President Nixon circa 1970 invented corporate health care insurance for the people of the United States. It was an early version of Obamacare. Would it work today since Wall Street structure and globalization have changed so much with computers, telecoms and deregulation?
Capital is fluid in some investment forms more than others. Capitalization of steel mills and shipyards is less fluid and transmorphic than the near purity of bank capital. In the modern capital ecosphere the insurance business is one of the few business fields that haven even less invested in physical capital stock than banks (that are positioned to take over properties in default or have loans to property owners). Insurers merely promise to pay for claims in return for ‘insurance’ payments that comprise a kind of rent. Insurers have made a science of claims versus profits from rents ratios and would not be in business without being able to receive a normal rate of return on capital. The market rate of return on investment if average at 5% would be the minimum the insurers would expect from their capital or they would likely reallocate it to better business investments. In effect the insurance business would be a close approximation to a purely theoretical capital-investment-return structure.
Nixon-care was envisioned in an era when capital was far less fluid and volatile. Globalism had not yet fused with computers and brilliant quantitative trading algorithms. Capital in the Nixon administration had a greater relationship to physical and national physical structure than in the present era. The insurance capital today is closer to being an abstract capital amendable to instant investment decisions by insurers. If the insurance rate of return falls much below the average for the market capital rate of return on investment it can disappear from insurance investment use as quickly as insurance contracts expire.
Obamacare theoretically is a great unionization of consumers that makes partial bond slaves of healthy youth who are compelled to pay for the high insurance costs of sicker and older Americans. Plainly as Obamacare ages and the supply of a z.p.g. America youth pool dries up; as the formerly younger people age and draw upon insurance for-themselves health insurance costs will skyrocket in the absence of a health pool of exploitable bond-slaves.
Nixon-care/Obamacare may have worked in the 1970s. A generation of uninsured Negroes would have had health insurance resulting in the stop-loss of quite a few avoidable deaths perhaps. Yet Senator Ted Kennedy was against Nixon-care along with Democrat party leadership then. They wanted full British-style national health care and would settle for nothing less. Now, after forty years they have Nixon-care when the market has changed and it is obsolete.
Levering insurance costs through compulsory collective bargaining in effects negotiates directly with the market average rate of return on capital. It will never drop below the market average though, without disappearing into better fields of investment. Thus health insurance costs are more likely to rise or the quality of health care decrease in the long run. Forced to buy insurance in one large body, insurance companies that choose to participate with a lower rate of return can reduce the quality of service and raise profit to the market average.
The enslavement of American youth to subsidize health insurance costs are regarded as being a sufficient tool to keep insurance cost down. As mentioned earlier youth age too and that advantage theory will capsize and become a Titanic reversal. So national policy with Obamacare will require a huge influx of legal immigrants in the style of a ponzi scheme to keep making subsidy payments before they age, or youth and especially women will need to increase fecundity and create large 19th century size families.
One way to actually reduce U.S. health costs would be to reduce the period of patent exclusivity for manufacturing new technology or drugs to just three years after expiration letting anyone manufacture the product in return for giving 10% of profit to the original patent holder for a century. Companies would be encouraged to invent more and manufacturers could produce generic products for a fraction of today’s medical-pharmaceutical costs. Supply and demand in production is far more valuable in theory, at reducing health costs than the effort to negotiate with pure capital and to reduce its rate of return on investment average.
Capital plainly has become less tied to physical structure in new ways compared to the1970s. A capital management algorithm may reinvest capital in numerous fields as they are predictively able to return an above average profit temporally.
Compare the health insurance business to a casinos. Gamblers want a lower cost or a better share with increased odds of winning. Democrat organizers pass a law to force all Americans into buying gambling insurance against losses (for there are many losers and players that aren’t allowed to gamble on credit because they already owe money and can’t afford to play more). The vast left-wing union of gamblers does force the casinos the lower their profit margin and increase the odds of winning. Non-gambling healthy youth busy working in a nearby salt mine 18 hour days are unhappy about subsidizing gambling insurance for gambling that they don’t even use themselves. Oh well.
The casinos would have been boycotted if they didn’t cooperate with the Democrat Party gambling union, and many just got disgusted and closed their doors (that were just made of laser beams, holographs, smoke and mirrors anyway) and reinvested their capital into a manure reprocessing industry that paid the market average 5% rate of return. Some casinos did stay in business though.
Those casinos cut their costs to keep their profits at 5%. They got rid of the showgirls, eliminated free breakfasts and dimmed the lighting. Carpets became thread bear and gamblers were given extra charges for renting seats to sit at roulette and poker tables. And then, after a few years, the youth in the salt mine that had subsidized the costs became old and sick and moved to the casino gambling all day too. They played bingo as if there were no tomorrow and sadly, for many, there wasn’t.
Democrat party strategists devised a brilliant plan to keep the gamblers in casino chips; flood the nation with legal and illegal aliens on a regular, and secure temporal ponzi schedule at a ration of 4 immigrants for every aging gambler that requires subsidy. That turned out to be a bigger gamble than before though, since capital was global and the casino was seeking to ways to increase profit and return on investment globally. For capital never rests content with exist profit levels, unless in some instances, if it is inherited.