This is a canonical example of an establishment media outlet steering (misdirecting?) the conversation into more "acceptable" directions. "The killing of a hum

This is a canonical example of an establishment media outlet steering (misdirecting?) the conversation into more "acceptable" directions. "The killing of a human being is morally repugnant — full stop." Yup. But this industry's business model is predicated on withholding care, sometimes costing lives. So, by definition, it too is morally repugnant. "But prices have continued to spiral upward, accelerated by the aging of the baby boomers and by important but costly advancements in medical science." Note how deftly this sidesteps profit taking as a driver. It's a big one, estimated to be nearly $2 Trillion in 2022 (as compared to other peer countries, who face the same aging population constraints and "costly" advances in medical science. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/the-cost-of-corporate-profit-in-u-s-health-care-reaches-2-trillion/ar-AA1tdpoo https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/the-cost-of-corporate...). "The passage of Obamacare over industry opposition..." I was around and paying close attention when that happened. The industry practically wrote the ACA. Sure, they made some concessions, but anything they really opposed--like the Public Option--didn't stand a chance. And when the individual mandate went before SCOTUS it was of course upheld. The industry was happy to have people pay a penalty for not using its products! This last is in fact the biggest sin of this piece: the obfuscation of the role that the industry's lobby plays in opposing change. Any attempt to get to a more rational system is met with full frontal opposition in the media and in our legislatures. People who advocate for systems like Medicare for All are labeled nuts, out of touch, and get the "Harry and Louise" treatment. There is no safety valve. So the pressure keeps rising and rising, until something really bad happens.