You didn't get a public option or you didn't get single payer and now your pissed.

[TheKentuckian]

24. What free lunch is to be had from Single Payer, a public option, or an NHS?

I'm sure some may believe such but get real if you think most advocates of these approaches think it is free.

Personally, I wasn't even opposed to any and all mandates but to this specific design. I do not understand the mandate is a mandate is a mandate people, I tend to think them simplistic regardless of where they stand on this one.

Many are aware that these systems would rely on taxes rather than fees which are almost always more progressive and affordable for poor and working folks. They also have pretty good reasons to trust government as the gatekeeper to access over what has been one of the most predatory industries in history.

You built in a dangerously naive assumption in your "hypothesis", that the quality of care is the same and skipped cost because you want to unload on this overblown "free rider" horseshit.

Let's be honest, high earners, the rich, and the wealthy always come out ahead on fees because in scale with the economy, the fees have to be at least arguably affordable for the masses so they do much better than typically would be in the cards with progressive taxes and conversely with progressive taxes the poor and working class folks take on less weight and those with the most take more of the load.

Now, personally I opposed the mandate as passed and agree that the Commerce Clause was stretched out of all proportion to justify the action and The Supreme Court bailed Congress and the President out by magic wanding the whole deal into a tax, which was stridently not the intention of the writers of the legislation.

I oppose the law in totality because I think it is bad law and poorly structured, to the point of needing an even more drastic overhaul by far than this fake reform that leaves the existing system fully in place and profit centers unaffected.
I've paid shitloads into the system and have got back far less than put in and that is accounting for birth and childhood. The only major ailment I've had, I had no coverage being employed where nothing was offered and nobody paid my bills, I did and still do (another reason the free rider shit gets little traction with me, I suspect as much blood as can be squeezed from busted folks with no coverage and then they jack the rates to hit the worst off far harder than multi-billion dollar members of the cartel).

What I'm wanting is value and you don't get that by schemes to get premiums as low as possible with a bunch of scammy cost sharing, no consumer choice, and thousands of tiny fragmented pools overseen by flat busted, or plain overwhelmed state regulators going against a very over powered industry with an anti-trust exemption.

Can a brotha get access to an exchange? Shouldn't we at bare minimum, make the exchange a single national entity to maximize or collective bargaining power and volume purchasing?
Why should most people be locked out of the exchanges and how do we get to even apply basic market pressure on a product we are mandated to buy but have no choice in?

Also, why do you want single payer if you believe the cartel is just as good, as you assert? Seems like double talk to me and you misrepresent positions to accuse when I've been banging the same drums before this shit even started.

I support single payer but did not push it during the debate, didn't even demand a public option (though it at least would allow an alternative gatekeeper which would keep the cartel from rebelling in unison and forcing NHS/Congress to back down because there is no other choice) but instead focused on the structure being put into place and thus ignored on the left caught up in nearly impossible shiny objects and blown off by the "sensible" types who drummed fear of failure and pushed pay for play features.
No, I wouldn't be satisfied with the "sliver" public option because it would only serve as a dumping ground for customers the cartel sees as too undesirable.

Seriously, folks are trying to pretend someone (an unresourced someone at that) is going to be breaking balls when we couldn't even muster a repeal of an anti-trust exemption? Really? How honest is that position?

Too many people just need tight little answers to everything, sound bite shit, when in reality things are complex and you have to mind the moving parts.