The real answer to health care and to most problems the world faces today is to do the opposite of what politicians recommend.
A question: Why don’t they just subsidize people with no health insurance (to solve the 50 million uninsured problem) and let companies sell across state lines (to solve the price problem?)
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 5521 access attempts in the last 7 days.
If a business cannot handle open competition, then that’s a business that shouldn’t be around. I honestly cannot believe that people are on here actually defending companies from actually competing. How much of a complete and total political whore must you be to honestly think that insurance duopolies are acceptable.
#3: “It’s not a crime to admit you are dead wrong”
But their cushy, high paying _job_ is to spin all of their continuous, consistent sellouts of the taxpayer to look like they’re helping the taxpayers rather than robbing them. And most taxpayers are far too clueless to realize they’ve been lied to.
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” — Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
My question is where in the constitution does it give the power to the federal govt to force its citizens to purchase health care or for that fact any thing ?
and before you give the smart ass answer about car insurance, that is state law not federal, and they do have that right because it is not given to the federal govt
Dylan=douche.
The rule is not question/response; it’s endlessly question and by never shutting up for a response; he WINS!
Clearly the it is the host who is the idiot and not the guest. Screaming louder than the person you INVITED to have on your show makes you look like a complete asshole, like Bill-O.
Who cares who is right or wrong, that guy is a complete fucktard if he can’t let the guest speak.
The title is misleading and plays to the dirty tricks of the main stream media.
I expect more of Dvorak Uncensored than misleading articals about this and UFO’s and being ignorant about how internet advertising works. The main stream media is shit, get over it.
Wake up Chermin!
This is low ball, low hanging fruit that means nothing. Nothing.
Dvorak uncensored is lower than low for this kind of senseless bullshit. Post something real already like you used to.
Now lets see if my comment is posted, unless you are bunch of pussies.
I want my Dvorak Uncensored back. Its been highjacked by a bunch of fruitloop nut-fucks.
In Soviet Russia, politician shout journalist. And bang shoe.
HOLY SHIT! He sure went off the approved rhetoric.
That was fucking awesome! Too bad no one gives a shit.
Sorry Cherman. External (Aussie) observer here. I have no idea whether or not the interviewee was, or was not an ‘idiotic congresswoman.’
All that was on show, was that he was a rude, arrogant cunt.
To the man up above suggesting a tax credit. The poor don’t pay many taxes. In fact if you had the poor not pay any taxes for a year, it would still not cover the cost of health insurance for the year, or even arguably for the month.
That said, nobody has a good solution that I’ve seen. I liked the idea of a public option, but even that has a ton of problems. Truth be told, with the economy being the way it is, if it were me in the white house I would be fielding calls for research into restructuring the medical education system in this country to take in a ton more students. At least that way there could be some possible way to meet the future demand and potentially reduce unemployment
A question: Why don’t they just subsidize people with no health insurance (to solve the 50 million uninsured problem)
Answer: Because our tax dollar subsidies won’t be going just to pay for people’s healthcare, they’ll be going directly into the profits of big corporations. Something like 35% of premiums go to profits, 65% to health care. It’s wrong to force taxpayers to pay for big corporations to profit. That’s not capitalism, it’s government hijacked by big corporations, aka fascism in its classical definition.
…and let companies sell across state lines (to solve the price problem?)
Face it: we can’t even figure out what the best car insurance is, and health insurance is much more complicated than that. If Cigna and Aetna compete for your business, how are you going to choose? Do you know the quality of their doctors, what procedures are covered and what should be covered, how long the hospital stays are that they allow and whether it’s reasonable? Are you a doctor, a medical expert? Capitalism requires that the buyer have a meaningful way of distinguishing between the different products offered, and the vast majority of Americans are not able to.
So the government should decide the best insurance because it’s just so complicated for everyone else? What gives the government this expertise?
And what is the total profit for the insurance industry?
How about for any country that offers free health care, we let doctors from that country practice here without having to go thru residency again?
All Dylan Ratigan wanted was a answer. All she wanted was to do say we are making history. 12/7/41 and 9/11/01 was days we made history too. Congress needs to learn, first do no harm.And learn to wite a bill under 500 pages.(really under 200).
#27 Cherman – You are obviously entitled to your opinion. No matter how foolish it may make you appear.
This is what makes Americasn’s happy is for the government to pay for things we dont want to pay for. But that is what insurance is all about. Its a community pot of money to cover car repair,health repair, lose of a house or property. It is so we as a individual do not have to pay the full cost. What government wants to do is have more people contributing so that it reduces costs. The unfortunate thing is that health costs rise because of expensive treatments and more of us developing long term illnesses. I think things like reducing drug costs, reducing malpractice payouts and opening up private insurance policies would have gone much further then bickering about a public option which in the long run will be paid for by people already paying for their insurance.
I am real surprised that MSNBC did not cut Dylan’s mic. You are suppose to kiss the Far-Left Ass. Not ask for an answer to the question Asked.
Radican spent about ten times the amount of time ranting as he allowed his guest to answer. How on earth could anyone suggest she didn’t answer the question? When she would attempt to answer, he again ripped into her within seconds.
Thank you but no thank you, that is not the type of interviewing we need.
Wow, this guy’s just as rude as Bill OReilly. That being said the man has a right to get emotional. Talk about getting screwed over and over again. Bank bailouts, the escalating presence in the middle east, now this. So where’s the change Obama was talking about? Looks like business as usual. Every time congress looks at a legislation it’s in terms of favoring their masters. Every time these clowns try to do something the american taxpayer gets the bill and the rich get the benefit.
I emigrated to Spain a long time ago, thankfully, and I’m amazed at how much the Americans of today are willing to bend over. So much for the spirit of ’76.
#38, To the man up above suggesting a tax credit. The poor don’t pay many taxes. In fact if you had the poor not pay any taxes for a year, it would still not cover the cost of health insurance for the year, or even arguably for the month.
Credits tend to give you a refund at the end of the year.
what if the fire dept. was run like health care…oh wait, at one time it was! it sucked so bad government was forced to step in and fix it.
I agree completely with #4.
The best thing this anchor could have done was to let the congresswoman finish, then simply point out the inevitable fallacies in her statement. Instead, the anchor looks like a complete fool, repeats the same lines (although at higher volumes).
Single Payer NOW!!!
The guy is just plain rude. I would not agree to be on his show if I had that type of behavior to look forward to. His behavior has me questioning if he would let anyone say anything that he does not want to hear, just like Bill O’Reilly. I’m surprised he didn’t just cut her feed and tell her to “Shut up.”
It’s too bad, because he has a good point. Unfortunately, it is difficult to argue the merits of the idea, when he’s so unwilling to allow arguing.
I really don’t like the idea of mandatory health insurance. Look how well mandatory worked for auto insurance. I think John should run for President.
Look Congress may be willing to pimp us out to the insurance companies but they intend to tightly regulate it all so it will run just as badly as medicare and medicaid do in economic terms. If what you want isn’t on the list you won’t get it and won’t even be told it exists.
Reform is just a word for more government control. We need reform but we sure don’t need these people making up all our choices.
I’d like to see the insurance monoplies broken up, tort reform, and give people the option to purchase major medical without having to buy insurance that covers all sorts of things they don’t want and don’t need.
I don’t need a marriage counselor. I’m single. I’m not worried about alchemical or tobacco abuse because I don’t drink or smoke!
Yep, he’s a jerk. But he’s also 100% correct.
She on the other hand, only knows how to drool out preplanned talking points. It was clear she wasn’t prepared to have an intelligent discussion on health care and defend the decisions made. More palaver by the ruling dilettantes. Makes a person want to explosively regurgatate the spewtum to cleanse the mouth of the taste.
I personally am glad he did. There may be hope for MSNBC.
He just apologized for that interview and that he was wrong.
He shouldn’t need to apologize for pointing out facts she won’t answer for.