Trump has no plan for Obamacare repeal and replacement

[BigWorm]

Or at least he hasn't told congress about it and they definitely don't have a plan of their own. Apparently someone leaked an audio recording of the closed door meetings.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/behind-closed-doors-republican-lawmakers-fret-about-how-to-repeal-obamacare/2017/01/27/deabdafa-e491-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html

This comes on the heels of the revelation that the White House pulled already paid for Obamacare ads from the air during the critical time at end of the open enrollment period.

I'm really glad to have a good employer provided health care plan. Hopefully I get to keep it after Trumpcare.

[Back]

You would think after all this time crying about the ACA and how they were going to repeal it they would have had a plan ready to go as soon as possible. Somebody (Republicans) dropped the ball big time.

[BigWorm]

Maybe Paul Ryan thought Hillary would win too? He really needs to get over it. Trump won.

[chalion]

Well everyone is going to get healthcare, EVERYONE, and its gonna be great, also its gonna be simple, just one person will hand it out and pay for everything, its going to be called The solocare plan. It's not a singlepayer, its a solo plan. Very different.

[Neveragain]

The whole notion that we have a right to healthcare is laughable. I swear you guys want to be in shackles.

[Methais]

Well everyone is going to get healthcare, EVERYONE, and its gonna be great, also its gonna be simple, just one person will hand it out and pay for everything, its going to be called The solocare plan. It's not a singlepayer, its a solo plan. Very different.

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/star-wars-canon/images/a/a4/DEAHT.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20160418094848

[Viekn]

The whole notion that we have a right to healthcare is laughable. I swear you guys want to be in shackles.

Doesn't seem like anyone made that assertion in this thread yet. Closest would have been chalion, but I believe he was speaking tongue in cheek. I think we all should feel a responsibility though to enable everyone to afford good healthcare. Surely such a thing could only help to strengthen our nation. Not saying it's the job of the federal government. But we as human beings we should want to do what we can so that everyone who wants to has the opportunity to get better or remain healthy. Certainly not a right though, I agree with you there.

[chalion]

people who are alive buy more things and pay more taxes. PERIOD.

[Neveragain]

Doesn't seem like anyone made that assertion in this thread yet. Closest would have been chalion, but I believe he was speaking tongue in cheek. I think we all should feel a responsibility though to enable everyone to afford good healthcare. Surely such a thing could only help to strengthen our nation. Not saying it's the job of the federal government. But we as human beings we should want to do what we can so that everyone who wants to has the opportunity to get better or remain healthy. Certainly not a right though, I agree with you there.

The only way that will be achieved is through teaching good will towards others, it's not in our nature to do so and good will is not achieved by a tax collector. There is also a yuge difference between virtue signaling and action.

[Neveragain]

people who are alive buy more things and pay more taxes. PERIOD.

People will also always take the path of the least resistance, the sting of failure should always be felt by those who make bad decisions.

[chalion]

People will also always take the path of the least resistance, the sting of failure should always be felt by those who make bad decisions.

Except captains of industry, its ok for them to spread the cost of a loss because ?? I'm sorry, clearly you are 100% against bankruptcy protection in ALL forms. Correct?

[Neveragain]

Except captains of industry, its ok for them to spread the cost of a loss because ?? I'm sorry, clearly you are 100% against bankruptcy protection in ALL forms. Correct?

Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

[Warriorbird]

Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

Good luck with that in a lobbyist empowered political environment.

[Neveragain]

Good luck with that in a lobbyist empowered political environment.

A lobbyist wouldn't lobby for an interest group that has failed because of bad decisions. I'll use the NRA as an example mainly because the left hates them so much. The NRA has strength because they have the confidence of the American consumer because the majority of the consumers believe in what the NRA stands for.

[zennsunni]

Maybe Paul Ryan thought Hillary would win too? He really needs to get over it. Trump won.

I'm pretty sure, appearances aside, that Paul Ryan absolutely, utterly, despises Trump with all his heart.

[chalion]

Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

Here is the problem with that whole concept, much like how communism falls apart on itself because of human nature and greed, a free market system will eventually turn to regulations and insurances and protections by its very nature. Someone will start up a company that keeps track of deadbeats compared to the people who actually pay back loans and do "good business". Others will do their own research and development, or pay someone else to do it, to see if other people's claims are legit or not and try to discrete their competition. And straight up insurance will be, and historically was, created to allow for more money to be made by spreading the risk and sharing the rewards in return. The free market is as unachiavable as the communist dream.

[Neveragain]

Here is the problem with that whole concept, much like how communism falls apart on itself because of human nature and greed, a free market system will eventually turn to regulations and insurances and protections by its very nature. Someone will start up a company that keeps track of deadbeats compared to the people who actually pay back loans and do "good business". Others will do their own research and development, or pay someone else to do it, to see if other people's claims are legit or not and try to discrete their competition. And straight up insurance will be, and historically was, created to allow for more money to be made by spreading the risk and sharing the rewards in return. The free market is as unachiavable as the communist dream.

Well now we are falling back on human nature and the choice to always take the path of least resistance. If memory serves me correctly I believe the first form of insurance in the states was crop insurance...may have been fire, too lazy to look. We also had a law at one time that a bank could not charge more than 1% interest on a loan, this made sure that banks didn't loan money to deadbeats as you put it. Insurance is nothing more than an attempt to escape the sting of failure and bad decision making.

[Neveragain]

grand kids are here will have to continue the BS later

[BigWorm]

Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

What the fuck do you think free market means? In a free market, the government wouldn't interfere in transactions between private individuals. What if I want to buy insurance? Making it illegal deprives me of a free and fair market.

[Warriorbird]

A lobbyist wouldn't lobby for an interest group that has failed because of bad decisions. I'll use the NRA as an example mainly because the left hates them so much. The NRA has strength because they have the confidence of the American consumer because the majority of the consumers believe in what the NRA stands for.

The insurance industry is wildly successful.

[drauz]

Insurance is nothing more than an attempt to escape the sting of failure and bad decision making.

So, getting cancer is failure and bad decision making?

[Methais]

So, getting cancer is failure and bad decision making?

People come here to the PC politics folder voluntarily, so yes.

[chalion]

Insurance is nothing more than an attempt to escape the sting of failure and bad decision making.
There are many different types of insurances. They were originally created to hedge bets against the unforeseen or stuff outside the control of man. Covering cargo ship voyages allowed for larger shipments to be made practical because no one wanted to eat the results of a ship being sunk by man or gods. When regulated and executed properly it can be a force multiplier. It is one of the creations that catapulted trade and industrialization in the middle ages and allowed civilization to take another leap forward. I'm not saying it is the linchpin of it, but it was one of a series of factors that brought us to today. It allows for products and services to cost more without crippling micro and macro economies when something goes wrong. The problem is that somewhere along the lines the medical industry got too greedy in too many areas and forced prices on the resulting product up far beyond what the market will truely bare. But that is a whole seperate conversation. The point is : To say that there is no right to healthcare is to deny the life in "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

[BigWorm]

To say that buying insurance is nothing more than bad decision making is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. It is often a very sound financial decision to buy health/homeowner's/life/business/malpractice/etc insurance in order to protect yourself from worst case scenarios.

[drauz]

People come here to the PC politics folder voluntarily, so yes.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/3orif46x93v1vWlyne/200.gif

[Neveragain]

So, getting cancer is failure and bad decision making?

Sure it is, not to say one doesn't get cancer but there are bad behaviors that increase ones risk of getting cancer. The fact is everyone of us has cancer cells in us, just over time our bodies lose the ability to kill them or behaviors increase the risk of cancer cells taking hold.

[Neveragain]

I understand why people use insurance, I'm not saying anything against that idea. What I am saying is that it comes at a cost to the free market, insurance causes artificial inflation and prevents a free market from making natural corrections. The poor are the ones that are the most impacted by insurance.

[Archigeek]

Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

The healthcare market is not a free market.

[BigWorm]

You say:


I understand why people use insurance, I'm not saying anything against that idea.

but you also said:


Insurance is nothing more than an attempt to escape the sting of failure and bad decision making.


Sure am, it's my belief all forms of insurance should be illegal in a society modeled around a free market.

So saying only failures and bad decision makers buy insurance and that it should be illegal anyway seems kind of like "saying anything against the idea".


What I am saying is that it comes at a cost to the free market, insurance causes artificial inflation and prevents a free market from making natural corrections. The poor are the ones that are the most impacted by insurance.

How does insurance come at a cost to the free market? How does it cause artificial inflation? How does it prevent the free market from making natural corrections?

I've never heard these arguments that all insurance is intrinsically anti-free market. From my perspective, health care costs are inherently unpredictable so as a participant in the free market, I would like to have the option to purchase protection for myself and my family from the potential downsides if I have to get medical care. For my personal situation, it makes a lot of sense to pay a monthly fee to avoid the potential of medical bankruptcy in a worst case scenario. That's free market af

[Neveragain]

The healthcare market is not a free market.

Sure it is.

[drauz]

Sure it is, not to say one doesn't get cancer but there are bad behaviors that increase ones risk of getting cancer. The fact is everyone of us has cancer cells in us, just over time our bodies lose the ability to kill them or behaviors increase the risk of cancer cells taking hold.

I mean cancer is just one disease, what about the other ones? Most are genetic, meaning you could do everything right and still get it. No amount of good decisions are going to stop them.

https://www.genome.gov/10001204/

[Tenlaar]

I mean cancer is just one disease, what about the other ones? Most are genetic, meaning you could do everything right and still get it. No amount of good decisions are going to stop them.

https://www.genome.gov/10001204/

Stop making excuses for all those Parkinson's patients and the poor life choices that led them to need treatment!

[Neveragain]

You say:



but you also said:





So saying only failures and bad decision makers buy insurance and that it should be illegal anyway seems kind of like "saying anything against the idea".



How does insurance come at a cost to the free market? How does it cause artificial inflation? How does it prevent the free market from making natural corrections?

I've never heard these arguments that all insurance is intrinsically anti-free market. From my perspective, health care costs are inherently unpredictable so as a participant in the free market, I would like to have the option to purchase protection for myself and my family from the potential downsides if I have to get medical care. For my personal situation, it makes a lot of sense to pay a monthly fee to avoid the potential of medical bankruptcy in a worst case scenario. That's free market af

How is insurance not an attempt to escape loss?

I'm not saying buying insurance is for bad decision makers or failures at all though it encourages bad decision making and failures, it lessens the sting.

It comes at a cost to the free market through artificial inflation, a drug maker would not be able to charge inflated prices for their drugs if the consumer could not afford their product. This is why many people experienced wild premium increases with Obama care, they had to share the cost of people that would not otherwise added to the demand. There are winners and losers man this will never change.

[BigWorm]

Stop making excuses for all those Parkinson's patients and the poor life choices that led them to need treatment!

What a bunch of idiots and bad decision makers. They should have made a free market choice to be born with better genes. Let's have the government make a law that interferes with their right to make the economic decision to buy insurance because free market.

[Neveragain]

Stop making excuses for all those Parkinson's patients and the poor life choices that led them to need treatment!

Has insurance rid us of these diseases? Would drug companies have the influence they have without the inflated prices because of insurance to fight off things like cannabis legalization ?

You can't say that insurance, which we have already agreed is spreading cost over a collective, does not work against a free market. It's like saying Communism and Fascism work together.

[Neveragain]

What a bunch of idiots and bad decision makers. They should have made a free market choice to be born with better genes. Let's have the government make a law that interferes with their right to make the economic decision to buy insurance because free market.

But you have no problem with a Government forcing people to buy insurance. Forced health insurance is a direct path to oppression. So that is the point I'm making with all this, rather the risk of a few getting Parkinson's disease or everyone living under Government oppression. I have Parkinson's and I assure you I would rather live with that than everyone being oppressed.

[BigWorm]

How is insurance not an attempt to escape loss?

Wut? Buying insurance is the opposite of escaping loss. I'm paying the insurance company money to absorb the loss instead of myself directly. They are providing a service that I am choosing to use. I am not escaping the loss; I am making an economic decision to compensate someone in return for protecting me personally from a worst case scenario. The insurance company makes an economic decision whether or not to offer insurance services. I can choose different premiums based on how willing and able I am to absorb potential costs (e.g. deductible). There is nothing at all against free market concepts in this transaction.

So let's say you choose not to get insurance. You may be super healthy, but what if you get shot or hit by a car? That's going to be expensive. Even if you decide you are willing to take this risk personally, you have no way to limit the potential costs of medical treatment. You can say that you would refuse treatment if you couldn't afford it (lol not likely), but you could be unconscious at the time and unable to reject care. What if you get a million dollar medical bill? Most Americans would have no way to cover that cost so they would be forced to declare bankruptcy. This sounds a lot more like escaping "loss" to me.

[BigWorm]

But you have no problem with a Government forcing people to buy insurance. Forced health insurance is a direct path to oppression. So that is the point I'm making with all this, rather the risk of a few getting Parkinson's disease or everyone living under Government oppression. I have Parkinson's and I assure I would rather live with that than everyone being oppressed.

Where have I advocated this position in this thread? I am arguing against your position that insurance is inherently anti market which is ridiculous.

[Neveragain]

Stop making excuses for all those Parkinson's patients and the poor life choices that led them to need treatment!

People were still getting treatment without Obamacare, what are you talking about?

[Neveragain]

Where have I advocated this position in this thread? I am arguing against your position that insurance is inherently anti market which is ridiculous.

Prove that it doesn't cause artificial inflation, it's an attempt to escape the downturn of free market economics which includes "the hand of god" which is a term used to describe unforeseeable catastrophe.

[BigWorm]

I already explained why is not an "attempt to escape loss" in a previous post. It's actually the exact opposite. Buying health or life insurance to protect your investments against the inevitabilities of medical treatment and death are anything but unforeseeable catatrophes.


Also I can't prove a negative about imaginary inflation so that's an unreasonable request. The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.

[Neveragain]

I already explained why is not an "attempt to escape loss" in a previous post. It's actually the exact opposite. Buying health or life insurance to protect your investments against the inevitabilities of medical treatment and death are anything but unforeseeable catatrophes.


Also I can't prove a negative about imaginary inflation so that's an unreasonable request. The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.

The proof is in the costs of goods and services. Insurance spreads that loss on to consumers that would otherwise not bare the burden of that cost. Insurance is a socialist construct, you can't argue that. A true free market does not function correctly with insurance. You would bear that loss on your own or in the case of say crop loss, the free market would adjust by increasing costs of that product by price increases. This is not hard man.

The whole point I'm making is, we are NEVER going to reduce medical costs by forcing everyone to buy insurance, it won't work, laws of basic economics make this true.

[chalion]

Insurance is a socialist construct, you can't argue that.
But it's really a business venture. So, yeah it can and is being argued. "Insurance" was created because it is a way for a person to make money by gambling that they can selectively choose which risks they are willing to take on at a price that will, over the long run, make them more money by taking in more than they pay out. It's the free market distilled to its essence.

[BigWorm]

It seems pretty hard for you to explain why I can't make a free market decision to pay a company to spread the cost of the loss over a large group of people who also choose to pay them. This is a economic decision made by individuals. That is pure free market and has nothing to do with socialism.

[drauz]

The proof is in the costs of goods and services. Insurance spreads that loss on to consumers that would otherwise not bare the burden of that cost. Insurance is a socialist construct, you can't argue that. A true free market does not function correctly with insurance. You would bear that loss on your own or in the case of say crop loss, the free market would adjust by increasing costs of that product by price increases. This is not hard man.

How are you conflating crop loss with price of goods? Whether you have insurance or not the supply is effected. The free market still adjusts whether farmers are paid for their lost crops or not. Insurance plays no part in this.

[Neveragain]

How are you conflating crop loss with price of goods? Whether you have insurance or not the supply is effected. The free market still adjusts whether farmers are paid for their lost crops or not. Insurance plays no part in this.

Sure it does, it makes for even more inflation. Not only will the price of grain go up but also the price of the insurance and the wealth that would have been lost that would have otherwise reduced demand for other goods.

[BigWorm]

So you truly just have no idea how insurance works, any understanding of supply and demand, or even what the word inflation means?

[Neveragain]

It seems pretty hard for you to explain why I can't make a free market decision to pay a company to spread the cost of the loss over a large group of people who also choose to pay them. This is a economic decision made by individuals. That is pure free market and has nothing to do with socialism.

You seem to want to leave the cost of insurance out of the formula. When have you ever heard a doctor say "Hey, I'm going to be able to charge less because my insurance costs went up."?

An insurance company is there to make money, the more losses they take the higher the insurance costs will be. I have never seen insurance costs go down, there may be a case where they go down temporarily but they will go up. Just look over the past 20 years, insurance keeps going up in price.

I mean your saying "yea, it's spreading my loss out among a pool" but it's not socialist.

[Neveragain]

So you truly just have no idea how insurance works, any understanding of supply and demand, or even what the word inflation means?

I'm going to make this as simple as I can.

You own a home, tornado destroys your home. With no insurance you lose that wealth and most likely can't replace the home causing less demand on the housing market and your wealth which at some point would have been reinvested in the overall market creating even less demand. This would be true free market.

[chalion]

I'm going to make this as simple as I can.

You own a home, tornado destroys your home. With no insurance you lose that wealth and most likely can't replace the home causing less demand on the housing market and your wealth which at some point would have been reinvested in the overall market creating even less demand. This would be true free market.

http://i.lvme.me/v8ccqht.jpg

[BigWorm]

You seem to want to leave the cost of insurance out of the formula. When have you ever heard a doctor say "Hey, I'm going to be able to charge less because my insurance costs went up."?

An insurance company is there to make money, the more losses they take the higher the insurance costs will be. I have never seen insurance costs go down, there may be a case where they go down temporarily but they will go up. Just look over the past 20 years, insurance keeps going up in price.

I mean your saying "yea, it's spreading my loss out among a pool" but it's not socialist.

I've mentioned the cost of insurance in most of my posts in this thread. The cost is key because that's what makes the insurance relationship transactional. People choosing to pay money to pool their risk on their own free will is the opposite of socialism.

[BigWorm]

With no insurance you lose that wealth and most likely can't replace the home causing less demand on the housing market and your wealth which at some point would have been reinvested in the overall market creating even less demand.

This is complete gibberish. You should really try to understand how insurance works.

[Neveragain]

This is complete gibberish. You should really try to understand how insurance works.

I..I...I just can't do this with you anymore. I just can't believe anyone is this stupid about math, I'm sorry I don't mean it as an insult. I normally don't do this but it's just true you just don't understand math. I'm sorry.

[BigWorm]

I..I...I just can't do this with you anymore. I just can't believe anyone is this stupid about math, I'm sorry I don't mean it as an insult. I normally don't do this but it's just true you just don't understand math. I'm sorry.

Pretty simple math really. The total of all premiums collected (plus any capital gains/interest earned by investing this money) needs to be larger than the total amount of losses paid out. Please explain how this generates artificial inflation?

[Neveragain]

Pretty simple math really. The total of all premiums collected (plus any capital gains/interest earned by investing this money) needs to be larger than the total amount of losses paid out. Please explain how this generates artificial inflation?

I'm not even going to try anymore, I just can't, I know no way of making it simple enough for you to understand. Until you can come back to me with an example of health insurance bringing down the cost of medical care over the long term, I just can't do it. If it were the case medical care would be less and less expensive over time when everyone (but you) knows that's not the case. Both Health insurance and medical care costs are on a constant price increase.

All you just showed is how an insurance company maintains profits................

[Latrinsorm]

I'm going to make this as simple as I can.

You own a home, tornado destroys your home. With no insurance you lose that wealth and most likely can't replace the home causing less demand on the housing market and your wealth which at some point would have been reinvested in the overall market creating even less demand. This would be true free market.You're confusing ability to purchase a home (purchasing power) with desire to buy a home (demand).

[BigWorm]

I'm not even going to try anymore, I just can't, I know no way of making it simple enough for you to understand. Until you can come back to me with an example of health insurance bringing down the cost of medical care over the long term, I just can't do it. If it were the case medical care would be less and less expensive over time when everyone (but you) knows that's not the case. Both Health insurance and medical care costs are on a constant price increase.

All you just showed is how an insurance company maintains profits................

I thought we were talking about a home destroyed in a tornado? I was not aware that was covered by health insurance.

[chalion]

He's just wildly flipping back and forth between the two with no consistency. Half the time he means "mandatory health insurance" and the other half he's just yelling about generic insurance, and there are times when he's just made that people are allowed to skirt bankruptcy.

[Neveragain]

He's just wildly flipping back and forth between the two with no consistency. Half the time he means "mandatory health insurance" and the other half he's just yelling about generic insurance, and there are times when he's just made that people are allowed to skirt bankruptcy.

It does not matter, insurance creates inflation just by existing.

[chalion]

http://images.memes.com/meme/450336

[BigWorm]

It does not matter, insurance creates inflation just by existing.

Yet you can't articulate why. Just because you imagine something doesn't make it true. I understand that Trump is setting a really bad example in this regard so I see why you might get confused.

[Neveragain]

without insurance could you replace your wrecked car? If no this reduces demand for cars bringing down the cost of cars.

without insurance could you afford heart surgery? if no a heart surgeon would have to reduce their price to make money.

Do insurance costs ever go down? Does a business pass on their insurance costs to the customer?

Just give one example of any insurance deflating the cost of anything without insurance costs rising.

[chalion]

Insurance is not designed to lower the cost of something. Your examples have too many flaws that go beyond a simple back and forth conversation.

The critical flaw is, again, insurance is not designed to lower the cost of something. It is designed to make rare costly events affordable when needed. Health insurance is a huge tangled mess that acts like no other type of insurance, because in a perfect world you would be getting regular check ups and physicals and other interactions with health care professional to extend and maintain a reasonable standard of living. This would make you a productive member of society to consume goods, produce a good or service, or otherwise help facilitate the flow of money in what we call "An economy".

Nothing covered by insurance would go down in price if insurance existed, instead you'd have people left destitute at any major act of god. This isn't good for society as a whole and luckily humans acknowledge this, and while you might have issue with some of the specifics, you are only allowed the luxuries you have right now because of things like insurance preventing entire industries, towns, etc from being left to die out because they ran into an event outside their control.

I'm curious if you would be happiest if everyone was released into the woods at a certain age and told to go fend for themselves instead of having an organized society that constantly pushes itself forward, even when part of it doesn't want to go. And before you go back to "but human nature is path of least resistance", which it both is and isn't (nothing is as simple as anyone puts it), I ask, do you get angry every day at your vesitigale organs? Do you yell down at your torso and curse the day your appendix stopped functioning ? Because your body isn't 100% working for you, just like in society there will always be an element that just gets dragged along for the ride.

[BigWorm]

Have you considered that there might be less upfront demand for cars and houses if auto and homeowner's insurance weren't available? It would make both of them much more risky investments. For example, it might make a lot more sense to rent and pass on the risk of a fire to your landlord than to take it on directly yourself.

[Neveragain]

It is designed to make rare costly events affordable <Inflation


instead you'd have people left destitute at any major act of god <deflation

I left out all the emotions, we are not arguing about emotions.

[Neveragain]

Have you considered that there might be less upfront demand for cars and houses if auto and homeowner's insurance weren't available? It would make both of them much more risky investments. For example, it might make a lot more sense to rent and pass on the risk of a fire to your landlord than to take it on directly yourself.

Yes, Deflation.

[BigWorm]

My homeowner's insurance premium went down last year. Does that count as an example of insurance "deflating the cost" of anything?

[chalion]

<Inflation

<deflation

I left out all the emotions, we are not arguing about emotions.

The price of a car doesn't magically go down because people are buying less of them. You are trying to reduce complex systems down to supply and demand to dictate price when it just doesn't work that way.
That person who just lost everything can no longer work, the company they worked for produces one less car because its short one worker, the supply drops at the same rate the demand does. These events are not vacuums with no other influence on other systems.

[Neveragain]

My homeowner's insurance premium went down last year. Does that count as an example of insurance "deflating the cost" of anything?

Did the value of your home go down? (I'm assuming you keep up on maintenance and not just letting your house go to shit)

[Neveragain]

The price of a car doesn't magically go down because people are buying less of them. You are trying to reduce complex systems down to supply and demand to dictate price when it just doesn't work that way.
That person who just lost everything can no longer work, the company they worked for produces one less car because its short one worker, the supply drops at the same rate the demand does. These events are not vacuums with no other influence on other systems.

Everything you said here is great yet you have provided nothing to suggest that insurance does not create inflation. I'm not saying ending insurance would not make for tough times, that company would probably end up laying off employees because it takes more than 1 person to manufacture a car.

Again, I'm not seeing any evidence that you have provided that suggests insurance doesn't increase inflation. You're kind of saying that a middle man doesn't increase prices.

[BigWorm]

Did the value of your home go down? (I'm assuming you keep up on maintenance and not just letting your house go to shit)

Nope, according to the county assessor it increased in value slightly, but I haven't had a real appraisal done since I bought it. My insurance agent got a hint that I was shopping for other providers and found a way to lower my rate.

[chalion]

I'm at a loss then. If you can't understand that both the supply and the demand go down equally in your own provided examples, thus nullifying the effects of both inflation and deflation then we must part ways.

[Neveragain]

Nope, according to the county assessor it increased in value slightly, but I haven't had a real appraisal done since I bought it. My insurance agent got a hint that I was shopping for other providers and found a way to lower my rate.

Of course it went up in value, we just got done holding interest rates at like .25% and bailed out banks. In turn artificially inflating home values making it even more difficult for the poor to purchase a home. All we are doing is kicking the can down the road to avoid the punishment of a free market. There's nobody to blame but the consumers buying a bunch of shit they could not afford.

I'm not saying insurance is the cause of all inflation just a part of it.

Moving ahead we have to decide, do we want the Government in complete control of our lives in exchange for healthcare or do we let the free market work? I know the majority did not want the ACA, they did not want the bank bailouts and they did not want to bail out Detroit. Do we really want these clowns in charge of all this shit, if history shows us anything we probably don't want that.

[Neveragain]

I'm at a loss then. If you can't understand that both the supply and the demand go down equally in your own provided examples, thus nullifying the effects of both inflation and deflation then we must part ways.

Dude you have to make the assumption that the person could not show up for work because they lost a car, most people are going to find a way to work and that is how the punishment of a free market drives people to succeed. These banks didn't change any of their practices because they received a bailout and they weren't punished.

The ACA was nothing more than a bailout for the health insurance companies.

[chalion]

Dude you have to make the assumption that the person could not show up for work because they lost a car, most people are going to find a way to work and that is how the punishment of a free market drives people to succeed. These banks didn't change any of their practices because they received a bailout and they weren't punished.

The ACA was nothing more than a bailout for the health insurance companies.

This is the problem, you are starting at one point of a conversation. ALL INSURANCE IS BAD. As soon as we start getting someplace with that discussion you add in a bunch of extra stuff that adds complexity to the conversation that goes above and beyond where we were before and alters everything.
You are right, the bank bailout was poorly executed, but at the same time, society cannot afford a massive adjustment like that without long-term ramifications (lots of people dying, the standard of living dropping sharply, etc) and for the better of society, sometimes we turn a blind eye.
I'll go back to one of my first comments, a truly free market is just as unrealistic as communism is. They will never work and should never be implemented.

[Neveragain]

This is the problem, you are starting at one point of a conversation. ALL INSURANCE IS BAD. As soon as we start getting someplace with that discussion you add in a bunch of extra stuff that adds complexity to the conversation that goes above and beyond where we were before and alters everything.
You are right, the bank bailout was poorly executed, but at the same time, society cannot afford a massive adjustment like that without long-term ramifications (lots of people dying, the standard of living dropping sharply, etc) and for the better of society, sometimes we turn a blind eye.
I'll go back to one of my first comments, a truly free market is just as unrealistic as communism is. They will never work and should never be implemented.

So insurance increases inflation and we should just let future generations pay for our mistakes, fuck people who lived with in their means and reward failure. Tell me more how to destroy an economy.