peacefinder's Journal: I rather suspected this was the case

Krugman:
"According to the World Health Organization, in the United States administrative expenses eat up about 15 percent of the money paid in premiums to private health insurance companies, but only 4 percent of the budgets of public insurance programs, which consist mainly of Medicare and Medicaid. The numbers for both public and private insurance are similar in other countries - but because we rely much more heavily than anyone else on private insurance, our total administrative costs are much higher."

And we're against expanding Medicaid why?

Because

[Stargoat]

Because there is no liberal media.

it's the American Way

[Mantorp]

everyone has a duty to make as much money as possible, no matter where it comes from. Theoretically competition should come in and adjust for things but in certain industries like defense and insurance the only losers are taxpayers sick people and who really cares about them?

Here's one take that resonates for me

[elmegil]

check it out [amazon.com]. I actually haven't read it, but I heard the guy talk at length and he makes a fair bit sense to me. Bottom line: the US has a fanatical obsession with "liberty" and it trumps all other aspects that might otherwise be judged on common sense bases.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but sometimes it gets in the way.

To say nothing about costs of Marketing....

[Anarcho-Goth]

To say nothing about costs of Marketing, buying power when negotiating for better drug prices, treating problems early on is less expensive, regular medical visits leads to early detection, and less contagion that you would get with a single payer system.

Then again, my local electric company pays for advertising and they are a monopoly. But then then are a private corporation not a PUD. A PUD would probably be smart enough to not waste money advertising to a captive consumer base.

Yet another reason why I