[robomartin]

Nope. Read it again. Government rules is what changed the nature of these GPO's from hospital-funded to being funded by kickbacks from the various vendors. That one act alone seems to have triggered a massive shift in power.

Businesses will adapt to the environment they operate within. If they can identify an advantage they will use it. I am not going to blame a business for moving within the existing framework any more than I would blame someone for taking advantage of SEO. In other words, given an environment where you can optimize your website for better search engine results, you do it. And that's fine. The problem is that those making the rules that create the opportunity for optimization are morons who have no clue about what they are doing or are simply corrupt.

Lobbying is a problem, but it is NOT illegal. I fully agree with disallowing it. So long as it isn't, those who can will use it. Again, you use the SEO tools available to you. When something starts to work against you or is no-longer allowed you stop using it.

Something else that needs to change: Government workers cannot be unionized. Why? They form a voting block that can influence the very laws that regulate them as employees of the government. It's as clear a conflict of interest situation as I can imagine. They vote as a block and favor anything that will keep them employed, protect their pensions, etc. The private sector has had to take haircuts for the last several years and suffer the consequences of ill-conceived plans from government. In sharp contrast to this the typical government worker is living in an isolated bubble where they can look forward to retirement while earning 80% to 90% of their pay for the rest of their lives and enjoying an amazing health-care package. Some even got raises. All on our backs.

In the real world the government workforce should have been cut by at least 25% to 50% and their salaries by another 20%+. Lifetime pensions seriously cut down and completely eliminated at some level. If you want to have a nice retirement make the right decisions and invest your money yourself, don't to on my back and my kids backs. This is so broken it's a tragedy.

I mean, see what's happening with the health-care law? They are hiring some 4,000 IRS agents to support it. These people are NEVER going to get fired. They'll probably cost us well in excess of a billion dollars a year in salaries, benefits and support systems.

[anigbrowl]

'Nope' is not an argument. Government rules previously forbid kickbacks, a common commercial practice. the rules were changed to remove this restriction. If legislators are corrupt for changing the rules, who is corrupting them? why should they skate? This was clearly a reduction in government interference in the marketplace, and what we've got instead is a situation where the dominant market player uses its commercial power to negotiate long-term exclusive contracts. Nobody in government forced them to issue such contracts or the hospitals to sign them without negotiating the right to purchase competing products.

Lobbying is a problem, but it is NOT illegal. I fully agree with disallowing it. So long as it isn't, those who can will use it.

Then advocate for that instead of putting all the blame on the government, and explain what you're going to fill the campaign finance gap with, or how you'll circumvent existing first amendment precedent. Bribery is one of those dances where it takes two to tango.

Something else that needs to change: Government workers cannot be unionized.

I happen to agree, but this is hopelessly irrelevant to the subject at hand.

In the real world the government workforce should have been cut by at least 25% to 50% and their salaries by another 20%+.

Suprisingly, Obama has cut government more than Reagan [1], and wants to cut it more [2]. Rome was not built in a day and it isn't torn down in a day either. Your argument seems adrift from reality and increasingly resembles mere ranting.

1. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/under-obama-a-r...

2. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/13/news/la-pn-obama-see...

[robomartin]

"Your argument seems adrift from reality and increasingly resembles mere ranting."

I really have to thank you for that. I appreciate personal comments of this kind in the middle of an otherwise civil discussion. I apologize for not agreeing with you and moving on. Thanks.

[anigbrowl]

I haven't made any personal remarks about you. I've just observed that you've devoted more than 50% of your comment above to argument about irrelevant topics, and that those arguments rest on inaccurate assumptions, such as the inevitable expansion of government.

[joe_the_user]

Actually, it sound like he's agreeing with you. Be gracious and accept that. Good job.

[robomartin]

If that's the case. I am humbled and further apologize for not seeing it that way.

[Tycho]

Government interference isn't a homogenous force that is amplified or reduced. While one particular rule or restriction may have been removed, the end result can still be an even more distorted marketplace (eg. because one side is disproportionately favoured), depending on the nature of the remaining rules.

[anigbrowl]

It's not like marketplace actors are devoid of agency.