Why NOT a "Public Option"?!!

Does it make LESS sense than giving corporate welfare to the same insurance companies that are spending $1.4 million per DAY lobbying against a public option while at the same time denying the claims of thousands of paying customers who are sick and need lifesaving medical care? Annie

You want to know the major difference. I have a choice. I still have the power to say, NO. I really wish President Obama would learn the meaning of that word.

You want to know the difference. I still have the power to say No. I really wish President Obama would learn the word, No. You might want to check your math again. How is the "evil" insurance companies lobbying any different from the Unions, AARP, AMA (who all want the public option) or the green companies or the million other companies who are currently lobbying Congress? Lame argument.

Yep and yep. I read the comments in this thread and was shocked that so many people think a public option makes sense. One of the common themes was that insurance companies have forced the price of their product to be unreasonable. If reality supported that statement then maybe I could agree with them. The problem is, it is not the insurance companies that have forced the price of health coverage to unreasonable levels. The health insurance industry's profit margin is 2%. I say again 2%. That is barely solvent. Which means they absolutely are not forcing the price up. So who or what is forcing the price up? It is the government, that is who. They are doing this through medi-care medi-cade. The government tells health providers, this is what medi care will pay for this procedure. More times than not, it is less than the what the procedure actually costs in the fair market, therefore creating a loss to the provider. The provider then negotiates the price it will charge insurance companies for procedures. That price ends up being higher than the fair market price. Which means the insurance company has to either raise deductibles or raise premiums. Which means insurance is less and less affordable. So now they are proposing a public option. No matter how the public option is funded it is going to have the same affect on private insurance costs that medi-care and medi-caid has. Don't get hung up on this is it going to be funded by tax payer money or premiums, it doesn't matter, it is going to create more of a problem either way. As insurance companies are forced to raise prices further, they will begin to lose customers, which will mean more people on the public option, which will mean more procedures the health providers will have to take a loss, which will mean higher prices to the insurance companies which will mean higher prices to the insured. Eventually it will lead to no insurance companies. That may sound good to some people, but what happens at that point when the providers no longer have insurance companies to subsidize the losses they are forced to take from public option patients. Those providers will start looking for different employment opportunities. We already have a shortage of health care providers in many areas of the country, it will only get worse. The public option at best is an attempt to fix a problem by creating more of the original problem. At worse the public option is a political ploy to "fundamentally transform America." To understand that, you have to remember what the fundamentals of America are. Its the Constitution. Hopefully they are just kooky, and are unable to see how horrible their proposals are. If that is the case there may be a chance to fix the problems they create. More and more, I am beginning to think they're real target is the Constitution. I don't want to even think what it will take to protect that when they really start attacking it.

So you want to create another insurance company to combat the other insurance companies? How does that make sense?