These people (Republican's I guess) can't be serious about this lame idea?????? Wasn't a privatized army in Iraq a big enough of a mess for them???? Not only are these private companies more expensive they are in business to make a lot of money. It has the ring of being something close to a Mafia protection scam! They now want to transport it to this country to continue on with their evil deeds with a bunch of thugs roaming the streets bashing in heads. This comes close to being the dumbest idea they have come up with yet. A bunch of Black Water thugs on the streets(I forgot they changed their name to something else)acting like Storm Troopers.

Michael Lind intended the essay as satire. But the presentation is so deadpan (except for the parody naming of the characters) that it reads pretty much verbatim identically to some sincere laissez-faire Libertarian screeds I've read.

I'll concede that the laissez-faire thing might even work- for communities of up to around 1000 people or so.

Beyond that, profound cracks begin to appear in the structure. And you wouldn't even want to find out how they'd get repaired, or plastered over.

felix- since it seems that you're new to learning about the level of political debate being carried on in the USA, here's a handy primer--

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/06/30/tomo/

[click the link at my signature]

You can research the archive over there for more helpful lessons.

I neglected to mention that my property taxes went up 87% in 2008. And now with a larger than average collection of homes in foreclosure, and the fact that those homes are new homes, priced above the market, and the fact that those prior owners were, at least on paper, shouldering the burden of future property tax obligations, that, my taxes are in the pipeline to be massively increased AGAIN, as a result to make up for the shortfall.

Once again, prudence gets gang banged.

For giving all the real Salon readers an opportunity to work on their polemics, which will go a long way to convincing their swing-voting co-workers of the problems with right wing policies.

Professional Winger Trolls: helping liberals win the public mind!

Was just enjoying the first sips of the first cup of coffee. It took me a minute to figure out what Mr. Lind was talking about.

Jokes aside, we won't solve the problem without addressing the most glaring inefficienies:

* Healthcare is one of few services where the service provider does not tell you the cost in advance. When was the last time you got out of the doctor's office and not been billed for more than you $20 co-pay. The doctor performs a test that appears routine and 4 months later you get an indecipherable "explanation of benefits" that states (without any explanation) that you owe hundreds of additional dollars. If your mechanic tried that, he'd be in jail. For doctors and the insurance companies, this is SOP.

* Sometimes this situation arises because the doctor's lab and the doctor don't both belong to my insurance network. So is the problem that we don't have a single payer system? Seems there's a problem in that we don't have a single biller system.

* Do we really need a doctor to do all of this? Let's empower more nurses to do more. A nurse couldn't prescribe an antibiotic? Or a muscle relaxant for back pain?

* Supply and demand. When demand is greater than supply, prices rise and you may have to introduce elaborate quota and rationing systems (which is what insurance companies and government run plans do). Why not encourage more doctors? Right now most practitioners come out of school flooded in debt. If we can afford billions to bailout GM (ha!), can't we introduce (or expand) national medical and nursing school scholarship programs? This would boost supply and help lower cost in the long run.

* Insurance companies claim they help contain costs with all of their complex procedures of review, denial, etc. Yet healthcare costs skyrocket. If I managed my department's costs the way insurance companies manage healthcare costs I'd be fired. Defenders of the status quo should stop pretending insurance companies are the victims (of malpractice no less!). Their clearly failing in their job and Americans have a right to be frustrated. Let's see the insurance companies make some improvements before we consider them as part of the answer.

You have just given Republicans an excuse for eliminating all public services in favor of private sector services. Trust me, this country will never see universal health coverage. Our Elite want us stupid, hungry, and sick. All the better to control us. This country is over. O. V. E. R.

Liked your "news story," Michael. Did you read my post on open.salon: "What If Firefighting Were Run Like Health Care?"?

Like your post, it's a satire--only using firefighters instead of police.

http://open.salon.com/blog/becky_cheston/most_read

Reading some of the conservative/libertarian responses would be funny if they were not so pathetic and ugly. But one thing is clear: libertarians are not moved by facts. Libertarians have a religious dogma and nothing is going to shake it from them. Facts just don't matter to these people. They pray to their corporate gods and those gods are all that matter to them.

Policing, military protection, and the like are legitimate responsibilities of the government, something only a government can do.

...

Health care is not something only the government can do.

That is a completely artificial distinction that you make. For example, in the ancient Roman Republic policing is something that was done by private forces. You had money, you hired security. Somebody murdered your family member, it was up to you to prosecute. Later the Roman Empire turned to mercenaries for their armies as well. It was one of the corruptions that led to its downfall.

So Lind's parody is apt since policing, fire protection, military protection all fall in your second category (along with health care) of things that can be done both privately and publicly.

Private enterprise is very good at giving us excellent goods and services where competition really and truly applies and there are incentives to create the best product. For example: digicams, bread, iPods, etc. If I don't like baker A's bread it won't kill me and I can go elsewhere for my bread. But that's not the case with health insurance because consumers have little choice, and without choice the marketplace will not work. My own choice now is: I take my employer's plan, or I go broke paying for my own, or I go without. Some choice, eh?

(Never mind that it's often done better by private entities, too. Compare the survival rates for cancer and heart disease in Canada and the U.S.)

Then why is the industry so afraid of the so-called "public option"?