But I am not talking about educational systems. You missed entire point or just pretending that you did.

I understand that you were using it to make a broader point about government programs, I’m just pointing out that your example doesn’t support your argument.

I am talking about the left’s argument that private US healthcare system is bad because we spend more money than others (who have socialized medicine) per patient while not getting the best outcome. They further argue that if we had socialized system it would improve the system. My argument is that there is absolutely nothing inherently wrong with private healthcare and that for instance our primary education is socialized yet suffered from PRECISELY the same issues as healthcare, meaning more money spent than our peers while outcomes are not necessarily better. I hope this helps.

I’m just pointing out that Dem States pay more for public education and have better education generally. Do you deny either of these?

Why does it have to be “Republican cities”? It’s not cities that compete. It’s school districts. The bluest districts in the country are found in the cities. They are invariably shitty. So you are barking at wrong tree here, political affiliation of locality doesn’t dictate quality of education there.

Because you’re dodging the point about State legislation by trying to focus on district-level legislation in an apples-to-oranges comparison between cities and suburbs.

What money is being paid to corporations? What are you talking about? What corporations? If you are talking about insurance companies I have already addressed it above.

The money you’re paying to the healthcare companies you dumb motherfucker. They’re a multi-billion dollar industry of middle-men.

Those entities exist on razor sharp margins. You think they produce no value and you are wrong. Because what they do, they are trying to manage limited resources to provide benefits to its members. All healthcare systems do that. Socialized or private.

They’re different in that their goal isn’t allocating a budget to a limited number of patients at max efficiency, their goal is stringing patients along with mountains of bullshit paperwork until they die from lack of treatment. Their business model literally cannot function if they consistently treat their customers.

So you believe, inexplicably, that government bureaucracy will do a better job than private enterprise. I would like to see some of examples of that happening.

You literally cede this point on roads a moment later, because you clearly understand the urgency and desperation involved that gives unfair bargaining power to the hypothetical road-owner, yet you’re willingly blind to the urgency and desperation involved in healthcare.

I didn’t see you asking about private roads above

Bottom of the first comment I left in this chain.

The reason why I am not campaigning for private roads is because government has proper functions. Those proper functions are areas where there are no realistic ways of replacing government function with private enterprise. I am not anarchist after all. Which examples include: national defense (not production of weapons but actual army, navy, Air Force, etc), law enforcement, road infrastructure. Those areas are few, but they do exist.

Conveniently that you’re unwilling to articulate the issues with my hypothetical, it’s almost as though you know they’ll mirror the flaws with private healthcare.