Which means health care management groups would have bilked American consumers to the tune of $2 Trillion without the planned intervention of President Obama. That’s $2 Trillion of profit that health management groups have collectively decided to forego in order to keep universal coverage, even a single-payer version, off the table. Because let’s be honest: these corporations exist to deliver profits to their shareholders. They will do everything they can to ensure they’re the entities delivering health “care” to consumers instead of the government. Which leads to this question: How much more profit could be shaved off so that actual care does get delivered to consumers more often? Which leads to this question again: Why should health care be delivered by for-profit corporations? There is no reason to have health care kept exclusively in the for-profit arena. If an entity can deliver care more efficiently that isn’t for-profit, it should be allowed, even encouraged to do so. Americans have stated they want that choice in the health care marketplace. Having that choice available will allow us to truly examine which delivery method makes more sense. If for-profits are too wasteful to survive, they’ll either change their ways or fail.
At the end of the day, the critical metric is how many people are able to get the care they need, not how many corporations exist or how many record profits they can garner.