[Peace-discuss] Re: marketplace mythologies was:
Insurance Companies Should Compete
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigs.ag
Fri Dec 4 21:07:59 CST 2009
I've never taken a flu shot but have vaccinated animals for the flu. I
consider the H1N1 "crisis" to be a huge scam.
On 12/4/2009 1:18 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> Good thoughts all.
>
> Of course another big difference between our system and the Cuban one
> is that their health care is configured to serve the largest number of
> people with the largest number of problems possible. They loan out
> their doctors in the way we loan out "military advisers." Of course,
> politics plays a big role in who gets these doctors, but the point of
> real interest here is the orientation towards serving the needs of
> large numbers of people. With the resources we have, compared to
> Cuba, imagine what we could do - how many friends we could make, if
> you want to look at it that way, but also how many lives we could save.
>
> Similar to food, the problem is not one of supply, but one of
> distribution.
>
> We spend a lot of money or R&D, for example, curing diseases - which
> we should - but the way we prioritize leaves basic problems affecting
> many more people largely untouched. What this actually means is that
> these cures are only for certain people, which sounds a lot less
> obviously good and important. Just to illustrate the perspective more
> clearly, an awful lot is written about worldwide deaths from various
> causes - AIDS, tobacco smoke, obesity, H1N1 - all nasty killers, but
> meanwhile the most common causes of deaths of children in the world
> are things like diarrhea, easily avoidable and easily curable.
>
> And one final point, I hear a lot of noise opposing publicly-run
> health care, but people sure as hell lined up for that free H1N1
> vaccine. Interesting.
>
> Ricky
>
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>
> --- On *Fri, 12/4/09, Stuart Levy /<slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Stuart Levy <slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re: marketplace mythologies was:
> Insurance Companies Should Compete
> To: "David Green" <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
> Date: Friday, December 4, 2009, 12:39 PM
>
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 10:35:32AM -0800, David Green wrote:
> > Economist Dean Baker repeatedly argues that two (anti-market) things
> > artifically raise the cost of healthcare: Patent protection for
> drugs and
> > limits on foreign doctors in the U.S., keeping doctors' earnings
> artificially
> > high. I would add to that that medical schools should be open to
> all comers
> > with basic undergraduate coursework. Drastically expand medical
> school
> > capacity, and let anyone who wants to sink or swim. Maybe we can
> learn
> > something from Cuba in this regard.
> >
> > DG
>
> yes, that's a good point. i'm uncomfortable with Baker's simply
> lowering
> limits on foreign doctors -- not because we'd suffer, but because
> it'd drive
> a brain drain -- our overinflated health costs will draw doctors
> from places
> that need them more than we do. but i really like the idea of
> wider access to
> medical school to increase the supply of trained medical people
> here (whether
> doctors or not).
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=baldwinricky at yahoo.com>>
> > To: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag </mc/compose?to=ewj at pigs.ag>>
> > Cc: Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>
> > Sent: Fri, December 4, 2009 12:07:46 PM
> > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Re: marketplace mythologies was:
> Insurance Companies Should Compete
> >
> >
> > And Leahy deserves it, but it's not necessarily timely on the
> occasion of his being right about something.
> >
> > And I happen to think, I'm afraid, that it is you who are not
> digging deep enough into the problems with competition or health
> care. Single payer certainly does actually cut costs - hugely.
> I'd read up on it again if I were you. It does this mainly by
> eliminating an entire layer of bureaucratic nonsense that
> insurance companies thrive on - that's right, bureaucracy isn't
> just for the government; in fact not even mostly - and by
> eliminating the profit necessity on the insurance side. That is,
> an insurance company always has to charge more simply because they
> have to turn a profit. That money has to come from somewhere. It
> mainly comes from labor, as profit normally does, but holding
> labor costs constant you can assume the consumer pays more.
> >
> > Why do we care about labor costs? Well, if we work for a living
> the answer is fairly obvious. That's us. We are the labor cost.
> Lowering labor costs means we get paid less. I don't work for an
> insurance company, you say. But it doesn't matter, because the
> economy is not a loose association of little budget-islands; it's
> an interconnected system. One company lowers labor costs, the
> others need to as well. That's back to that "competition" idea
> again. This is another one of the ways competition is enormously
> destructive: because it privileges profit over human needs -
> specifically it privileges the increasing concentration of profits
> over the supplying to people of what they need to live.
> >
> > There is no denying that the effects of some regulations have
> the effect that Wayne describes. It's just that it's not the
> whole picture, and not even the most important part of it. For
> one thing, as I said before, the shutting out of competitors is
> not solely - or even primarily - an effect of regulation; it's
> mainly a direct consequence of "market" forces themselves.
> Different regulations simply work differently, so it really
> doesn't make sense to generalize in the way you're doing - which I
> realize is the way we are often taught to do.
> >
> > It's not that competition doesn't exist (the way the so-called
> "free enterprise" system doesn't exist), or that regulation is
> always good or bad. It depends on the effects.
> >
> > Similarly, another (related) golden icon is the Law of Supply
> and Demand, which as Marx famously noted, works - like the Law of
> Gravity works when your house falls in on you.
> >
> > Ricky
> >
> > "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
> >
> > --- On Thu, 12/3/09, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
> </mc/compose?to=ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag </mc/compose?to=ewj at pigs.ag>>
> > >Subject: Re: marketplace mythologies was: Insurance Companies
> Should Compete
> > >To: "Ricky Baldwin" <baldwinricky at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=baldwinricky at yahoo.com>>
> > >Cc: "Jenifer Cartwright" <jencart13 at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=jencart13 at yahoo.com>>, "Peace-discuss"
> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>
> > >Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009, 9:14 PM
> > >
> > >
> > >Ricky,
> > >
> > >I guess I really was poking fun at Leahy's doublespeak and the
> ideologic play on words
> > >it puts him in. Patrick Leahy has contributed as much to the
> bureaucratic morass that
> > >characterizes the highly regulated practice of medicine in Amerika.
> > >
> > >You are not digging deep enough into the
> medical-industrial-legal complex
> > >and the web of rules and regulations that prevent competition.
> > >
> > >Single-payer only changes who pays. It doesnt change the cost.
> > >Single-payer just ensures the foxes of the medical industry
> that the hens are plump and well-fed.
> > >I want to stomp on the foxes.
> > >
> > >One not need to call upon the dark annals of history to refute
> your argument against the
> > >benefits of competition. A few days ago I became leery that my
> auto insurance was getting more and more expensive.
> > >A few clicks on the internet last night...now I am saving $126
> per month without having
> > >to speak with any insurance salesman at all. Competition in
> the marketplace is a good thing.
> > >
> > >Surely you are not so semiotically inflexible that you can't
> engage in metaphor about the marketplace.
> > >Perhaps you prefer to have Big Sibling make all of our choices
> for us? Or just for the rest of us?
> > >
> > >*
> > >Regulation serves abusive corporations because it raises the
> bar for new entrants.
> > >It's another case of the collusion of the "left" at its worst
> ("stupid") and the
> > >"right" at its worst ("evil"). The "do-gooders" want more
> regulations because they think that more regs will make
> > >their miserable and pathetic fear-driven lives "safer". The
> greed-driven corporate plutocrats accept more regulations
> > >with glee, because for them it represents a way to slime their
> competition out of the market.
> > >
> > >The great bulk of the work of the FDA is no longer to provide
> consumer protection but to
> > >provide a competition free shelter for the entrenched companies
> who produce materia medica.
> > >
> > >Even the Obots bumped up against an impediment with their own
> goofy regs in delivering the flu vaccine,
> > >and the government had to declare an emergency to bypass its
> own competition limiting rules.
> > >
> > >The insurance companies paid a lot of money to their lobbyists
> to get those exempting regulations passed.
> > >Practically No one in America seems to be serious about
> providing decent medical care at a reasonable price.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On 12/3/2009 5:15 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> > >Um ... REMOVING their EXEMPTION from anti-trust laws is
> "getting the government out of the way"???
> > >>
> > >>This is a common misconception of how the famous "marketplace"
> (a ridiculous name, anyway - as if Exxon and GM were just tables
> at Lincoln Square). But this misconception is at the very heart
> of the fog that keeps the economic emperors (clothes or not) in
> power. It is the insidious myth that, but for the interference of
> "government", free competition would keep businesses honest,
> efficient and meritorious, even serving humanity, etc.
> > >>
> > >>In fact the reality, as long history shows repeatedly, is
> quite different, and often opposite. Left to their own devices
> (or the devices they can creatively acquire) profitable businesses
> engage in ruthlessly destructive wars, the very least result of
> which is anything resembling "efficiency" -- with the possible
> exception of human needs (such as clean water, air, land, food,
> etc.) -- and very quickly consolidate themselves horizontally and
> vertically into monopolies that act as they please with the lives
> of the puny humans trespassing on the surface of their planet.
> > >>
> > >>It is against this trend, as a block and tackle against
> gravity, that the government enforces (when it does) anti-trust
> laws. But there are always opponents, who stand or believe they
> stand to benefit from monopolizing trends. There are others who
> believe this trend is so powerful that anti-trust laws are by
> nature inefficient (working against gravity), and the proper
> response of a people organized ought to be not just to allow
> monopolies to form, but in fact to aid them, with the eventual
> goal of then using the government to take them over and run them
> in the community interest. This of course assumes better
> government than we ... have ... have had ... in ... forever.
> > >>
> > >>(Even when opportunities arise, i.e., the bailouts, our
> government smiles and announces that the problem was the biggest
> corporations hadn't stolen enough yet, fast enough, so we'll just
> give it to them - poor, little, inefficient thieves.)
> > >>
> > >>Others say - as in the case of the proposed merger between NBC
> and Comcast - they are already too big; bust 'em up. They are
> given permission (by us) to run these shell games, er, enterprises
> on our land, our airwaves, using our waters and forests, etc., and
> we have the right to set some parameters.
> > >>
> > >>But even proponents of this view often assume that competition
> is inherently good. It isn't. It's often incredibly destructive
> and wasteful, besides being inhumane. It leads sweatshops in New
> York and Indonesia, slavery in Florida's fields and in the homes
> of the well-to-do, the brothels of LA and Thailand, etc.
> > >>
> > >>On a more mundane level, it's competition that meant that when
> we lived in Champaign on a certain morning of the week every week
> we had to be awakened repeatedly starting at 2am by THIRTEEN
> garbage trucks going up and down our street, each collecting a can
> here and there and moving on. This uses several times the fuel,
> produces several times the pollution, etc., as a city service -
> and as a result raises the price to the "consumer" (funny term
> when you mean throwing away trash, isn't it?). Examples of this
> type are nearly infinite. Yet we persist in the belief that
> competition somehow helps us.
> > >>
> > >>But lest we (ok, I) digress too far, the issue here is health
> care. Do these bozos deserve exemptions from anti-trust laws?
> Did Al Capone? But the real answer to our health care woes is
> complex, surely, but just as surely includes some form of
> universal plan that covers everyone - single payer, national
> health, something. I don't say its perfect in places like England
> and Canada - the people there complain about it all the time - but
> when they hear about "our" system, they react as if you just
> proposed cannibalism. That's how barbaric it is.
> > >>
> > >>We'd all know it if we weren't scared stiff of the Jews,
> Commies, atheists, gays and immigrants hiding under our beds and
> in our bedroom closets.
> > >>
> > >>Ricky
> > >>
> > >>"Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
> > >>
> > >>--- On Thu, 12/3/09, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
> </mc/compose?to=ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag </mc/compose?to=ewj at pigs.ag>>
> > >>>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Insurance Companies Should
> Compete
> > >>>To: "Jenifer Cartwright" <jencart13 at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=jencart13 at yahoo.com>>
> > >>>Cc: "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>
> > >>>Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009, 3:42 PM
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Yes!
> > >>>
> > >>>Get government out of the way (by removing the nanny-state
> corporate-welfare protection)
> > >>>and let the Free Market Operate.
> > >>>
> > >>>Amen, Sister!
> > >>>
> > >>>"a free and fair marketplace. "
> > >>>
> > >>>That's the stuff!
> > >>>
> > >>>On 12/3/2009 3:25 PM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>--- On Thu, 12/3/09, Patrick Leahy <info at leahyforvermont.com
> </mc/compose?to=info at leahyforvermont.com>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>From: Patrick Leahy <info at leahyforvermont.com
> </mc/compose?to=info at leahyforvermont.com>>
> > >>>>>Subject: Insurance Companies Should Compete
> > >>>>>To: "Jenifer Cartwright" <jencart13 at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=jencart13 at yahoo.com>>
> > >>>>>Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009, 1:55 PM
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Dear Jenifer,
> > >>>>>On Tuesday, I took to the Senate floor and formally filed
> my amendment to repeal the antitrust exemption for health
> insurance companies.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I look forward to debating this critical measure during our
> deliberations on the broader health care reform bill. After all,
> to bring insurance costs down, we've got to introduce more
> competition in the marketplace -- and my amendment will do just that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Already, nearly 40,000 members of our Leahy online
> community -- including you -- have emailed their Senators urging
> support of this amendment, and 18 of my colleagues have now
> co-sponsored it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>But we need more Senators to join us to get this critical
> amendment passed.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Click here to invite your friends & family to forward an
> email to their Senators too -- and urge them to support our
> amendment to repeal the antitrust exemption for health insurance
> companies!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Our amendment will introduce antitrust oversight to the
> health insurance industry, ruling out of bounds egregious
> anti-competitive conduct like price fixing that harms hard-working
> American families and raises costs. It's an outrageous loophole
> that must be closed.
> > >>>>>The health insurance industry should compete on a level
> playing field just like every other business in America, large and
> small, so that consumers know that the price they're being quoted
> is the product of a free and fair marketplace.
> > >>>>>That's why our amendment repealing the health insurance
> industry's antitrust exemption is so important -- but I need your
> help, right now, to get it passed.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Click here to invite your friends & family to forward an
> email to their Senators too -- and urge them to support our
> amendment to repeal the antitrust exemption for health insurance
> companies!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>As we move forward with debate on the health care reform
> bill, much of our discussion will be about bringing costs down
> while expanding and improving insurance coverage.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>This amendment is a vital part of that effort, and we've
> got to do everything we can to get it passed. Please invite your
> friends & family to email their Senators now.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Thanks so much for your help.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Sincerely,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Patrick Leahy
> > >>>>>U.S. Senator
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>P.S. A vote on our amendment could come in a matter of
> days, so please take a few seconds, right now, to make your voice
> heard. Please invite your friends & family to email their Senators
> now.
> > >>>>>Visit LeahyForVermont.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Paid for by Leahy for U.S. Senator Committee, Inc.
> > >>>>>PO Box 1042
> > >>>>>Montpelier, VT 05601
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > ________________________________
> >
> > >>>>>Visit the address below to tell your friends and family
> about this message.
> > >>>>> Tell-a-friend!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up
> for Leahy for Senate.
> > >>>>>This message was sent to jencart13 at yahoo.com
> </mc/compose?to=jencart13 at yahoo.com>. Visit your subscription
> management page to modify your email communication preferences or
> update your personal profile. To stop ALL email from Leahy for
> Senate, click to remove yourself from our lists (or reply via
> email with "remove or unsubscribe" in the subject line).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > ________________________________
> >
> > >>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>Peace-discuss mailing list
> > >>>>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> > >>>>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>Peace-discuss mailing list
> > >>>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> > >>>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list