About 95% of the money spent by the public health insurance company is „Leistungsausgaben“, I.e., paying out people for health related costs.

You can’t optimize that away, even when combining the companies. The remaining 5% is overhead. Having worked in a big company, I can tell you that big companies are not that much more efficient than small companies. In fact, the overhead is often even larger since there is lots more cross-communication involved between departments. In the end, everyone that is now a CEO would be an SVP instead, and barely anything would change.

Unpopular opinion, but I actually like the competitive landscape in public health care in Germany. IMHO this is the best example for capitalism: you define exactly what each company has to deliver, and they can compete on:

1. pricing

2. service

3. additional benefits

The nature of the strong regulation here makes them compete on actual relevant things, and they can’t externalize the costs (mostly).

I actually believe having just one public health care company would result in a worse service.

I would rather focus on the ridiculous increase in wealth inequality, in Germany, and around the globe. That’s the root of all evil.

Well, the entire point of ranked choice is that you can do this. You can put unknown candidates up top without having to be afraid to „waste“ your vote, as you would have, with FPTP.

I am pretty confident that this would not have happened were it not for ranked choice. People would have voted the „safe“ candidate instead.

That sounds … genius

Karl Lauterbach hat im Jahr 2023 die Aufarbeitung durch sein Ministerium beantragt, wenn ich mich nicht täusche. Die ist kürzlich abgeschlossen worden.

Der Bericht sollte aber geheim bleiben, wegen der cdu.

Daher der Rummel.