>
"Disrupting" health care would involve the federal and state governments massively deregulating health care and insurance so that a private, free market could actually exist. Disruption/competition are quite literally illegal as it stands.The problem isn't regulation. Many other countries are far more regulated in the health care industry and operate a private market just fine. In fact some might even argue that some of the problems with the current US model is a lack of regulation.
The problem I've observed isn't a lack of competition, it's that all of the competition play by the same broken rules. You basically have an industry where people need your service. It's not luxury, it is literally life and death in many cases. People have to use your service, whatever it costs. And you then allow those companies to regulate themselves, companies that will almost always put profit ahead of welfare. That is never going to turn out well. But because libertarianism is very much a core part of the American ideology, whenever the question of how to fix the problem arises you argue that the market needs to be deregulated further. Basically just doing more of the same, as if it will suddenly fix things despite decades of proof that it hasn't already.
Now I'm not going to pretend that other counties have a perfect system. But I do believe the only way you are going to get a health care system that works for everyone is for voters and politicians to want something that is, at least on the surface, very "un-American".
> I'm personally concerned with the 50 Stalins sort of sentiment surrounding health care.
And here lies the problem. People are so brainwashed into thinking any form of social health care is communism and bad. Quite frankly, it's ridiculously misinformed. In fact most of the rest of the developed world has a social health care system AND private health care, capitalism, etc too. On this particular occasion you can actually have your proverbial cake and eat it.
> Why not fix the causes instead of trying to legislative more effects and doubling down on government interference yet again?
Because you're fixing the wrong thing. You're looking at a broken faucet causing water to leak constantly, and instead of fixing that faucet you go and break more faucets thinking that should some how change the behaviour of the first faucet. Then when the flow of water gets too expensive you then start arguing that it's not the leaking faucets at fault, it's the water rates instead. If this weren't a political problem then I'm sure most on here would throw their hands up shouting "learn some basic root cause analysis!"