re: #6 researchok

Would you like to compare the costs (both real and legacy) of the projects you mentioned, versus private projects?

Sure. Go for it.

For example, the VA, medicare, and medicaid all outperform private insurance. That would be the appropriate comparison, right?

Speaking of levees, do you believe the NOLA system was money well spent over the decades?

Some of it was. It wasn’t well done enough recently. Obviously you’re not enough of a fool to say that the failure of those levees means all levy building is somehow suspect.

But please explain how and when private levees would be built to protect a city.

Immunizations do save money, of course but are the programs that administer them as efficient (again, factor in legacy costs) as private programs?

What private programs for immunization? Be specific.

One has to wonder why, if government spending is so efficient both Congress and the Executive branch are so keen on cutting those expenditures.

Because idiots who insist that government is naturally wasteful have taken over the national discourse, simpletons who recommend cutting spending during a recession, even while we can see the negative effects of austerity in Europe. And they may very well continue to win the argument, and the economy will double-dip. Fucking awesome.

However, it’s rather obviously untrue to say the Executive branch is keen on cutting expenditures. Obama is attempting to get something, anything out with a completely hostile GOP house. I completely agree he’s fumbled it in terms of presentation and bought into the stupid cost-cutting meme, when he should be making the argument that ten years ago, nobody dreamed of cutting costs in a depression aside from the rankest of Randites; everyone knew that when the private sector faltered, that cutting government spending at the same time was disastrous.

The same applies to Medicare- future expenditures remain unfunded because money was taken to pay current bills.

What are you talking about? How is that anything like a comparison of whether medicare is cheaper and better-run than private insurance?

It is. It mainly is through savings on salaries, administrative costs, and advertising. It would be really weird if it weren’t more efficient than private sector, since it doesn’t have the advertising costs.

Can you explain what magical transformation you think happens to people when they work for the government that makes them become inefficient, that doesn’t happen at a big corporation?

It boggles the fucking mind that people actually believe there’s any efficiencies that benefit the consumer in the private insurance market.

My wife just got yet another stupid letter from her insurance company asking if she had other insurance. She gets this after every time she submits a claim, because if she doesn’t respond to it, they can use that as an excuse to not pay the claim. That’s an efficiency of private insurance, the only thing it’s an efficiency for them making a profit, not for them serving the actual customer. Because health insurance is a naturally broken market.