Look, I think this is reasonably funny:
But the truth is, arguing about "insurance company profits" really misses the point. It's hard to argue that public insurance companies should operate in an environment where altruism drives business decisions. We can regulate the insurance industry to the point where they are forced to cover everyone, focus on reducing costs, etc., but they will always answer to shareholders and their boards. They will always try to use the "market" to maximize profits. I understand we tend to be incrementalists in the US when it comes to changing things that have established histories, but really, this is a fundamental debate about whether or not you think everyone should have health insurance (in a way that doesn't bankrupt everyone) or not. That simple.
