Don't even get me started on credit scores and banks…I can rant for
days on that one. What is it about for-profit entities that makes it
okay for them to be invasive? Are they any more trustworthy than the
government? I hardly think so. This argument is a red herring.

Here's something interesting. On my call with Senator Merkley today,
he discussed public insurance plans that have a proven track record.
Oregon, it seems, has had a 'public option' for Workers' Compensation
for 20 years. Their costs today are half of what they were 20 years
ago. That strikes me as pretty compelling evidence for a public option.

Chuckle all you like. A gov't entity wouldn't be motivated by profit,and wouldn't have the same impetus for recissions, denials, etc. Fact.

You are confused. The gov't isn't going to “(get) their hands into the health insurance business…” There isn't going to be privatization of existing entities. Insurance co's aren't going away. So that negates your whole lovely fear-mongering there.

“…you will be able to get any arbitrary necessary or unnecessary test and/or treatment you want, because you got those nasty ole insurance companies out of the way…”

You're making assumptions not born out by facts, and not supported by any knowledge of me. 3 weeks ago, my insurance company denied payment for a CT scan. Said scan prevented my having to have immediate surgery to determine if a condition existed. With my doctor's office, I was finally able to get payment approved, thereby saving myself from unnecessary surgery, and the insurance company for a 10 times greater bill.

“Your response like many others like you are very eager to make life easier for yourselves.”

Oh, I see where you're going. I want free everything right? No, dude, I want the ins. co. I have now, which I pay for (quite expensively, I guarantee), to live up to its contractual obligations, and not attempt to weasel out of its responsibilities.

“Unfortunately, there are alot of Americans out there like you who are easily persuaded to give up essential principles for ease and convenience.”

Yadda yadda, Ben Franklin, yadda. Yeah, you're using the wrong analogy.

“Due to your side's simple minded solutions, our country will suffer”

Wanna back that up with, ya know, FACTS, rather than liberatarian blatherings and posturings?

“What about all the books and documents regarding free markets vs government control? “

What about them? Just invoking their existance doesn't prove you actually know anything about them.

“What about our ancestors (mine anyway) who came here to come out from under an opressive government? “

You're from a communist nation? Bravo. My ancestors came here between 1880 & 1902. My grandfather gained his citizenship through service in WWI – something that's not available to current immigrants.

I could write you a tome on how the conditions they faced are not applicable for analogy today.

One issue that I don't see covered much in any discussion is how the insurance industry can essentially stifle job mobility. Many, like me, are pretty much held captive in our work positions, even if those environments are otherwise terrible, for the simple reason that we cannot afford to lose our insurance benefits. There are virtually no affordable non-group insurance options available for the majority of us. If, for instance, I leave my job for another there is little likelihood that I would be entitled to full medical benefits without a large time gap–in many cases up to a year after hire. Financially getting non-group insurance is out of the question for most of us, as well as having those exclusionary pre-existings as a consideration. COBRA is one option, but again, financially prohibitive. My partner, however, is on Medicare — one of those government controlled and implemented programs you
reference so negatively. She is not limited in her work choices by concerns of losing her insurance, and even has the option of fulfilling self employment if she so chooses.

Yes, we have government run/controlled programs that fail us. But we have many more that work relatively seamlessly: fire and police service, public works, public education, the military. And those are only a few examples. Education, in my opinion, is the best analogy here. There is a public option for education but
one always still has the private sector option, as well. If you don't like the way one is implemented you can choose another path with no penalty for some kind of pre-existing issue, and no delay in continuation of education.

The physical health of a nation's citizens would seem to be one of a government's first priorities. Until this health care initiative push, it has truly appeared the opposite in this nation.

Fear mongering, as some have referred to your voicing of some of your concerns, may or may not be appropriate labelling. What I know is appropriately called fear is the tightwire dance so many of us live our lives performing because of the corporately manufactured enthrallment to the whims of insurance providers.