Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man

the difference between private insurance and government provided insurance is that the government care is guaranteed.


Not true. In many, if not most, government run systems, there is a certain amount of de facto or de jure rationing of health care.

 Quote:
there's no profit margin for the government. no businessman deciding whether to treat you based on money. private insurance companies are worse than the government, they have more power.


You are very naive if you really believe that bureaucrats won't look for ways to cut costs to curry favor with their superiors.

Furthermore, have you forgotten the golden rule, that is, "he who has the gold makes the rules?"

If the government pays for health care, there is a strong incentive for the government to regulate personal behavior, on the theory that said behavior costs the taxpayers more in health care. Which, on its face, might be appealing to you in that "nanny state" mentality sort of of way.

However, what behavior is deemed "costly" would probably be tied to whatever theories, medical and political, are in vogue at a given time. So maybe under a moderate to liberal administration the banned behaviors (see, eg, smoking) are ones who agree should be banned. But eventually the political pendulum will swing, as it always does. And then some behavior you enjoy (see, eg, gay sex) will be seen as inherently dangerous and worthy of regulation.

The power to tax and the power to spend is the power to regulate. Do you really want a centralized planner deciding what you, or others, can do with their bodies?