"...And let me say a word in their (health care insurance) defense. The law demands and requires corporations like a health insurance company to maximize profits for the shareholders, and if they don't do that, their violating the law. So our laws are set up to...it's antithetical to what's best for people. If they are required by law to make a profit, and the only way to make a profit is by denying claims or cutting people off from their insurance or never taking them on in the first place, then that's not good for us. So that's why in my opinion we need to remove private health insurance - profit making health insurance from this and go the way of every other western industrialized country - that where it's not profit." - Michael Moore on Oprah. http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/54007 (go past the half way point, right after the clip of the woman in white giving her testimony)
Q: So what's wrong with Michael Moore's logic in that quote?
A: He lies about what a free market is. He claims we have private health insurance companies when in fact we don't...as he said they are regulated by the government to provide maximum profit for the shareholders.
In a free market with private health insurance companies, we would have competition which would bring down prices and increase quality of service. Right now the government is telling them to simply focus on maximizing profits or else they violate the law which completely screws up the market.
Yeah lets have this stupid government regulate everything about our health. Maybe they can do a marvelous job, like they have done with our public education system.
Ron Paul would get rid of the regulation and that would save us from taxes and we would go back to a stable currency (as opposed to fiat) which would save us from inflation and we all win in the end.

Our government SUBSIDIZES employer-provded health insurance. What did they expect to happen? As Dr. Paul says, if you subsidize something, you get more of it. Adverse selection in the insurance market occurs because insurance companies are prohibited by law to charge more for certain people (smokers, etc) than others. So everyone pays more.One thing I think middle class America is suffering from is the abuses of the insurance industry in the "free market." Ron Paul will need to address this issue in a more more in depth manner than he has, even as a doctor.


You came to that decision. Everyone else should have the right to decide that as well. We are all different people, there is no one size fits all.Dr Paul's statements about letting nurses make certain diagnoses might end up being a detriment though. I would have no qualms about taking a child with the sniffles to see a nurse. However, my old insurance plan used to try to herd me to a "nurse practioner" and her services weren't adequate for me.
1. Government programs are administered more efficiently than private ones. Half of the estimated $309 billion in health administration costs could be saved by shifting to national health insurance, claim Woolhandler and Himmelstein. After all, Medicare purportedly spends only 2% on administration, and Medicaid 5%, in contrast to private industry costs of 12% to 20%.
Such estimates, however, omit many costs that are spread through various agencies of federal, state, and local governments. If these are considered, the administrative overhead of public programs amounts to $0.27 per each dollar of benefits to patients, compared with $0.16 for private insurance- 69% more, according to a study by Mark Litow for the Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI), March 1994.
2. Government accounting is honest. While passing a corporate crime bill quadrupling the penalties for ordinary "mail fraud" from 5 years to 20 years in prison, forcing attorneys practicing before the SEC to turn in their clients, and imposing the same punishment for "attempted" crimes as for crimes actually committed, the government persists in financial mismanagement much worse than Enron's. For 5 years, the GAO has been unable to render an opinion on government consolidated financial statements because of material weakness in internal controls. In 2000 and 2001, $463 billion was looted from trust funds (T Schatz, Scripps Howard 7/12/02). As early as the 1960s, statistician Barkev Sanders warned that the Social Security Administration was concealing the truth in actuarial estimates in order to sell national health insurance (S Blevins, Medicare's Midlife Crisis, 2001).
"No corporation on earth comes close to the accounting fraud practiced year after year by the federal government," wrote Rep. Ron Paul, M.D. (R-TX). "In fact, there is no real accountability at all for the trillions in tax dollars...spent annually ( www.house.gov/paul).
The federal government recorded a $1.3 trillion loss last year — far more than the official $248 billion deficit — when corporate-style accounting standards are used, a USA TODAY analysis shows.
Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.
The White House and the Congressional Budget Office oppose the change, arguing that the programs are not true liabilities because government can cancel or cut them.