We get our most creative actuaries and brightest lawyers together to design thousands of complex "a la carte" plans that ultimately allow us to not pay for your health care. For example, one plan might cover only organs on the left side of your body, while another covers only right-side organs. This gives us a 50/50 chance we'll be able to not pay for your health care (of course neither plan covers your heart since it ambiguously straddles both left and right).
But doesn't having thousands of different complex plans unnecessarily add hundreds of billions yearly to America's health care costs?
Duh! Yeah, our creativity forces health care providers to endure a paperwork nightmare of delays and denials that costs Americans hundreds of billions each year. But that's not our problem.
Imagine how hard it would be for us to not pay for your health care if we had just one plan for all that said simply, "We'll cover all medical procedures your caregivers deem necessary for your health as long as these procedures are accepted, standard medical practice". Such a plan would leave us no room for creativity or profits thus making our very existence superfluous.
Isn't that how single-payer would work?
Yes, exactly. Single-payer would instantly end our legal con game. That's why single-payer is "off the table".
It sounds like competition in the health care industry is really a "race to the bottom"?
Only if your concern is health care. Our concern is profits. Remember, we compete to not pay for your health care. The company that can most deftly delay or deny payment for your health care wins (keeping billions of your health care dollars each year for providing that vital service).
As the "middle man" between us and our health care providers, what value do you add to our health care?
Surly you jest! We add only cost. We take a dollar you give us for your health care and give you back at most 70 cents worth of care (and good luck collecting that 70 cents).
How do you justify returning only 70% of our health care dollars when single-payer Medicare returns over 90%?
Medicare doesn't have to pay out billions in profits to shareholders. Medicare doesn't have to hire an army whose only job is designing ways to not pay for your health care. And Medicare doesn't have to pay Congress millions in bribes.
Are you saying millions of our health care dollars go to bribing those who supposedly represent the American people?
Duh! It's the only way anyone can do business in DC.
Keeping this very lucrative con game legal ain't cheap. We had to shell out millions in bribes to keep single-payer "off the table". How else could you get the "representatives of the people" to keep an obvious, proven solution to our health care crisis completely "off the table"?
"Fellow members of Congress, there's a system out there used by 28 of the world's top industrialized nations that delivers significantly superior health care for about half the cost of our system and it delivers it to every citizen. I don't see any reason to waste our precious time debating the merits of that system, do any of you? (two second pause) Okay, it's settled, single-payer is off the table."