rberq wrote:My remark, if you would keep it in context, was to keep them honest in the sense of not cancelling your health insurance AFTER you get sick in order to get out of paying. I think you would agree that is a reasonable imposition on the poor abused insurance companies.
I agree with you, if regulation of insurance companies alone were adequate, that would be the preferred solution. Unfortunately, the health care problem is multi-pronged, involving insurance companies, hospital practices, drug companies, equipment manufacturers, and affordability. Regulating one prong, as New York does, would be good enough for you and me, maybe, but wouldn’t touch the other problems.
I am ok with regulation of the financial industries and insurance companies. I always have been.
So why are you a proponent of Obamacare when you fully understand that
1. The government has been as dishonest as the insurance companies in their approach and
2. regulation would be a far more balanced approach, that is, balancing the public and the private sectors which is how is should be. (You agreed that in NYS it works.) ?
The single extenuating circumstance of the health care industry is simply that third party payments have induced a cost-push inflation in health care
because no insured has to consider the cost of medical treatment on a personal level. That has caused the "calamity" that has everyone in a tizzy. Sixty years ago, no one worried too much about it. now, there is a difference in how the rich and poor are treated on the high end, catastrophic and end-of-life issues. Now because we are told that the fountain of youth may be within our reach technologically, we cannot be denied such "rights" just because we are poor. That is the political baloney that has caused this entire mess.
Some people have money and are accorded privilege as a result, and some are not. It's an issue for the dems to whack republicans and grab power tugging the heartstrings of Americans through a complicit media. It's rubbish. Soon reality will set in for Obamacare, too. Reality always finds its way to the surface. The laws of economics can be shifted but not broken. Resources are limited. Soon death panels (or end-of-life decision boards, or what evs) will inevitably make the tough choices that money, or the lack of it, made earlier. Ultimately, health care will be provided and end-of-life issues will be solved in much the same way as they are now, but not with the same quality as in the past.
Federal government has the power to regulate interstate commerce. It does not have plenary power to take over or run any aspect of the economy it chooses. This will be revisited in the Supreme Court when we get to that phase.