards are unsecured debt. So, the lender moves to get the money back, which in this case is backed by real estate values. Only now, they are owed more money than the house is "worth". Now what?

---

Quote:

---

You buy the house, you hand over the $500,000 and it goes into the sellers savings account. Two weeks later "implausible terrible scenario #4" occurs, your house loses fifty percent of it's value, and you lose your job and can't pay the mortgage. The bank forecloses, but can only get $250,000 for the house on the open market.

"Ah" you say, "that means $250,000 has just vanished into thin air!"

No. Take a look at the Sellers savings account, it still says "$500,000".

---

Quote:

---

When: 1634-1637
Where: Holland
The amount the market declined from peak to bottom: This number is difficult to calculate, but, we can tell you that at the peak of the market, a person could trade a single tulip for an entire estate, and, at the bottom, one tulip was the price of a common onion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Thanks for bumping the thread to keep it up top while we wait on Finn and Geezer.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Can we count on you posting your stupid posts and at least get some value out of your presence ? Twice a day at about 12 hour intervals would be nice.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JKiddo:
And what I was saying is tha loans based on ephermal values are a form of currency CREATION. Where did that money come from? By putting a five with a bunch of zeros behind it into to the seller's account. What is backing that amount? A $250,000 value and a promise to pay which fell through. Yes, the seller has nice new crisp bills... it was the loan itself which turned "nothing" into "real money", the reason why some mortgage institutions are flirting with insolvency, and also why Obama is printing money as fast as he can ... to backfill all of that created money with actual currency.

---

Quote:

---

I don't think we'll ever agree on this, but I think the facts (deflation in the past 6-9 months) suports my POV.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
You mean I can't be interested in their reply ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
If that's true, then you should have NOTHING to post anything not directed TO YOU.

That'd be nice.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Meanwhile, neither Geezer nor Sarge have devised a viable alternative to the cluster-f*ck which is our very own privately-run health care system.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I'm a little tired of people handwaving with generalized, ideology-based concpets which have little basis in fact. So be specific. Look at where the rubber meets the road. Enlighten us.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

If you can figure out how to achieve your seemingly-contradictory goals, please let us know how. You're arguing AGAINST government oversight, yet also AGAINST corporatism. How do you curb corporatism without oversight? In other words, if you remove all government oversight (which seems to be the goal, going by everything you've posted), won't the corporations run wild and roughshod over us?]

---

Quote:

---

On another note, how do you feel about Tort Reform? Are you in favor of that kind of government oversight (limiting punitive and actual damage payment caps by government mandate), or do you prefer to let juries decide what is fair compensation for corporations gone wild?

---

Quote:

---

Repeal all legislation that prohibits people from providing health care to others who want it. Period.

---

Quote:

---

That's the point I've been making all along.

---

Quote:

---

If you look closely at how large interest groups ("corporations" in the sense of corporatism) express their power, it's through their manipulation of the political. They use it to curb competition and consolidate

---

Quote:

---

and they use it to enhance their own position at the expense of other groups. That's really what modern economicsboils down to - large, focused groups manipulating the economy for advantage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I know you really want to create a system of many providers and true competition, but inevitably it devolves into monopolism, whether the government is involved or not, due to economies of scale and other economic (not political) factors).

---

Quote:

---

In a real free market, large companies face a long list if disadvantages from their lumbering size that offset the advantages you focus on. They're slow to react to changing conditions and tend to eat themselves up from the inside out with waste and inefficiencies. They become deeply invested in the status quo and squelch free-thinking innovation in their ranks. These disadvantages translate into opportunities for smaller, focused companies.

---

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"currency was (n)ever created at any point"

Currency wasn't created - it takes a mint or a printing press to do that ! - but (currency denominated) wealth was.

---

Quote:

---

If my house goes from 100,000 to 500,000 (for illustration purposes only !) and someone goes to the bank and gets a loan to buy it - where does that 500,000 come from ? Remember, banks aren't required to have all the value of the loans that they write on-hand, or to even show that they are guaranteed that money in the future.

---

Quote:

---

Sure, small companies have precious little advantage left in the current climate

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
The end result of unconscious economic forces: economies of scale, the big eating the smaller and less profitable, combined with the conscious desire to GET RID OF THE COMPETITION - virtually ensures that with or WITHOUT government assistance, the trend is from small to larger to monopoly.

If you truly had studied economics you would know this, and your blind faith in competition is puzzling.

---

Quote:

---

if government intervention was constrained to breaking up the monopolies you believe to be inevitable, I'd have no complaints. But the vast bulk of state policy does exactly the opposite. It stifles competition, punishes innovation, and works to maintain the status quo. The amount of effort spent combating monopolies is minuscule in comparison.

---