[WS:] Playing the devil's advocate, it can be argued that increasing the demand for service will lower the operating costs of inscos and consequently the price. This is the same logic that asks for public health insurance. One condition under which this would not obtain is inscos cherry picking - but the Obamacare explicitly prohibits it, at lest in principle. So at least in principle private company, if properly regulated, can deliver a public service in a similar way as a government agency does. In fact, I've seen that in Edinburgh, Scotland, where private bus companies provide public transit at the same price to the riders as a public agency would.
I can see different advantages and disadvantages of each venue for working conditions - but that is a separate issue.
Wojtek
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:44 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
> Yes. But when the government says you have to pay overpriced premiums to a
> bloated for-profit corporate oligopoly for questionable care it sounds like
> a relatively healthy reaction. Still you're right.
>
> ---------------
>
> How can you tell that Woj is right? How can you tell whether people are resisting being forced to pay premiums for care that might never come or whether they just don't want the gummint to make them do something?
>
> If you're not getting health insurance through employer & you don't have a good income, health insurance is not affordable.
>
>
> Joanna
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>