Unfortunately, that price will likely be too low for stockholders, etc. Also, we should be able to offer prices for food, etc. That's a sweet idea, but impossible to implement without commisars, and we all saw how that worked out... what will we have? Immense mechanisms to determine the price of everything by someone's opinion? We have that: The Marketplace.

What we need are observers who see when illegal steps/actions occur to prevent the market from acting freely - ie monopolies, price fixing, etc.

The effort to fix "affordable" prices has resulted in the hyperinflation of health care costs in the US. These efforts are called Medicare and Medicaid.

Please take a look at this article:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/understanding_the_cause_of_hea.html

The same thing would happen to food, clothing, etc. if their prices were 'fixed'. Government isn't the fix in this case.

Victor5 ....read #111...

AGAIN

It is neither incoherent, loaded, NOR desperate, however the inability of SOME to comprehend may just make it all moot.

If you cannot understand its relevance then you, too are being deliberately obtuse for the sake of point-scoring.

The reality is STILL that there are people who 'like' doing things that are either abhorrent to others or are ILLEGAL...or both.

What makes ANY ACTION universally acceptable is exactly that....'universal acceptance'.  A small, specific group 'liking' a course of action, WHATEVER IT MAY BE does NOT define universal social acceptance.

The marketplace would be all well and good as a self-regulator if it were a fair and level playing field to begin with.  Sadly, the majority of corporations seek to extract the maximum they think the market can bear, and in doing so, those at the lower end of the socio-economic scale are deprived the opportunity to compete for goods and/or services. Instead of using the mentality that it is much easier to get one dollar from one million people, they keep prices high to extract that same million from a smaller number of wealthier clients/customers.

What this does is to create a class of elites and a class of "I want to be a part of this modern, consumerist world but can't afford to", thus creating societal inequity and those coveting that which they see wealthier citizens enjoying but cannot afford themselves.  Once a society like that is created it is inevitable that inequity leads to jealousy and jealousy leads to crime.

It wouldn't matter how many observers you employ to monitor these things, price fixing has been a corporate tool for manipulating the masses as well as maximising profits, and politicians have been/will be handsomely rewarded for their inaction in this regard, so it will continue unabated until capitalism in its purest form is brought to its knees.

It's all well and good to hope for positive things for the masses from the corporate world, but truth, justice and fairness will never ever be a part of corporate psyche while profit is the prime mover. 

Again, this comes back to corporate greed... the health insurers and corporate doctors who administer businesses rather than medicine.  While it is not perfect, we have government run health care here in Australia and it works well with the private sector.  While one can/could pay a fortune for treatment at a private facility, the public system provides more than adequate health care free of charge and the country isn't going guts up because it's government run. 

True, governments stuff up here and there, but I think the US' aversion to government controlling anything [other war and the military] is based on fallacy and untruths perpetuated by self-serving corporate interests who'd rather not give up another share of the economic pie.  Put simply, there's money in medicine and the US corporate isn't giving that up for anyone's better health.  The truth is, if other countries have proven it works, corporate America has purposely sabotaged universal health care and the American public has been duped/brainwashed into thinking it won't/can't work.   Land of the Free?  Not according to the ex-pats who reckon the US is one of the most manipulated and over-governed countries in the world, though not by government alone. 

Ah. So as long as you want it, it's ok to take it. The deprivation defense is not legally recognised.

The essence of business is profit: Not what YOU or I would consider "fair". The market/consumers do that.

They do the same in Medicare and Medicaid. Government run health care is like every other government run entity: Beset with nonsense rules and regulations made to cover government toadies' arses. And waste. Oh what waste. I remember the 'great' care you received, mate. Not that it would have been better under a govenment program here. Government programs are the shelter of the non caring. The VA is the perfect example. The workers get 'tenure' and from then on it's cruise control.

Nope. It's based on seeing one gov't. screw up after another. We also treasure our freedom too much to surrender it to a "benificent" government. Medicare and Medicaid are Democratic power bases as the rich and loopholes are the Republicans'. I want no self serving group of power hungry bought and paid for politicians in charge of my health care: Neither now nor ever.

In Australia the public health system is recognised by both major parties.  While it is not perfect, it works quite well and is just part of the landscape.  But the profit motive says nothing for a great deal of kindness and compassion, and a lot (all?) of the free computer programs that many of us use would not exist if the profit motive was applied to everything.  The economy is not the sum total of human capacity - why do open source and free programs exist?  Just what is their economic use?  This just proves that the economy is just one piece of the puzzle.  Just as not all the world is explained by economics, not all of what government does is useless or intrinsically valueless.  The government has a place in society, just not all-important or of nil-importance.  Moderation - not too little, nor too much - as they say, helps with a great many things.

Best regards,
Steven.

I'm not saying it's right, just that when inequity is engineered to benefit an elite group while the majority are deprived/having to go without, stealing the unattainable is the only way some know to level the playing field a little.

Business obviously has to make some profit in order to exist, but it is the obscene level of profit to which major corporations aspire to regardless, and sadly, the market/consumers do not set the price, corporate big-wigs do, and thus profit is in their hands, not the consumers.  When corporations speak of exponential growth, they're not speaking about expansion but rather how many more of your [the public's] dollars they can grab, and if they can't sell you more shit, they'll care you more for the shit you do/will buy.  That IS corporate mentality,... ruthless, and to believe/think otherwise, well it'd be like being off with the fairies.

For the most part, private [non-government] doctors were the thorn in my side when I could not get decent pain relief, etc.  I have since found a decent doctor who does not refer to foreign law/culture to refuse treatment, but rather he addresses my issues and treats them accordingly.  Also, my recent treatment at the public hospital here in Ipswich was very good and I have no complaints there, either.  The staff were courteous and polite and respectful.

However, if what you say is true of health care in the US then there is something fundamentally wrong, not just with government, the insurers and health care in general, but with society as a whole.  It is totally ludicrous that a country as advanced as the US can't manage a workable health system, and frankly, it sounds far from the land of the free and I'm glad I don't live there.... it's going down the proverbial gurgler

I am at the lower end of the socio-economic scale here in Australia, yet it seems I enjoy many more choices and freedoms than I ever could/would in the US, and certainly more than many [supposedly better off than me] in the US do  And here I was bitching about Gillard's carbon tax last week.  Shit, that's bugger all compared to what's going on over there.

Theft is theft. Prison doesn't level any playing field. It's the Criminal Higher Learning Center.

The profit goes to the company and is disbursed to executives and employees (they don't get paid from thin air), stockholders and invested for expansion. Also to pay bills. They want to sell more. Fine. So?

You think you got great care. Hope you did. But your frame of reference is 2 socialized health care systems with rationing protocols, etc. Do tell about the chances a 60 year old has of getting on Dialysis in England if he can't pay for it himself. Great system. It was born out of post WWII poverty, and reflects that in the care it gives. The priorities are "different".

You are completely avoiding or ignoring the greater issue here.  I'm not saying theft is right or that it isn't a crime, but rather that the mechanisms to steal were created by the very people who complain about it most... the wealthy.  What I am saying is that we need to remove more of the reasons/causes if we are to reduce the incidence of theft... and to make society a more equitable place would be one right step in that direction. 

Okay, stealing is wrong, but is an already wealthy entrepreneur any better when he/she marks up his/her goods by 800% to maximise profit per unit?  We have one such retailer here in Oz, and because his sales have fallen, largely due to online prices being more competitive, he wants government to tax online purchases at a higher rate to force consumers back to his stores. F**k him, I'll never step foot in one of his stores, ever, not with his billions and whining, self-serving arrogance, and I'm not the only one according to opinion polls.  

Some of his markups are/have been 900%. according to our consumer watchdog  So tell me, how is that any less stealing than stealing a loaf of bread?  In both instances, somebody's expendable income is reduced... in both cases somebody is ripped off.  The one difference is that one is legal and the other is not... while one suffers a small dent in a huge personal fortune, the other gets to feed his family another day.  To me, neither crime is acceptable, but my sympathies would err on the side of the person who, through no fault of their own, is forced by socio-economic inequity to steal to feed his/her family. 

For mine, the wealthy retailer/entrepreneur deserves no sympathy because he most likely begged, borrowed and stole to get where he is, and hopefully on Judgement Day his Hell is twice as hot and fiery as the bloke who stole simply to feed his family... cos really, which is the greater crime at the end of the day? 

And this is different from the impoverished family man in the US who has no health cover and no disposable income how?  I have spoken to a number of people from the US who came to Australia specifically to receive health care because it is equally as good as and far more equitable than what they had at home.  You can decry the public system all you want, and laud the excesses of the private sector all you want, the fact is, I would rather an imperfect public system that co-exists with a private one... and in the event the public system cannot accommodate my particular need, I can resource the private sector to provide treatment...

Yes, that's right, under the universal health care scheme here, I could access private health resources and be reimbursed 75% of my initial outlay... my/our government's way of ensuring I/we [at the lower end of the socio-economic scale] do have access to adequate health services.  Is it perfect?  Hell no, and I don't always have the spare cash to pay for private services up front, but various providers 'bulk bill' [send medicare the bill] and my treatment is not with-held on grounds of inability to pay. 

Am I always happy with the outcome?  Nope, I'm a grumpy old bastard who's in a lot of pain most of the time, and while that's not the doctor's fault, it helps to blame him/her and let off a bit of steam with a good whine.

In a humane, compassionate and caring society, the primary focus of any hospital and/or doctor should be the provision of health care... before the cost involved becomes a consideration.  Sadly, for far too many [and that's worldwide], the primary concern is finance and even basic care is denied because the propensity to pay is not there.  That is my greatest argument against the broad privatisation of hospitals... because a profit is there to be made and that is the primary goal.  True, public health has administrative waste and etc, but waste if far more acceptable to me than the provision of care being denied because "he/she is poor" and profit will take a hit.  In other words, the body corporate and shareholders can't afford compassion.,, or simply don't have it because the dollar signs are too distracting

Anyway, I have seen how it works here... and you have seen how it doesn't work there, so how about we agree to disagree.  Our system.. your system... a bit like comparing apples to oranges, don't yer think?

I decry the lacks of the public system and do not "laud" the private sector, as it has major faults as well.

I am opposed to the excesses of both. The inhumanity of yours (and the defection of good practioners from it), as well as the "conceirge" practioners here. I understand them, and they do their share of treating the uninsured, if not enough. I decry the lack of the Public option here because that would have caused prices to fall. I do not believe it would have caused the government take over of medicine... paranoid crap.

You are enamored of socialized medicine and its obligatory rationing. Fine. I don't want my life in the hands of a high school drop-out clerk.

You attribute everything you don't like to greed. I attribute the shortcomings of both systems to putting ideology before people. 

No, I am not at the mercy of some high school dropout clerk.  When I attend the public hospital I am placed in a queue to see a doctor... when I see that doctor I am assessed by him/her, not a clerk... and if I require further attention [x-rays, dressings, minor or major surgery] I will likely receive it. 

Like I said before, the system is imperfect, and I'm certainly not enamoured by it.  If anything, I want to avoid it like the plague, and not because I am worried about its effectiveness/ability to treat me.  No, having to attend a hospital would mean I am sick/there's something wrong, right?

Again, no!  Some of it I attribute to pure evil and/or corruption.  The rest I attribute to bankers, ex-wives and not enough corn flakes for breakfast.  However, greed is a primary motivator for human excesses and shortcomings, don't you think?

Oh, and to let of steam that's built up because of rampant corporate greed, sometimes I go down to the CBD where all the bankers and corporate high flyers park their cars, and if I hit the parking meter just right with the palm of my hand, the expired tag pops up and they're greeted with a parking ticket or 3 by the time they knock off work... hehe.

Now can we agree to disagree?

And the simple fact is, we are all different and there are some things we, as individuals, will never come to agreement over, and this is perhaps one of them.

EDIT: You posted 41 seconds before I did.

Best regards,
Steven.

And the thing is, I know I'm right... only because the missus hasn't told me [as yet] I'm wrong. 

Thing is, she's never told you you're right.

@Starkers: Would you mind if I quoted you in my topic Inside Job about the economic collapse?

No need!  I'm right unless she tells me otherwise.

[must admit though, that's more often than not]

No, not at all... go for it.