Why Obama’s FedEx Comparison Doesn’t Make Sense!

While stumping for his public run health care system last weekend Obama addressed the notion that private insurers would not be able to compete against the government run system. President Obama did this by equating Private Run Health Insurers -vs- The Government Run Option to the U.S. Mail Service -vs- UPS and Fed Ex. This is now the third time I have heard him make this assement. However this comparison fails in several ways.
First it fails: because it bases the success of his so called side by side competition on the across the board comparison of a system that by his own admission is currently failing to succeed in side by side competition. Which is by its very nature an oxymoron.
Secondly it fails: because he is not saying he plans to fail, no he is saying everyones a winner, except the insurance companies. They are the bad guys. The greedy "illigitimate sons" who need to be brought down. Therefore he is implying that there would be a different outcome than that being seen in the current system. However, He does this without defining how he actually plans to achieve that goal; the revelation of which would be too transparent a venture for the secrecy by which this current administration likes to operate.
Lastly it fails: because by likening the Government Health Care Option to the U.S. Mail Service you are actually conceding to the fact that if ObamaCare is not able to compete with private insurers it will like the U.S. Mail Service use whatever means it needs to stay in the game. In the case of the U.S. Mail Service the Fed. has raised the price of postage steadily to stay in business. In the case of ObamaCare private insurers would most likely outperform the government system in a fair and competitive market. This is due mostly to the bureaucratic waste and abuses inherent in all government run programs. So that like the U.S. Mail the government would have to find ways to keep the failing system afloat, which would probably lead to one or all of the following, a loss in benefits, censored rationing, and or an increase in taxes to keep the government run option in the game.

The only way to avoid this would be to create an unfair playing field which favors the government program over the private insurers. However creating such a system would render the promise of a one stop insurance marketplace with multiple options for consumers a disingenuous political ploy to pass a single payer system dispite the will of the people.