• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Why the murder of Healthcare Insurance CEO should end Private Health Insurance

Explain the not-for-profit private healthcare insurance providers in Australia.
I raised the same issue. In the UK we have mutual insurance companies, which can be for profit, but the profits belong to the members i.e. those who have taken out insurance policies. The insured are the owners, so the ethos of the insurance company is different if they are not required to maximise profit for shareholders.
 
certainly you could devise any number of ways to collect money and use it to pay for things.

my question is how does the not-for-profit private insurance company in australia or the uk perform relative to public options?
 
my question is how does the not-for-profit private insurance company in australia or the uk perform relative to public options?
They are in addition to public options. The universal system we have (Medicare) provides free hospital treatment in public hospitals. But there are waiting times, you don’t get a private room when hospitalised and you don’t get a choice of doctors. If you value those things, as I do, you take out private insurance. It costs me a few thousand a year, but I’m happy to pay.
 
They are in addition to public options. The universal system we have (Medicare) provides free hospital treatment in public hospitals. But there are waiting times, you don’t get a private room when hospitalised and you don’t get a choice of doctors. If you value those things, as I do, you take out private insurance. It costs me a few thousand a year, but I’m happy to pay.
it sounds like you’re saying they provide supplemental coverage.
 
You think profoundly, ignorantly wrong.
Wrong, yes. Profoundly wrong, no. There are only a handful and I don't know many people that could name even one. Also non-profit in the USA is often not, in practical terms, non-profit. They just have to show no profits on the books of the entity, not the people that work for that entity.
 
Last edited:
Part of the problem is that the oligarchy has effectively disenfranchised the voting public. A lot of people would love to be able to vote for someone who would change it, but they aren't given that option.
That is just applying the principles of capitalism and rewarding the holders of capital to the political sphere. We should celebrate oligarchs they are the proper leaders in capitalism.
 
i agree and if us private insurance did a better job at managing healthcare costs and providing quality healthcare the numbers would simply be different than they are. but all the us model has got are high costs and a bunch of other average or worse data points on quality of care. and some surveys that people are ok with this i guess
Because those are not their moral obligations under capitalism, that is to maximize shareholder value no matter how many people die as long as the deaths don't cost you money. Hence why Martin Shkreli is a model of how to run a business in the health care sphere. He should win a medal as a hero of capitalism.
 
And not good beer at that.

Your post says it well. Capitalism can be very advantageous. But like everything, it has drawbacks. It doesn't always produce the best results. The Robertson screwdriver head was superior to the Phillips head. Betamax was superior to VHS.

This is actually not true. They were competing products each with advantages and disadvantages. Sure Beta had better picture quality, but its tapes had shorter run times. How often did people when recording things on their home VCR use the 2 hour setting for the tapes vs the 6 hour? If Beta could have fit a movie onto a single cassette instead of needing multiple of them it might be able to be considered better but in reality people chose the media that they liked more.

Boiling down two competing products to a single attribute and saying the one with the better attribute is better is very poor logic. Next up we will evaluate automotive choices solely based on fuel efficiency, and prove that the smart car is the superior car.
 
Yeah, better example
Yea but it is wrong for slaves to rebel, jesus said so. Aproving of Luigi's actions would be like aproveing of a slave revolt. Like how Haiti was made to pay for centuries for the way they stole the legitimate property of their owners.
 
Back
Top Bottom