Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 9 to 12 of 12

Thread: Why don't honest journailsts take on Roger Ailes and Fox News?

  1. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Topanga, CA
    Posts
    2,019

    Re: Why don't honest journailsts take on Roger Ailes and Fox News?

    I can't figure out why big business isn't behind the health care reform. They have the most to gain. According to them, they spend tons of money on it and also for the promised health care in retirement plans that were agreed to many years ago. But we hear nothing from them, or any Unions, or my "News" doesn't cover it because it won't get good ratings? I don't know if it's the same where you live but would like to know what you are hearing in your area regarding big business and their support of the reforms.

  2. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    9,507

    Post Re: Why don't honest journailsts take on Roger Ailes and Fox News?

    I haven't heard any advertising for reform here by big business either. I know the insurance industry is supposedly behind it- Obama decided to dump single-payer at the very beginning just to get their support. After all- what a gift to them- a mandate that everyone must have insurance. They stand to gain millions of new customers to bilk!
    The only big company I ever heard support health care reform was Walmart... who in the summer of last year came out in support of a mandate for businesses to have to provide health care coverage. Maybe some businesses are working behind the scenes in support and we just don't hear about it. I agree with you- it seems like it would be a winner for them in so many respects. Especially if it leads us down the path to single-payer like Medicare and we take health care completely away from employers.

    Here's something I read on a blog... I particularly like the notion that business wants their workers to be fearful and needy of their health insurance- and so much more willing to bow down to anything employers want! That sounds about right to me, sad to say.

    Sunday, March 07, 2010
    Why doesn't big business support a national health service?
    Cross-posted from the blog, Stephen's Blog.
    It is often argued that a "single payer" health insurance system run by the federal government or a national health service would be in the interests of American big business apart from the health insurance companies. The growing burden of healthcare costs on the economy would be brought under control, and companies would no longer have to pay insurance premiums for their employees. Companies in Britain and Canada are quite happy with the national health service in those countries.
    So why does big business not promote a real healthcare reform? This is the question asked by Doug Henwood in Issue 120 of his Left Business Observer (a publication that I highly recommend for its astute analysis of American economic and political developments; see here).
    Apparently some people offer a "web of influence" explanation that focuses on interlocks (overlapping membership) between insurance companies and other companies and on the role of insurance companies as a source of finance for other companies. Henwood presents detailed evidence to show that these are not very significant phenomena.
    Basing himself on testimony from researchers who have interviewed top executives on the issue, Henwood states that some (perhaps even many) executives support "single payer" in private but are reluctant to make their views public for two reasons.
    First, they worry about the possible reaction of other firms with which they do business. Small companies especially are considered hostile to "single payer." They do not stand to gain in terms of costs because they do not provide health insurance to their employees, while they would have to bear part of the additional tax burden. So they would see such a reform as an attempt to shift costs from big business to small business.
    Second, they are afraid of "encouraging would-be expropriators." One informant formulates this fear as follows: "If you can take away someone else's business -- the insurance companies' business -- then you can take away mine." In other words, the politics of capitalist class solidarity trumps the economics of cost reduction.
    Henwood adds another consideration: "Employers like workers to feel insecure. Fear of losing health coverage makes workers less willing to strike or resist pay cuts or speedups."
    At least in this case, it is misleading to view reform politics solely as an arena of conflict among diverse business interests. It is also an arena of class struggle.

    Stefan

  3. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Topanga, CA
    Posts
    2,019

    Re: Why don't honest journailsts take on Roger Ailes and Fox News?

    Well, that was positively disgusting! Sounds like they have it figured out. I hadn't considered the control issues. But I have talked to many people stuck in a job because of medical issues within their family and seen it on TV. There is a family that has a little girl with lung problems, very severe lung problems. Neither parent can take a pay raise or change job for "fear" of earning more money. They currently are able to qualify for SCHIP for their daughter who can need care all of a sudden, out of the blue so to say. That's ridiculous that you have to NOT improve your situation because you have a sick child.

  4. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    9,507

    Post Re: Why don't honest journailsts take on Roger Ailes and Fox News?

    It's just all so crazy... having our health care tied to our employers. It may have made sense years and years ago- but it surely doesn't today.

    That's why, IMO, the best solution is a single-payer system where everyone is covered and we leave the middle-men out. A third of health care costs are nothing but profit mand operating costs for these private health insurers! Why do we need insurance companies? We don't! There's just no logical reason why we should have a middle-man (who's only goal is to make a profit) in health care. It makes no sense.

    If we take the private companies out of the equation- we automatically cut a third off the costs! That's huge! BUt that's not something you will ever hear from the opponents of reform.

    It's obscene... and immoral, IMO, that we are allowing sick people in this country to lose everything they have... just because they had the bad luck to get a serious illness or become disabled. What kind of country are we?!? It's absolutely insane. Nowhere, nowhere, in any other developed country do we find this situation! Nowhere!

    It's way past time for our elected officials to step up to the plate and do what's moral and right for the people of this country... and stop protecting private insurer's profit margins!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •