Group insurance views people as fragmented beings
Standard employer based insurance pays for your health for the fragment of your life when you are employed, however, it is problematic for the fragment of your life when you are retired.
Because employer based health care covers only the fragment of your life when you are working, the program is completely dependent on being able to shove people off onto the public doles when they retire.
Without Medicare to catch people on retirement, workers would rise up in rebellion against the insurance companies and demand change.
Because insurance is dependent on government, it is impossible to talk serious entitlement reform without first discussing the creation of a self-funded alternative to insurance.
A system in which employers take care of health when people work and people magically develop the ability to save and look after their health on retirement is ludicrous.
Unlike insurance, the Medical Savings and Loan sees each person as a whole being. The program sees humans as creatures who build wealth in times of health for use in times of need. From dollar one, the goal of the Medical Savings and Loan is to assure that people build health resources for retirement. The program can co-exist with Medicar, but is not dependent on Medicare.
Any attempt to discuss entitlement reform without first replacing employer based insurance is a waste of time because such efforts would abandon people in times of need.
If you belong to a group interested in entitlement reform, I would be more than happy to contribute a discussion of free market health care reform. Please contact me.