How many businesses can compete head to head with the US government and succeed?
Please don’t υѕе Obama’s model οf Fed-Ex & thе USPS. Fed-Ex іѕ nοt delivering mail fοr $0.43 coast tο coast.
Whаt businesses саn compete wіth thе US government’s deep pockets аnd survive?
Please сlаrіfу hοw thеу compete wіth thе government?
whimsy: уου hаνе јυѕt proven once again уου hаνе nο thουght whаt уου аrе taking аbουt.
Blackwater, Halliburton, GE, Exxon-Mobile….
HMOs, seriously.
All they have to do is offer rebates to the healthy. Government cannot compete with that.
The Washington Lobby has been spanking the U.S. government for years now.
This should be fascinating, since I hear people say that the government can’t run anything. You seem to be implying that the government will do just about anything better than the private sector.
Seems like conflicted reasoning.
Well most colleges are private and beat out the state universities.
Depends on what the business is.
Only the Catholic church.
Well, there are really only 2 ways to look at it.
Either the public option will fail, and all persons people on it will be right back where they are now…
Or the public option will succeed in such a way that it puts companies out of business (and people out work) to the point that we possibly over work it… and we are all screwed.
Pretty much all of them.
If by “deep pockets” you mean pockets full of holes and Monopoly cash.
The government will be charging people something like 99 dollars a month for their insurance to start and people will switch over–driving the private sector out of business and the government can then charge 500–and Obama will be saying, “well, I believe that people should have excellent shape coverage but they should have to pay.” A monopoly will be produced by the government and that will be that.
None, and that is the function. The govt will run business at a loss, like the Post Office, and tax us to make up the difference which means it really isn’t cheaper because we get charged on the back end. Then private business can’t compete and when they go under the govt has a monopoly and complete control of what you buy and what you do. THAT is their goal.
If the government is willing to lose cash and change the policy so that a private company can not compete then no company can compete.
The government is the only business that can lose millions of dollars each year and subdue survive.
The post office is an model, among many, of a government operation that can provide poor benefit, lose cash, but remain in operation.
They have only lost out in package delivery, not letters, or junk mail, because they don’t allow competition in persons areas.
None only the government can lose cash forever and print more but if they sold the post office somebody bought it they would cut labor and make a profit.
How many businesses posted over a 400% percent increase in PROFITS since the year 2003?
I ain’t too damn worried about the insurance industry.
Nearly every country in Western Europe has combined public/private option – it works splendid.
The private companies aren’t gone, far from it. And the public likes the choice. And there are always people who don’t mind paying a bit more for better coverage.
What lobbyist are you working for?
None. Particularly when the government tacks on a penalty premium if you don’t use them.
Model, I can buy my own insurance from a private entity, but I subdue would have to subsidize the government insurance that I do not use. That’s like CHOOSING to buy a Blue Cross policy and being FORCED to send Kaiser a $300 check every month just to keep them competitive. How long do you reckon I’m going to keep Blue Cross if I’m being forced to pay for a Kaiser policy anyway?
I’m not exactly sure one could succeed over the United States government outright. But, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and other major military producers may be able to do so.
When Eisenhower said his final address to the nation he warned the American people to beware of the “military industrial complex”, a term he coined. What he warned against could be argued is happening right now. So many jobs are tied to the production of military aircraft, weapons, vehicles, toilets (yes we all remember that episode don’t we?), that IF these companies were to stop producing this mass amount of military products then so many people would be out of jobs, it could send the economy into turmoil.
Chelfi-I agree. That does appear to be what is being said.
The kind of business that can compete with the government is any business that produces a feature product or benefit at a reasonable price. The private sector is more accessible to the public than the government is. It’s simpler for me to walk into a retail shop and buy something than it is for me to walk to the local government office of “whatever” to order it. For instance. Let’s take cars. If the government were to manufacture cars then they will more than likeley have limited retail outlets to keep costs down. The private sector is not bound by any policy (other than the rule of profits) to do that. Thus making it more convinient for me as a consumer to find a private dealer and buy from them. The only come forth left to reconcile will be the feature of the product. If “Huge Gov Autos” offers a better feature product for the cash, then consumers may want to switch. But that should only force the private sector to offer feature and affordability. That’s the key. Feature and affordability. If companies continue to set price points above what is sensible for their customers, they will ultimately force all of their customers out leaving only a select few who can afford the product or benefit. There’s no point in lining your own pockets if you are your only customer.
obviously none. but I reckon that’s the point. he wants total control of our shape care and it scares the hell out of me.