Since when is government unfair competition? I can't think of an example of a government-run institution that is "unfair" in any sense to its free market competitors. Consider the United States Postal Service. It's a pretty good deal - you drop a letter in your mailbox with necessary postage and it gets picked up and delivered with an extremely high probability of success. For packages you may have to drive a few minutes to the nearest post office instead (for weighing and labels and so forth), but it is still marginally convenient. The letter/package then arrives a few days later (or longer depending on where you are sending to) at the addressed destination.

Now, there are companies such as FedEx and UPS that ultimately decided to enter the free market/capitalist system of the United States (which is completely within their Constitutional rights and freedoms) with the intent of creating a competing service to that of the USPS. The private sector now provides a valuable service to businesses as well as individuals who have specialized mailing needs, whether that be same day/overnight priorities for time-critical deliveries, extended hours/customized pickup times beyond hours the USPS is bound to (by law), or perhaps other special services (such as prepaid-labels or advanced package tracking) that the USPS simply does not have.

The proponents of privatized health care are all in favor of the free market capitalist system, and find no lack of ways to extoll capitalism's virtues and remind people that the free market ultimately is self-policing and provides for the needs of all people, a la textbook Adam Smith.

To reiterate the point - if privatized health care is such a firm believer in their own infallibility and the power of laissez-faire economics (and how it ultimately provides the consumer with the best possible health care through open competition and supply & demand), why would they be opposed to another player entering that arena regardless of whether it is government- or private-run? Again - if they provide a better service than the government does, why should they be afraid of a mass exodus to the public option? The government SURELY will provide an inferior level of health care, so they have nothing to be afraid of!

Any health care provider that is not saying "Bring it on" is one that knows they are screwing their customers up the wazoo.

Think about what would happen if the public option failed miserably. Let's say the legislation passes and Obama's plan is put into effect. If anyone who joins that plan gets treated like cattle in a slaughterhouse, is denied health care due to so-called "rationing," or a "death panel" euthanizes their grandma in front of them - that is what will frighten consumers into going back to ol' reliable privatized health care. And the government option will inevitably collapse and Obama will look like a worse president than Bush, all while reaffirming the strength and sensibility of a free market health care system. Capitalism 1, "Socialism" 0.

Let them duke it out, and to the victor go the spoils. QED.

>> ^gtjwkq:
^ Because government is unfair competition. People being forced to pay for government healthcare would have less money and incentive to pay for private healthcare.
Government is not really an "option" when it's funded by taxes. You can only choose not to use it, but you can't choose whether or not to pay for it.