Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › GM Faces potential BK
- This topic has 150 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
Coronita.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 6, 2009 at 9:18 PM #362348March 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM #361787
gandalf
ParticipantDitto. I don’t have any specific stake in this whole healthcare debate, except to point out that currently, it’s highly inefficient and failing to a point where a solid majority of America supports reform.
This really isn’t an issue of socialism vs. capitalism. Healthcare is not a free-market. It’s highly manipulated and controlled. Anybody suggesting healthcare is free market capitalism is on crack.
It’s so bad, that in the mind of most people, the costs, quality an availability of care have become worse than what the government would provide under single-payer.
Government is the lesser of two evils… Let that sink in.
But set aside philosophical matters for a moment.
There is a SIGNIFICANT opportunity here to streamline healthcare delivery, and this would end up lowering operating costs for every business in USA that carries healthcare, as ours does. The costs are obscene. The market is broken. It’s not just GM. Get a clue.
Why would anybody oppose this?
Except for political reasons. Calculations of this nature need to take a backseat to dealing rationally with this economic crisis and putting our country back on a competitive footing.
And yes, GM should go BK. It needs to restructure.
March 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM #362085ParticipantDitto. I don’t have any specific stake in this whole healthcare debate, except to point out that currently, it’s highly inefficient and failing to a point where a solid majority of America supports reform.
This really isn’t an issue of socialism vs. capitalism. Healthcare is not a free-market. It’s highly manipulated and controlled. Anybody suggesting healthcare is free market capitalism is on crack.
It’s so bad, that in the mind of most people, the costs, quality an availability of care have become worse than what the government would provide under single-payer.
Government is the lesser of two evils… Let that sink in.
But set aside philosophical matters for a moment.
There is a SIGNIFICANT opportunity here to streamline healthcare delivery, and this would end up lowering operating costs for every business in USA that carries healthcare, as ours does. The costs are obscene. The market is broken. It’s not just GM. Get a clue.
Why would anybody oppose this?
Except for political reasons. Calculations of this nature need to take a backseat to dealing rationally with this economic crisis and putting our country back on a competitive footing.
And yes, GM should go BK. It needs to restructure.
March 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM #362228ParticipantDitto. I don’t have any specific stake in this whole healthcare debate, except to point out that currently, it’s highly inefficient and failing to a point where a solid majority of America supports reform.
This really isn’t an issue of socialism vs. capitalism. Healthcare is not a free-market. It’s highly manipulated and controlled. Anybody suggesting healthcare is free market capitalism is on crack.
It’s so bad, that in the mind of most people, the costs, quality an availability of care have become worse than what the government would provide under single-payer.
Government is the lesser of two evils… Let that sink in.
But set aside philosophical matters for a moment.
There is a SIGNIFICANT opportunity here to streamline healthcare delivery, and this would end up lowering operating costs for every business in USA that carries healthcare, as ours does. The costs are obscene. The market is broken. It’s not just GM. Get a clue.
Why would anybody oppose this?
Except for political reasons. Calculations of this nature need to take a backseat to dealing rationally with this economic crisis and putting our country back on a competitive footing.
And yes, GM should go BK. It needs to restructure.
March 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM #362271ParticipantDitto. I don’t have any specific stake in this whole healthcare debate, except to point out that currently, it’s highly inefficient and failing to a point where a solid majority of America supports reform.
This really isn’t an issue of socialism vs. capitalism. Healthcare is not a free-market. It’s highly manipulated and controlled. Anybody suggesting healthcare is free market capitalism is on crack.
It’s so bad, that in the mind of most people, the costs, quality an availability of care have become worse than what the government would provide under single-payer.
Government is the lesser of two evils… Let that sink in.
But set aside philosophical matters for a moment.
There is a SIGNIFICANT opportunity here to streamline healthcare delivery, and this would end up lowering operating costs for every business in USA that carries healthcare, as ours does. The costs are obscene. The market is broken. It’s not just GM. Get a clue.
Why would anybody oppose this?
Except for political reasons. Calculations of this nature need to take a backseat to dealing rationally with this economic crisis and putting our country back on a competitive footing.
And yes, GM should go BK. It needs to restructure.
March 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM #362380ParticipantDitto. I don’t have any specific stake in this whole healthcare debate, except to point out that currently, it’s highly inefficient and failing to a point where a solid majority of America supports reform.
This really isn’t an issue of socialism vs. capitalism. Healthcare is not a free-market. It’s highly manipulated and controlled. Anybody suggesting healthcare is free market capitalism is on crack.
It’s so bad, that in the mind of most people, the costs, quality an availability of care have become worse than what the government would provide under single-payer.
Government is the lesser of two evils… Let that sink in.
But set aside philosophical matters for a moment.
There is a SIGNIFICANT opportunity here to streamline healthcare delivery, and this would end up lowering operating costs for every business in USA that carries healthcare, as ours does. The costs are obscene. The market is broken. It’s not just GM. Get a clue.
Why would anybody oppose this?
Except for political reasons. Calculations of this nature need to take a backseat to dealing rationally with this economic crisis and putting our country back on a competitive footing.
And yes, GM should go BK. It needs to restructure.
March 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM #361877Ash Housewares
ParticipantFree markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise.
March 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM #362175ParticipantFree markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise.
March 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM #362317ParticipantFree markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise.
March 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM #362361ParticipantFree markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise.
March 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM #362467ParticipantFree markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise.
March 7, 2009 at 1:08 PM #361897CA renter
Participant[quote=Ash Housewares]Free markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise. [/quote]
Agree with this, Ash.
Additionally, “free markets” work best when dealing with things that are not a basic necessity. It’s too easy to manipulate and monopolize a system when there is a finite resource that’s provides a basic necessity. People become captive consumers, and are forced to pay whatever the monopoly decides for them.
IMHO, a free market requires both the supply side and the demand side to work with full transparency and free will. Otherwise, it does not work.
March 7, 2009 at 1:08 PM #362195Participant[quote=Ash Housewares]Free markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise. [/quote]
Agree with this, Ash.
Additionally, “free markets” work best when dealing with things that are not a basic necessity. It’s too easy to manipulate and monopolize a system when there is a finite resource that’s provides a basic necessity. People become captive consumers, and are forced to pay whatever the monopoly decides for them.
IMHO, a free market requires both the supply side and the demand side to work with full transparency and free will. Otherwise, it does not work.
March 7, 2009 at 1:08 PM #362337Participant[quote=Ash Housewares]Free markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise. [/quote]
Agree with this, Ash.
Additionally, “free markets” work best when dealing with things that are not a basic necessity. It’s too easy to manipulate and monopolize a system when there is a finite resource that’s provides a basic necessity. People become captive consumers, and are forced to pay whatever the monopoly decides for them.
IMHO, a free market requires both the supply side and the demand side to work with full transparency and free will. Otherwise, it does not work.
March 7, 2009 at 1:08 PM #362381Participant[quote=Ash Housewares]Free markets provide the optimum (lowest cost) solution when certain conditions are met- like both parties to a transaction having perfect information.
Commodities are the ideal case. Shoes, cars, etc. You can compare exactly what you are paying versus what you are receiving and make your decision. The free market works brilliantly in cases like this.
With healthcare, the provider doesn’t know what services they will be asked to provide in the future, and you don’t know the quality of service you will receive. Both parties enter into the agreement essentially blind. The lack of information on future services and quality of those services creates an inefficiency. This is why the free market model breaks down in the area of healthcare. Not enough information.
Free markets are a remarkable tool for driving down costs and increasing quality, but they are not a one size fits all solution. Although many politicians think otherwise. [/quote]
Agree with this, Ash.
Additionally, “free markets” work best when dealing with things that are not a basic necessity. It’s too easy to manipulate and monopolize a system when there is a finite resource that’s provides a basic necessity. People become captive consumers, and are forced to pay whatever the monopoly decides for them.
IMHO, a free market requires both the supply side and the demand side to work with full transparency and free will. Otherwise, it does not work.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.