I am confused. Am I supposed to fear a government health insurance option because it will be really bad at providing health care or because it will be so good it will drive private insurers out of business?
Fair enough, Jeff. Although I am curious about why you think the government "should not" offer health insurance, I am still also left wondering how those who make them reconcile the two opposing arguments in my original post.
Roch - you should fear the government involvement for a couple of reasons. The government runs Amtrak and the Postal Service too...looked at their books lately?
The government also set up another "subsidized" alternative to the private markets one time...it was called Fannie Mae. With an implicit (then it was anyway) federal guarantee, Fannie could borrow far more cheaply than any other competitor and, so the theory goes, could offer mortgage rates far below the private sector....sound familiar? How'd that work out for us?
The Obama plan for health care is Fannie Mae, all over. No private plan will ever be able to compete with a government subsidized "non-profit" plan...the question you should ask is can the federal government actually run this? And if you think they can, I'd like to know on what historical precedent you base that on...
Roch: The only thing you have to fear is fear itself.
ReplyDeleteHowever, weren't you one of the loudest critics of the War in Iraq because of the deficit spending involved?
How can you now be so satisfied with the health care bill's expansion of deficit spending?
Haven't you seen the CBO estimates on the presidents spending plans?
"weren't you one of the loudest critics of the War in Iraq because of the deficit spending involved?"
ReplyDeleteNo.
Still would like an answer to my question though.
I don't think you need fear either one.
ReplyDeleteMy view is that the government should not be in to the insurance business, therefore I oppose the public choice option.
Fair enough, Jeff. Although I am curious about why you think the government "should not" offer health insurance, I am still also left wondering how those who make them reconcile the two opposing arguments in my original post.
ReplyDeleteMaybe because they aren't opposing arguments. Put on logical thinking cap now:
ReplyDeleteGovernment offers health insurance. Companies lose customers, the public ends up with an inferior product.
The cheapest car isn't the best car, but sometimes gets a lot of market share because of price.
Roch: I saw this article this morning. It does a better job of explaining how I feel than I can.
ReplyDeleteThat article refers to a particular provision just "discovered" in a proposed bill. You must be prescient.
ReplyDeleteRoch - you should fear the government involvement for a couple of reasons. The government runs Amtrak and the Postal Service too...looked at their books lately?
ReplyDeleteThe government also set up another "subsidized" alternative to the private markets one time...it was called Fannie Mae. With an implicit (then it was anyway) federal guarantee, Fannie could borrow far more cheaply than any other competitor and, so the theory goes, could offer mortgage rates far below the private sector....sound familiar? How'd that work out for us?
The Obama plan for health care is Fannie Mae, all over. No private plan will ever be able to compete with a government subsidized "non-profit" plan...the question you should ask is can the federal government actually run this? And if you think they can, I'd like to know on what historical precedent you base that on...