All throughout this HCR "debate"...

[SHRED]

...the business sector was also something that really surprised the hell outta me.

I thought they would have rallied hard in favor of a single-payer health insurance system to relieve the burden of HC insurance cost off of their backs.
Increasing their competitiveness by removing this obscene insurance cost/burden seemed like a "no-brain-er" to me.


:shrug:

[grantcart]

1. I agree

It shows how insular American business is and how little do they understand the economy outside of the US.

[SHRED]

2. These are alleged "educated" people

Go figure.

[TwilightGardener]

3. That's what I would've thought too--

They'd become more competetive with the rest of the world if they didn't have to carry that burden.

[lapfog_1]

4. But they are also Republicans (for the most part)

and they are reflexively against any government involvement in, well, anything.

Plus, I suspect many are thinking that the mandate + subsidy will allow them to shed insurance plans anyway.

[billyoc]

5. They reflexively are against any domestic program for fear of increased taxes.

[SHRED]

6. It would be the removal of a "tax"

The "tax" of picking up the cost, or partial cost, of very expensive health insurance premiums.


---

[blondeatlast]

7. But the devil is in the details; the operative word in boc's post is "fear" of increased taxes.

As he notes, it's reflexive--and that's all it takes.

[SHRED]

9. Yep...I guess "knee-jerk" is alive an well

That is the only reasoning I can come up with.
Ignorance-based fear.

---

[DJ13]

8. I also agree, but US corps like using the "cost disadvantage" as an excuse

to outsource.

A single payer system would have removed that excuse by reducing cost of manufacture here in the US.