I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking for an American history lesson or just being rhetorical?Neither. I'm asking why comments from Obama about moving away from an employer-funded scheme is seen as some sort of admission of guilt. The implication is that employer-driven healthcare insurance is a paragon and/or that its only alternative is single payer. Why?
Given your knowledge that the U.S. does not only have employer-funded health insurance but it evolved that people generally choose that option and it became competitve for businesses, I will take this message as sarcasm and not really a question at all./edit/
If you think this is sarcastic then neither of us needs this and I'm perfectly happy to leave it there... though KG will be delighted at my "parthian" shot:
http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=1241
"... They ne'er cared for us
yet: suffer us to famish, and their store-houses
crammed with grain; make edicts for usury, to
support usurers; repeal daily any wholesome act
established against the rich, and provide more
piercing statutes daily, to chain up and restrain
the poor. If the wars eat us not up, they will; and
there's all the love they bear us."
-- Shakespeare: Coriolanus, Act 1, scene 1
