Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
10. Weird. I was shouted down as a RW paid troll hack for saying as much during the debate.
Reply to KG (Reply #9)
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:41 AM
Sep 2014

This was wholly predictable. In fact, it was impossible for there to be any other outcome. There's even a slush fund to pad profits during transitions such as plans being deprecated for lack of mandated coverages and employer implementation.

If the government plan relies on for-profit corporations then the government finds itself protecting corporate profits, even if the corporate model is a net loser. Taxpayer money must then be shunted to the profit line -- protecting the corporation from the consequences of its misjudgments (assuming no avarice *giggle*). There is no incentive to correct the bad model and for all we know the tax-shunting pols are stockholders.

Anybody saying anything differently is either too naïve or outright diabolic.

One day they'll learn to listen to the cynical and world-weary 20-something young woman.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Why Health Insuranc...»Reply #10