Insurance isn't a means of production.
Yes it is. A middle man is doing a job facilitating a deal. That is still a production whether you feel like it is or isn't.
A means of production is "means of production (also called capital goods) are physical and non-financial inputs used in the production of economic value. These include raw materials, facilities, machinery and tools used in the production of goods and services." Insurance is not a means of production because they don't produce anything. You can disagree with my assertions if you like, but please try to use the terminology correctly. When you blur the terminology it just makes it impossible to discuss issues.
This is the difference between me and you. You have to inject your feelings even though the other person is trying not to be emotional.
There is nothing emotional about it. They add no value. All they do is take money in and then try not to pay it back out. That is their entire business model. That business model ends in hurting people when their claims are denied. That isn't emotional, it is factual.
Fully able 18-24 year olds?
Lots of 18-24 year olds get hurt and need medical attention. And in the rest of their life they will absolutely need it. That is like someone saying that they shouldn't have to pay for public schools because they are 40 and don't need to go to school anymore. it is ridiculously short sighted.
Under capitalism if there was such a barrier to entry that was impacting enough customers they would have to reduce their prices. If they don't they lose out on potential profit which can lead to eventually shutting down for not meeting profit margins.
Why? If the people who can't gain access don't have much money then there is no motivation to include them. They can make more money by heavily milking the upper middle class and rich people. They have no financial incentive to lower prices.
Emotional yet again. Community and corporation are the same thing.
That statement literally makes no sense. A community and a corporation are nothing alike.
Health insurance companies add no value to anything.
They do deals when other people cannot.
What does that even mean? Obviously the government can provide that service the same way they provide roads and schools. There is no reason to put a for profit company between people and healthcare. It doesn't serve a purpose other than soak more money out of people.
It is more socialist than it is capitalist. It doesn't have to be a socialist state in order to have socialist esc ideas.
Is america a socialist country then? America has provided things like roads and schools for people for decades or centuries. You seem to think that the government providing services for people is socialism. So either america has always been a socialist country, and then there is no issue with providing universal healthcare, or that isn't socialism, which would also mean there is no issue with providing universal healthcare.
It is no different than what america has been doing for a very long time.
Appeal to tradition.
Right wing people try to paint providing universal healthcare as a divergence from american values. I am pointing out that the government providing services has been an american value for a long time, thus invalidating that argument.
