I recently re-read 1984. I do not see how “Public Option” is in the least “Orwellian”. Can you explain this without exposing too much irrational distrust of government?

My mistake. I should have said not for profit health insurance plan. Not health care plan. It is my feeling that we pay an excessive amount of our insurance dollars for profit and shareholders dividends and that our health care suffers. We have no control over the yearly increases in premiums and deductibles decreases in coverage. I do not think that we should expect to get our health insurance for free, but I want my money going to pay the health care professionals that deserve the money, not the insurance company execs and their private jets.

It is the american public that is being robbed here. I was recently laid off from a job in a profession that will not be bouncing back for at least a year or more. There is no way that I can afford to continue my insurance for more than a few months. I can get cheaper, lower coverage…with a $10,000 dollar deductible. COBRA won’t work as the firm I worked for is too small and the state assistance program is completely overwhelmed and there is a two month wait for applications to be reviewed. If I get sick or injured, I’ll be sure to thank you for paying my bills through your higher insurance rates and medical care costs.

In regards to your comments about buying cell phones, computers, etc. These are not truly necessities, and last time I checked, the loss of one of these items does not cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or have the potential of bankrupting you as a single major illness or injury can.

And finally, let’s please drop the ‘facism’ stuff. It is a gross misunderstanding of the word and practice and does not belong in intelligent debate.

Once again, A public OPTION is a public choice…

Brian, I think you confuse label with the actual content. The title “Public OPTION” is positively Orwellian.

Unfortunatly, Insurance decides what you get, when you get it, and how you get services.

And you think this won’t be true when the insurance company is the government?

You talk of guns to the head but the biggest gun is that weilded by insurance over doctors, patients, and hospitals.

No, government has the biggest gun.

I agree with you that there are serious problems with health insurance, but understanding those problems requires more than lashing out at the first convenient target.

The problem isn’t that for-profit insurance companies make business-oriented decisions, the problem is that they have to compete within the particular rules of their marketplace. Unfortunately government hasn’t done such a good job at setting the rules.

If government is incompetent as referee, what makes you think it will be more competent as both referee and player?

When I pay for insuranvce then I expect to be insured. I do not expect the insurance company to turn around and un-ilaterally decide whether to extend the benefits that I have already paid for. I do not expect the insurance company to give me a lemon when I paid for an apple. I expect to get what I pay for. Unfortunatly, Insurance decides what you get, when you get it, and how you get services. Insurance unilaterally decides whether, after taking your money in payment, whether to even fulfill their side of the buisness contract. AND if they decide not to, then who is to ensure that they live up to their side of the bargain?
You say take you buisness elsewhere…. sounds good and works on paper. BUT the problem lies in the fact that EVERY insurance company does exactly the same thing. They decide what you pay and what you get for your money. That cannot continue. You talk of guns to the head but the biggest gun is that weilded by insurance over doctors, patients, and hospitals. Rememeber that things on paper may look nice and logical but in real life turn out to not be logical or effective.

Where have we just seen that scenario? Oh yes, it was called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage crisis. For those of you with your heads in the sand, the government forced banks to make loans to overly risky borrowers, and that is why there was such a huge collapse in the financial sector. Of course, that point is not widely reported on the Telly News Geared to Sell The Status Quo.

Take a look at markets where people don’t have to be forced to buy. Cell phones, computers, TVs, video games. No subsidy needed there. In fact, in health care, there have been subsidies for such a long time, which together with all the subsidies, taxes, quotas, and other government interventions = you have no resources to cover your own health care costs. Now the government wants to enfeeble even more people, by further corrupting the health insurance industry. Is there no end to Obama’s fascism?

So, what you are really saying is you support holding a gun to people’s heads as a viable alternative to uncoerced competition? You are advocating more legalized theft. You will achieve destruction of the health care industry. How is that going to help anybody? Please, for the love of rationality, wake up already.