> Here's a really short video of what used to be a "company town" in Appalachia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBCxG_SCnQE

That's a great video.

That video "has been taken down by the uploader", according to YouTube.

Got another link?

They seem to have deleted the video and re-uploaded it?? Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SugMvGn2wQQ

If getting your health insurance through your employer creates dependency and gives your employer more control over you (and it does) then why is it a good idea to give this power to the government?

Your employer can mistreat you under the threat of losing your employer-provided health insurance. If everyone had government-provided health insurance, then employers would have less leverage. Government-provided health insurance can also ease the burden and risk for people starting new companies.

It also maximizes the number of people paying into the insurance pool.

> If getting your health insurance through your employer creates dependency and gives your employer more control over you (and it does) then why is it a good idea to give this power to the government?

Does your government have due process? If it does, how would that government use an obligation to provide you health insurance against you to influence your decisions?

People quit jobs far more often than they quit countries, and employer provided insurance does tie you to more strongly to your employer (e.g. I knew someone who needed a heart transplant who would literally die if he went without insurance, because he depended on a heart pump).

Also, you have to get insurance/healthcare from somewhere, and in a democracy the government is far more accountable to its citizens than an employer typically is to its employees [1].

[1] This is very clear in the typical case, but less clear for people with rare in-demand skills (like software engineers).

So you can switch employer and keep the care.

The US military paid occupation soldiers in Berlin in scrip too.