Posted on 08/20/2016 9:14:02 AM PDT by BDParrish
This rate of acceleration will, as I have repeatedly pointed out, bankrupt the Federal Government within the next administration's term. It will in fact exceed all current federal spending within the next 10 years. Neither of these events will actually come to pass because you cannot have a government when you can't pay the light bill in Washington DC.
There is exactly one way to stop this from happening and that is to start prosecuting and imprisoning, right now, each and every instance of price-fixing (Sherman/Clayton), attempts to monopolize markets (Sherman/Clayton again), pricing discrimination of like kind and quantity for goods (forbidden under Robinson-Patman) and failure or even refusal to provide a price before services and goods are rendered (various consumer protection laws within the states, as well as unfair business practice regulations within the FTC), including such facially-outrageous practices as setting price based on the GDP or "ability to pay" (extort) within a given nation while enforcing same through the passage of laws that are facially unlawful as said practices violate 15 USC.
(Excerpt) Read more at market-ticker.org ...
A fish rots from the head down. It isn’t about “price fixing” downstream. It is vastly more than that. Look to your government
I thought Karl was done.
Denninger
Full and strong obama supporter in 2008
Refuses to endorse Trump. Will not vote for Trump.
I’m thinking President Trump would start an earthquake if he changed the laws so health insurance companies could compete across state lines.
Maybe there was a need for that law in the beginning, but I have never seen the rationale.
Government run health care will mean the government determines what doctors and staff are paid. Your doctor will have a Cuban accent, if you can get one, and dispense aspirin only. Your nurse will be from Zimbabwe.
Uh Karl, news flash. The Federal government is already bankrupt.
Ah. Angry Karl. He writes articles that blame the problems of the world on his readers. An interesting way to build your customer base.
Often wrong, but never in doubt.
Rule of law is subjective.
Some have to obey laws or face consequences, others do not.
It starts at the top. If even so much as thought about price fixing in my profession I’d lose my license in a heartbeat. And I’d probably go to jail.
But the government can actually CREATE monopolies, in addition to supporting and advancing other ones.
Ditto for all other laws and regulations which only ‘some’ have to obey. For example if I shared classified information with others I’d be in prison in a heartbeat.
Until this changes I don’t see why any of us should feel accountable under the law because there is in effect no rule of law. It does not exist.
If laws/regulations are not enforced fairly and equally, then it is plain and simple tyranny, not law.
There is no law.
The "rationale" is the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The insurance industry has been regulated at the state level ever since it existed.
To be fair, he only supported Obama because he thought it would speed the decline, eventually forcing the governments hand, not because of supporting his policies
please don't preach to anyone here cuz we knew what was going to happen.
to be fair, he is still responsible for putting the jerk in power....now 8 yrs later, he's regretting the policies?...
Bullsh*t
Denninger never said anything of that.
He fully supported the hope and change ticket.
Taking into account as to how it stands now, would you be in favor of the States each removing that restriction? It seems to me to be a way out without getting the Feds involved. It also seems to me that that restriction has outlived whatever usefulness it might have had.
I would have no problem with states doing this collectively with no Federal involvement, but that is never going to happen anytime soon. Insurance is very expensive in some states, and in those states that is often a GOOD thing because the insurance companies must meet very stringent legal requirements that help ensure that they are solvent even if many claims are filed. New York is a good example of this. There’s no way the insurance commission in New York would ever reduce their regulatory requirements just to make sure NY-based companies could compete in a place like Mississippi.
Point taken, but I was wondering about other states that are not so strict. It would seem to me to be a free-for-all, with companies competing in states like Mississippi, while ignoring NY state. At some point something would have to give - like those NY-based companies going to another state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.