By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The lack of widespread mourning following the death of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson reflects deep-seated public anger towards the healthcare insurance industry’s profiteering practices. This anger stems from insurers prioritizing profits over patient care, leading to denied claims, unaffordable costs, and compromised healthcare access. The overwhelmingly negative public reaction underscores the urgent need for systemic reform, as current attempts at regulation have failed to address the core issue of prioritizing corporate profits over patient well-being. A single-payer national health program is presented as a potential solution to alleviate the suffering caused by the current system.
Read the original article here
Americans are angry about their health insurance, and rightfully so. The stories are heartbreaking: individuals facing aggressive cancer delaying treatment out of fear of bankruptcy, those with chronic conditions denied life-improving treatments, and gunshot victims struggling with recovery further complicated by insurance denials. These aren’t isolated incidents; they represent a systemic failure impacting millions. The profit motives of corporate health insurers seem to overshadow the well-being of patients, a problem that appears to be worsening.
The affordability of healthcare is a major source of anger. Even with the Affordable Care Act (ACA), monthly premiums can be exorbitant—$450-$475 per month for a “decent” plan with significant cost-sharing is hardly affordable for many. This leaves people in a difficult position, forced to choose between paying for essential care and other necessities. The system, designed around for-profit companies, often prioritizes profit over patient care.
Despite widespread agreement that the government should guarantee healthcare for all Americans—a majority believe this should be the case—a significant portion still prefer a privately-run system. This inherent conflict is a substantial hurdle to reform. This preference for private insurance, even while acknowledging the need for universal coverage, is a key reason why comprehensive change remains elusive. It suggests that many Americans are willing to support a system that fails a large segment of the population, preferring to preserve the status quo rather than pursuing radical change.
The political landscape further fuels the frustration. The lack of decisive action from elected officials, coupled with the influence of powerful lobbies, perpetuates the cycle of high costs and limited access. Many feel that their votes are inconsequential, and the perceived lack of meaningful change reinforces cynicism and anger. Even when there’s a shared desire for improvement, the conflicting interests and political gridlock prevent effective solutions. Even when a majority want better solutions, there is no consensus on how to achieve them.
The debate over single-payer healthcare highlights the deep divisions within the population. Some support a system where the government covers everyone’s healthcare costs, financed by taxes. This is a significant shift from the current model, and many oppose such measures. Some find it philosophically objectionable, even if facing serious illness, while others resist paying taxes to subsidize the care of those they deem undeserving. This attitude of “self-reliance” creates a roadblock to a system that values the well-being of everyone.
The current system incentivizes denial of care. Health insurance companies, prioritizing profits, have a vested interest in limiting payments. Ironically, this often results in reduced premiums for some, but at the catastrophic expense of those denied essential treatment. The system isn’t structured in a way that prioritizes people’s health; the incentives are misaligned.
The limitations of the ACA are undeniable. While it expanded coverage and eliminated some of the worst abuses of the previous system, it is still widely considered inadequate. The cost of premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance remain significant burdens. Moreover, the failure to address the underlying cost drivers of healthcare has left many feeling unheard and uncared for.
Reform efforts, such as the ACA, have faced significant pushback and mischaracterizations. Republicans have actively worked to undermine the ACA, spreading misinformation and preventing improvements. This has further polarized the debate and made it incredibly difficult to achieve meaningful, lasting change. The political strategy of obstructionism has only exacerbated the anger and frustration surrounding healthcare in the United States.
Ultimately, the anger about health insurance in America stems from a confluence of factors: high costs, limited access, political gridlock, conflicting values, and systemic incentives that prioritize profit over people. Addressing this anger requires addressing the underlying problems and fostering a genuine commitment to equitable access to quality healthcare. This requires a concerted effort from all stakeholders, including policymakers, healthcare providers, insurance companies, and the public itself, to move beyond the current state of dissatisfaction and create a system that prioritizes the health and well-being of all Americans.