“let the free market decide” invites corruption without proper oversight. *However*,

“let the free market decide” invites corruption without proper oversight. *However*, _IF_ done right, this could work. It’s a huge “if” though. It could also end up a disaster without proper regulation of “the 620″. But would it be a worse disaster than what we have now? Hard to say. Keeping ears open on this one.


“any port in a storm”. It could get worse. There’s a lot of failed health-care systems around the world that are worse. I rather liked England’s model the little I know of it.


Unlike education though, the money ends up in the hands of precisely the people who would make up “the 620″ currently.

His path is just an easier path for their wealth.

This is a concern. It simplifies things for them, but will it better things for us?

Gotta watch smooth-sounding words.


I’d be fine with a two-tier system: Guaranteed basic healthcare for all with “extras” for those who can afford it. In segment of “those who want more”, I’m ok with “The 620″ ruling their healthcare system.

But for someone like me, if I just want to get to the doctor’s and get a basic prescription or ask a few questions, I should just be able to go in.


I just never thought I’d see the answer to the question:
“What would happen if Ayn Rand’s philosophy governed a nation?”


They were too wrapped up in their heads. Its all stuff that sounds great on paper but when you try to enact it, they’re both unrealistic.

Ayn Rand would be a terrible leader. But Universal healthcare in this context maximizes profit, so it follows a ‘rational self-interest.’


“let the market decide” maximizes profit. It does so in a naked way versus the shell game currently played. [long before Obama came along, healthcare was a shell game Learned a lot working for Pharma about insurance] but if you combine ‘let the market decide’ with closed boardroom mentality, you lose all transparency.


Market’s not about reducing costs but about maximizing profit. Lowering expenses is one way. Lowering product quality is another. There’s many roads to profit.


Its John Stossel. I’ll probably agree with him :) He has a way about him that I always liked.

I didn’t like Obamacare but was unaffected by it [so far].
I didn’t like the system we had before that.
But Obama rode the coattails of Bush’s Federalization of everything.


Appreciate the summary ’cause lunch is almost ready and I don’t usually sit through videos where someone’s talking to me, unless it’s about science or engineering (or maybe philosophy.. a little).

This is the issue I have with Trump’s idea: 620 private insurance companies. Think about it. What changes compared to now? It simplifies their routes for profit and we’re *still* stuck with insurance.

Needs to be a safety net at the bottom, for the bottom, regardless. What the ‘on top’ ppl do is what they do.



Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 + five =

Leave a Reply