Corporate greed is more harmful than taxes collected by the government

"I'm hating the character limit I put." You're not alone :) "that's far more true of beauracracies who are on government salary" It's far more true that salaries funded by plunder leads to control by right? How can plunder =right? "Imagine where we'd be if police or fire departments were managed by corporations the way hospitals are." First off, hospitals are mostly run by bureaucratic mandates, private corporations just take the crap they're given for rules and try to find some way to make it function (as a result, most hospitals are nonprofit). Second, if they were managed by corporations in a free market (the issue is not whether they are run by corporations as such, since governments ARE corporations, simply ones engaged in plunder rather than trade), they would be subject to the laws of economics and therefore economized upon-- i.e., oolice services would go where they were valued, instead of on tracking down druggies, hookers, and other folks whose "Crimes" harm no one. Fire departments are already fairly well run, I don't envision much change in them in a free market, though they would no longer have to "ban buildings" for not complying with "fire codes," and could instead simply charge higher fire protection rates to those buildings. "f you have no insurance and no means to pay, no one will put out the fire destroying your house and no one will bring the creep who raped your little girl to justice" The alternative being slavery. The risk of not being competent is more than outweighed by the reward of actually having a shot to live a life that is YOURS. By the way, I can imagine quite a significant possibility of charities providing funds for the protection of children against rape, as evidenced by the current popularity of denouncing even non-rape relations with children. Same people who work for Perverted Justice would probably be more than willing :). People don't HAVE regular access to a doctor when the government controls health care. They have regular access to a waiting list (unless, in some countries, they have political clout, but clearly earning service by providing something in exchange for it is a superior basis to having political clout). "Compare this with "socialist" states-- hey pay less than we do out of their paychecks for health care, and get much more! " They get much more if you think of humans in terms of cattle-- you get more, healthier meat, because expensive services become impossible to obtain, the money that would otherwise be spent on them by those who earned it going instead to fund statistics for those who did not earn it. They do not get much more in terms of a total product-- since the "expensive" illness is often outweighed by the great productive capacity of the person who has it, and yet many cannot produce enough to justify even the cheap illness. Of course, as evidenced earlier, under a free market (as opposed to our regulatorily crippled market) access across the board is cheaper. "I don't see why Americans left to die by HMO greed are any less victims than the victims of terrorism. " "Leaving someone to die" means "leaving them alone.--" i.e., not being their slave. Refusal to be a slave is not the same as attacking another person. " I challenge you to shop around to find what HMOs you can get as an alternative to your employer-supported one." Irrelevant. Our current system is a direct result of taxes, as are the other systems. The differences are trivial compared to those obtainable in a free market. It is the free market, not our current regulated one, which I am supporting. "when you are forced into a game of Russian Roulette by corporations" "Force" has nothing to do with the corporations. The corporations create health care, it's up to you if you wish to accept it. "Force" is what happens when you make those who create health care, and the things which make it possible, your slaves. Which you do :)