Government Run Care Is Wasteful
by Big Dog on Sep 19, 2009 at 01:07 Political
The idea that the government can run anything efficiently is one that I cannot get my hands around and I cannot understand those who believe this to be true. How many government programs have to run out of money and how many have to be funded with tax increases or reduction in benefits before people begin to see that government is not in the business of business and is inefficient?
Social Security will be paying more than it takes in in a few short years (something Bush warned about) and the paper IOUs that the government exchanged for the money it confiscated from the program are worthless. We have NO money to pay out when the bill finally comes due and current recipients will receive no cost of living increase next year. The Democrats have a solution and that is to raise the cap on which people pay Social Security taxes. This would happen without a corresponding increase in benefits that a person would receive in retirement. One would get the same for paying taxes on 130,000 dollars as the guy who paid taxes on 90,000. There is never a corresponding increase in benefits when taxes are increased.
Medicare is broke. It pays out more than it takes in. This, like Social Security, is a huge Ponzi scheme in which the current workers are paying for those who have retired. The only difference between these government programs and what Bernie Madoff ran is that the government’s Ponzi scheme is legal.
Medicare is touted as a success story by those on the left. They claim it runs efficiently and has a 2 or 3% operating cost. This is absolutely incorrect and is extremely misleading. Medicare has a lot of costs that are absorbed in other parts of the federal budget and the methods it uses to calculate administrative costs are based on fuzzy math.
Speaking of scams, the argument that Medicare’s administrative costs are 2% is one of the biggest scams out there.
Public figures for Medicare’s administrative costs count only what it takes to print reimbursement checks. Normal operating costs — rent, management, health insurance, taxes, capital to start a business and new equipment — which private insurers must include in their administrative costs, are counted elsewhere in the federal budget.
Official Medicare administrative costs simply exclude what most companies must include. No administrative cost savings exist in the public plan, and the true costs will never be counted because they’ll be hidden in the federal budget. American Spectator
A frequent argument is that, by removing the profit motive, the federal government, as through Medicare and Medicaid, does a more efficient job insuring health care than do private insurers. Congressional Research Service estimates Medicare’s administrative costs at 2 percent of the total program costs, compared to 12 percent for HMOs, and 10 percent for private insurers. A study by the consulting firm Milliman and Robertson, however, estimates that when factoring in the hidden costs shifted to care providers, and the social costs of collecting taxes for funding, Medicare and Medicaid actually spend 27 cents per dollar more on administration, compared to 16 cents per dollar spent by private insurers. The Evening Times
This program is what Obama wants for America and he claims that it will not add one dime to the deficit. He claims it will be deficit neutral. That is what he says now but what did he say when he was candidate Obama? He said that going to a Medicare like program would cost and additional 90 or 100 BILLION dollars a year. He said that it would cost 15 BILLION dollars to set up certain programs and he said that the idea that this kind of coverage would save money is only a theory. He said the reality was it would COST money.
Then he said that the reason that Medicare reimburses at about 62 cents on the dollar is because politicians use that program as a safety valve when there are budget problems. He said that when money is tight the politicians delay reimbursement or lower the rate and that doctors have to “suck it up.” Gateway Pundit has the video and what he said as a candidate is drastically different from what he is saying now. Please go look at the video and see for yourself that he is lying now about the costs.
It is also important to listen to what he said about how politicians use this program to ease budget problems. If they are tight on money then they delay payments or reduce them and expect doctors to suck it up. If his takeover of the health care system passes there will be plenty of budget shortfalls and that means delayed reimbursements and lower rates with doctors sucking up more of it. And keep this in mind, if they can do this to the doctors to ease budget problems then they can also ration care to accomplish the same thing. Obama would rather you take a pain pill in the first place. If he gets control of your health care then some government bean counter can decide if you should get the treatment you need based on the budget. The savings have to come from somewhere and Obama already said that the government uses Medicare as a safety valve.
The government is not efficient. Do you like the Postal Service? I think it is amazing they can get a letter to anywhere in the US for less than 50 cents but they also run a deficit in the billions of dollars. If they were a private business they would have gone belly up but they are a government entity so they are going nowhere. Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution allows Congress to establish the Postal Service and postal roads. This means they are here to stay no matter how poorly they are run.
Do you like the Department of Motor Vehicles? Run by state governments, they are an exercise in inefficiency. How about the Passport Office? Ever go there to get a Passport? IRS, Customs, and just about any other government agency you can name specializes in the run around and expending huge amounts of money.
Hell, The TSA is a government agency and look at how it operates. TSA stand for Thousands Standing Around.
The idea that government run health care will be a good thing is beyond reason. It is not about health and it is not about care. It is all about control over our lives.
Lastly, take notice in the video. Obama mentions single payer health care. That is the ultimate goal.
The government does not belong involved in this and if it succeeds the only thing we will have is a further erosion of our freedom.
I suppose the DNC will now try to rain hell down upon me. Two words for you morons; Bring It.
Related:
Mandatory Health Care is unconstitutional
Medicare efficiency over-hyped
Fannie Med?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: health care, inefficient, medicare, Obama
Bigd: Social Security will be paying more than it takes in in a few short years>>
DAR
False.
“…variously estimated as 2041 (by the Social Security Administration[84]) or 2052 (by the Congressional Budget Office[85]), the Social Security Trust Fund will have exhausted the claim on general revenues that had been built up during the years of surplus. At that point, current Social Security tax receipts would be sufficient to fund 74 or 78% of the promised benefits, according to the two respective projections.”
At that time it will need a tweak. Easy, tax the rich.
Bigd: (something Bush warned about)>>
DAR
Bush tried to loot SS for wall street. He got laughed out of town.
Since Bush then went on to have the worst stock market ever (net loss of 20% v. Clinton gain of 330%), that was an iceberg missed.
Bigd: We have NO money to pay out when the bill finally comes due>>
DAR
A common rookie mistake. Assume all of our debts are owed now. I don’t have the money to pay for my home right now, but I will over the years. Same thing with the government.
Bigd: “Medicare is broke. It pays out more than it takes in.>>
DAR
You need to learn the difference between these two things. They are not the same. Medicare is not in place to make money so it is entirely appropriate for it to run surpluses at times and then deficits before it gets adjusted again.
Bigd: They claim it runs efficiently and has a 2 or 3% operating cost.>>
DAR
I have seen considerably higher than that, but bottom-line, it blows the doors of off the private sector for really obvious, really easy to understand reasons. I’ll get to these later.
Bigd: based on fuzzy math.>>
DAR
Make all the fuzz you want. It blows away the private sector. Not even close. Your articles are just grossly misleading.
Bigd: “Public figures for Medicare’s administrative costs count only what it takes to print reimbursement checks.”>>
DAR
Sorry, your American Spectator source just lost all credibility with that howler.
Bigd: “He said that going to a Medicare like program would cost and additional 90 or 100 BILLION dollars a year.”>>
DAR
Not net. You are confused.
Bigd: “he said that the idea that this… He said the reality was it would COST money.”
DAR
And of course you don’t actually quote him. You just go from memory. I don’t trust your memory.
Bigd: “Medicare reimburses at about 62 cents on the dollar”>>
DAR
Good. That’s too high. Being a doctor shouldn’t be a license to be rich. They need caps just like all other utilities and basic services. That’s what is coming, some day.
Being rich distracts from the task of healing people and being a doctor. Maybe this is why we have one of the highest medical error rates, they are thinking about their golf games.
Bigd: “Do you like the Postal Service?>>
DAR
Let’s ask:
Pollingreport survey, The Postal Service rating:
Favorable……………..58%
Somewhat favorable……..31%
…………………… =89%
So, ah, yes, we do.
Bigd: “…they also run a deficit in the billions of dollars.”
DAR
What’s that, three days in Iraq? Big deal. Their goal is to break even not make money. In an business that large, a couple billion a year is close enough.
Bigd: “[US Postal is] here to stay no matter how poorly they are run.>>
DAR
They are very well run. The US Postal service is top notch, world class. You should be proud of these hard working people, many of them ex-military. STOP bashing America.
Bigd: Do you like the Department of Motor Vehicles?>>
DAR
Love them. I have visited them probably a dozen times in the last three years. We have a nice new building and I have never waited more than five-eight minutes. Usually 2-3. Zero complaints, first class professional service.
Bigd: How about the Passport Office? Ever go there to get a Passport?>>
DAR
Got one this year. Easy as pie, came way ahead of schedule. The only trouble? Dealing with the private business that took the passport photo (Sears). For my wife they screwed it up twice. The government part worked perfectly.
Bigd: IRS, Customs, and just about any other government agency you can name specializes in the run around and expending huge amounts of money.>>
DAR
Always have had a smooth time with IRS and Customs and have dealt with both, recently. Right now am getting the run around by Bank of America (completely screwed up an in house, home re-fi by taking seven months) and Verizon (they think I owe them $2,700 and we have been getting the complete run around for 30 days). Unbelievable. Your private sector big corporation service SUCKS.
Bigd: The TSA is a government agency and look at how it operates.>>
DAR
I have. I have been flying lately and go through their check points in minutes. Like a well oiled machine. Perfect. Top notch. Zero complaints.
Bigd: The idea that government run health care will be a good thing is beyond reason.>>
DAR
Without defining “government run” this really means nothing. Nearly every one of these countries that kick our butts in health care, have private docs and private hospitals, and several even have private insurance too. You need to study up on this.
Bigd: single payer health care. That is the ultimate goal.>>
DAR
In the end, it will be what works. It may take decades and complete fiscal collapse to get there. A good way would be for one sensible state (up north where the IQ’s are higher) to make the leap, and then everyone will see how excellent it is, and then it will spread (like gay marriage) everywhere. That’s how Canada did it. And then it passed nationally, unanimously. Not a single politician opposed.
It would pass the same way if they voted again today.
D.
You are so full of it D-
1)- If you pay out more than you take in, you will go broke, that is a fact.
2)- While the USPS does deliver letters and packages, they, as Dog points out run a deficit (for all you socialists out there, that means they run out of money, and do not make a profit) and need government to bail them out like they were kids that get an allowance.
3)- Actually, SS will run out of money far sooner than even Dog predicts, because politicians from both sides have been using the actual funds for their pet projects (think the John Murtha Airport) and the IOUs they have been putting in the till don’t feed the bulldog.
4)- “Their goal is to break even, not make money. In a(n) business that large, a couple of billion a year is close enough.” Spoken like a true socialist- the goal in the capitalist society, if you are even a quasi- private business, is to make money, but they do not even come close to breaking even- a “couple of billion” is not close.
Bottom line, no example you cite has government run anything running in an efficient manner, at or under cost, and healthcare would be as bad.
Doctors leaving in droves, 20 million more people dropped into the system, using yesterday’s technology, because there is no financial incentive to innovate- oh boy, can hardly wait!
The mandatory sign up is unconstitutional, and I for one will not sign up- I guess I’ll use Darrel’s insurance, at least until the government transfers him to the gubbmint option.
Just to touch on the US Postal Service; it is provided for by the US Constitution, if I’m not mistaken. ( No time for citation). Am I wrong?
No, you are right, but as a quasi- governmental entity (part govt, subsidized- part private enterprise) they are at least, after all costs, supposed to break even, and year after year, they do not, thus costing the government more and more.
1) There is a difference between “will” and “are.” Learn this difference.
2) The USPS ran billion dollar surpluses in ’03, ’04 and ’05. Lately they have been running minor and insignificant deficits. This doesn’t get a “bail out” but rather a price increase paid by users.
3) I provided standard non-partisan references showing estimates for when SS would “run out.” They refute Dog’s claim and he didn’t address this.
BLK: no example you cite has government run anything running in an efficient manner, at or under cost,>>
DAR
Under cost would be in deficit, which you just said you were against. Confused people often contradict themselves.
BLK: Doctors leaving in droves,>>
DAR
Rubbish. With the highest paid doc’s we are 52nd in per capita doc’s. Nearly all of our peer countries, with systems far more socialized, have more doc’s per-capita.
D.
Your SS references are outdated- the 2016 date is the most recent I have found, under or below cost is not a deficit- under profit would be- get your terms right, and doctors have declared that if this bad plan goes through, many will leave- that is a statement that is subjective certainly, but even you would agree that we can’t afford a loss of even one doctor.
And pay caps on salary are counter- productive to incentivizing potential doctors to join the work force- I know you are from Canada, but here in the US, we have a capitalistic system of rewarding work with pay- a radical concept, I know, especially for a Canuk, but if you read about it, you will find that this is the best way of rewarding work, and pay caps only work in government positions. Doctors should never be government workers.
BLK: “Your SS references are outdated”>>
DAR
I gave references, you give nothing. IF you give references I will then explain exactly how you are completely misunderstanding the situation anyway. SS will not run out.
BLK: “pay caps only work in government positions.”>>
DAR
Think mandated fee caps. Even your cable TV, which is hardly an essential service like health care, has it’s fee’s regulated. Etc.
D.
Kudos to DAR!
You expertly deconstructed every line of BS (or I should say; DS) of Big Dog’s party line propaganda and misinformation.
Give me a single payer, public option and I’ll drop my current, ever shrinking benefits for a redoubling premium, health care-LESS plan like the DOG that it is.
I have just been notified that my carrier, in more words than this, will make any change to the pharmacopeia and covered procedures at any time, with my only recourse is to pay out of pocket.
The sooner private insurers are cut from my equation, the better!
This flap about doctors and end of life consulting is a red herring, because right now, if grandma is healthy, but goes to the doctor with questions about end of life care, the doctor gets $0 for his time. I think they should be paid for their time.
These rabid, anti-health care idiots claimed that if Stephen Hawking, well known astrophysicist, had lived in England and depended upon their system of health care, he would have died long ago.
Wrong! Stephen Hawking is a citizen of Great Britain and credits the excellent health care received under that system as the reason he is still alive!
The reasons that regular Americans want public health care are obvious. Private insurance diverts a big chunk of our health care dollars to their profits. That’s money that won’t buy a band-aid for my little toe.
I don’t worry that government will “pull the plug” on me. We all know that insurance companies “pull the plug” all the time. Even worse, insurance companies never even “plug in the plug” in the first place. They fight with their profit-laden legal funds tooth and nail ( and liver and heart ) to deny care at every possible turn.
Every patient that dies while fighting for critical care is just more $$$ in their pockets.
Again; give regular Americans the health care we deserve. Give us the choice of public health care.
As the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States states; “… in order to for a more perfect Union, … promote the General Welfare, …”, it is our right to expect such basic services as health care from our government.
Sincerely, W. Williams
There is no right to healthcare- that is a socialist lie- but you are welcome to be socialist in one hand and poop in the other- both will smell equally bad.
Mr. Williams- I hate to disagree with you, but no. 1, you do not have to get healthcare now- you can just go without- but if you do, you might (now) be denied because of a pre- existing condition- I agree that this is not right, but the greatest cost cutter would be tort reform, which Hussein, because he is a lawyer, and his wife is a lawyer, will not do- even though it would be in THE NATION’S INTEREST- but then as we have seen, he doesn’t care much about that.
The government will have rationing every bit as onerous as that of insurance companies, or worse.
There is no one as heartless as a government drone.
To call President Obama “Hussein” adds nothing to your argument. He wasn’t my first choice and I’m not 100% happy with his performance. Look at what Dennis Kucinich has sponsored in the House of Representatives, H.R. 676.
Whether or not we have a “right” to health care doesn’t change the fact that a healthy, well educated and informed citizenry is, without doubt, in the best interest of our country. As for the government rationing of health care being equally onerous; whatever criteria are used in that rationing, it won’t be money. That distinction right there makes for a more equitable system.
In the end, there will be more money available for the actual treatment of patients.
Sincerely, W. Williams
I call him Hussein because that is his name, and he is acting more muslim than christian these days- but I digress- I agree that a healthy well educated informed citizenry is in the best interests of this country. I do not agree that the government is required to pay for this, or demand that you become either healthy, well educated, or informed-.
This is still (for now) a relatively free country, with our citizens free to be sick if they wish, uneducated if they wish ( and that IS too often the case), and uninformed (the lamestream media take care of that). This is not a good life plan, but time after time I see people choose a lifestyle counter- productive to success, or health. It is their choice to do so- that is a part of freedom, the freedom to make the wrong choice.
As far as “rationing” the whole reasoning will be money, in terms of your “estimated” productivity to the state- in other words, how much in taxes can you be expected to bring in for the state.
Zeke Emanuel (one of the Resident’s advisors) has a chart demonstrating a person’s worth- five seventy year olds will not bring in as much in taxes (money) as an eighteen year old, so there you have it.
Five old people equal one young person, based only on the relative taxation brought in over their estimated lifetimes. Seems pretty heartless to me-to allow the older people to die, as in not treating them, just so we are assured that we have the money to treat the younger one.
Oh- and the government saves money, because they do not then have to pay out any more SS benefits to the old people who die.
BLK: “I call him Hussein because that is his name…”>>
DAR
Let’s ask Karl Rove what he thinks:
****
ROVE: Look the “Hussein”…using his middle
name helps Obama, it doesn’t hurt him. So anybody who wants to help John McCain ought to stop using…
WALLACE: How do you explain that?
ROVE: ‘Cause I think people look at it and
say, ‘look, that’s one step too far. You’re
trying to leave an implication that he is a
Muslim when I know he’s not.’ And I think you
know, lot of times attacks in politics fail, in fact they turn into a negative for the person who’s doing the attacking because people think it’s gone too far. And this frankly, goes too far.”
>LINK
Perhaps- Rove is entitled to hi position, but until Hussein begins ACTING like the President of our country, rather than someone who just won a Carnival cruise, I will continue mocking him in any way I choose.
Dar
these countries that kick our butts in health care….
Vic
Then how come do they come here when they can’t get the care they need in their own countries? I happen to have a relative who works in the Mayo Clinic and this person has told us all about how some of the rich big names from overseas come with their big entourages and take up a whole floor in the hospital.
VIC: “Then how come do they come here when they can’t get the care they need”>>
DAR
Speaking of that:
“Many seek care in Mexico”
The total number making the trip is unclear. But a recent study by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research estimated that nearly 1 million people from California alone seek medical, dental or prescription services in Mexico each year.
Some making the trek have little or no medical coverage. Others like Ritz are on fixed incomes and want to avoid so-called co-pays and deductibles charged by U.S. insurers on top of policies that routinely cost from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand each month.”
LINK
VIC “some of the rich big names from overseas come with their big entourages [to Mayo]”>>
DAR
The exceedingly wealthy can indeed afford the US health care, which because of it’s size is quite good at some things (especially Mayo which has very collectivist tendencies). Too many tens of millions of Americans, can’t afford it. This won’t do.
Put me on record as being FOR the “private option.” People should at all times be able to choose private insurance and Doc’s, as they can in the UK, Germany, Sweden and many other countries (not Canada which needs more private competition in this area IMO).
D.
Darrel- everyone wants a bargain, even if the result can turn out to be less than desirable, or haven’t you seen some of the results of Mexican surgery? Even the drugs that you can get cheaply (you often get what you pay for), and I can attest to the fact that Mexican drugs are not the most tightly controlled in terms of quality.
Same for dental- there are some true horror stories there.
2016 is the latest estimate.
Bush did not try to rape SS for Wall Street. He tried to allow people who are actually paying the money in to decide how they wanted to invest it much like government employees do with the TSP. If people wanted to stay in SS as it now is they could have. The stock market downturn would not have hurt anyone currently in SS or those who soon would be because the plan forbid them from changing.
The market will recover long before anyone our age has to worry and if money is moved to safe securities (which suffered little) there would be no problem. Rate of return on SS less than 1%, rate in private market avg of 6%.
He was not laughed out of town. Congress rejected it because they need to have their hands in our lives to control it. It is your money. You should be allowed to invest it as you want and pass it to your heirs. Surely you agree with that idea.
Medicare does not kick the pants off private insurance. Once again, you do not like the info so you bash the sources. Medicare is not required to do some things that the government requires of private insurance. For instance, no QA. Medicare just pays claims rather than review them. Now you know why there is billions in fraud.
Medicare will have a decrease in funds before the readjustment? Yeah, until government increases what workers pay in. That is no way to run a business. And it makes my point valid, government can just raise taxes when it needs the money or it can do as Obama said and screw the doctors (or the patients).
SS has trillions in worthless paper. If government had put that money aside SS would be solvent for a very long period of time. Instead it was wasted. That is one of the reasons we have trillions in debt. Government has bills to pay because it kept taking SS money and spending it.
Yes, those crazy liberal progressives (progressive is such a deceptive word- under them, we ALWAYS go backwards), they believe in the myth of Social Security-I wish I could afford to- and they believe in unicorns too, I bet.
Darrel- why do you hate doctors so? Certainly they have a right to get as much money for their services as the market will bear. Doctors are not a” utility”, and healthcare is not a “right”- it is a privilege that we are a rich enough nation that we have doctors and not shamans-
You verge on the ridiculous sometimes D- and this has been one of them.
BLK: “they have a right to get as much money for their services as the market will bear.”
DAR
Well, the market can’t bear it anymore. See medicare spending.
CBO.
Medicare is going broke because it is A GOVERNMENT PROGRAM it is that simple, and if you look at Medicare/ Medicaid, you can see the abysmal future of government run healthcare.
Tort reform would get costs down, but you never hear D talk about that-
Actually, I do. I just converted my Power Point presentation on health care and posted it here:
http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6079&start=0
There are several references to how the high cost of mal-practice insurance in the US contributes to our cost. It’s a small part.
D.
The general welfare clause means that Congress should pass laws that keep within the framework of being self governed. It does not mean to confiscate money form those who earn it in order to pay our welfare.
Mr. Williams, if you had read the post you would see the citation that establishes the post office.
But you make an interesting point. Another item the government is supposed to do and can’t get right.
Bigd: “[post office] Another item the government is supposed to do and can’t get right.”>>
DAR
Note:
“Independently measured customer satisfaction scores show that 94% of residential customers rated their experience with the Postal Service as excellent, very good, or good.”
http://www.usps.com/history/anrpt05/
On what planet is a 94% rating of good to excellent, not getting it “right?”
D.
————
ps I guarantee that approval rating kicks Canada’s butt. Did you know their postal system is so lame, they don’t even pick up your to go mail when they drop your mail off? You have to go to the Post Office.
Getting it right, Dar, would also mean to at least break even- they can’t even do that. So more govt. tax dollars go down the tubes.
Well Walt, the government will certainly use money as the driver when it rations care. Obama said that with his own mouth. He said that the government short changes doctors in Medicare reimbursement when the budget is tight. Watch the video and see for yourself.
He said it, I did not make it up.
As I said, he wasn’t my first choice, and fortunately Congress will be where the details are decided. Also, I’m for docs making good money. If we gave 25% of private insurance’s profit to the docs, then they will do good and we will, too. The only ones that should do worse, are the leeches of insurance and pharma. Finally, I’ve talked about this with a doc that has an office where I work; he’s for MAJOR Changes and agrees with Pres. Obama.
Sincerely,
Walter Williams
I have talked with several docs also, and Dog in in medical work so he talks to LOTS of them, and most are against this, ESPECIALLY when there is no tort reform- this may be the most important part of ANY viable plan, but none of them have this in the plans in a meaningful way.
I know, because here in Texas, we have tort reform, and our costs have gone way down- same with California- one of the few common sense things California has done recently.
And don’t completely dis the insurance or Pharma companies- this IS a capitalist country, and this is not a hobby for these companies- they are SUPPOSED to make money, or why are they in existence?
The key is to tweak the insurance and Pharma regs, but not to build a completely new system.
As a cancer survivor, I know how good our medical system can be- we cannot afford to tear it all down and start over- that kind of turmoil would scare many potential Doctors away, and if we are to have ANY hope of covering 10- 20 million more people, we cannot afford to let any Doctors rethink their career options, and they will do this if they are faced with a more restrictive environment.
The estimates you provided run contrary to what Congress has recently said and what recent estimates show. They also use the money that is backed by the paper they have. The government does not have the money to make good on the debt.
You equate customer satisfaction with efficiency. That is a mistake.
But, using your example, 80% of the people are happy with the insurance they have. Why change the system? Or in your words, in what world is that not good?
Bigd: “You equate customer satisfaction with efficiency. That is a mistake.”>>
DAR
I am good at getting goals, so you keep moving the goal posts.
D.
—————-
“Moving the goalpost, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.”
No Darrel- that is a legit question- it’s apples and oranges here- Satisfaction does not = efficiency, or the insurance industry does not need radical changes. Which is it?
And of course, the Post Office never raises prices.
Obama did not want Hussein used then, he is OK with it now.
Moving the goalpost is what you say when you have no legitimate response.