Reading the letters to the editor concerning health insurance the writer was complaining about the current inefficiencies. Their point was that the private insurers skim of 300billion a year in administrative costs, therefore we need a single payer system.
My question is do you think the government or private companies will have lower administrative expenses?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Having spent a little time as a government employee and married to another, I can say quite confidently that those with a profit motive will have a greater desire to control overhead costs. Many in the government are solely concerned with ensuring their budget is never cut. Look at the Department of Energy. It was created in the late 70's to end our dependence on foreign oil and to get fuel costs under control. How's that worked out? DOE is now a cabinet department with thousands of employees and an annual budget of billions of dollars. It is in the best interest of those employees not to achieve that goal. Just like the race hustlers would be out of business if racial problems (real or perceived) ended. Sorry for rambling, just amazed at the thought that government involvement would make any thing more efficient. Anyone want their health care controlled by the folks who came up with the Bureau of Motor Vehicles???
ReplyDeleteThat's why the letters to the editor are better than the funny pages.
ReplyDeleteTo paraphrase Churchill, capitalism is the most inefficient distribution system ever except for every other distribution system ever tried.
ReplyDelete