re: #190 Simply Sarah

Ah, no. What I meant is that those were some of the things you’d need to do if you insisted on “health insurance” as the main method of running payments for health care. I don’t entirely blame the insurance companies, in that they’re basically doing things as would be expected in a for-profit “free market” health insurance world. It’s just that the reality of that isn’t pretty.

There is a place for “for profit” insurance, for example covering voluntary things like oil spills or sky diving or driving, but when it comes to social coverage of things like health or hurricanes that affect an entire nation if only indirectly, then it would be better named as a sharing of risk.

I sometimes wonder why Republicans have not called for the abolition of FEMA Flood Insurance, which is about as socialist a single provider system as one can imagine.