my brother wants obamacare.
^ As do I.![]()
my brothers and I want The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but we just call it rOmneycare 2.0.
my brother wants obamacare.
^ As do I.![]()
Well, if anarchy had a proven track record of working. Yes.![]()
MEDICARE for all!.............IF the bill goes down.
MEDICARE for all!.............IF the bill goes down.
I thought it was because cheap Indian tea was undercutting local tea merchants, who rebelled because their profits were threatened. As usual, the rich shafting the poor demanding the right to keep doing it.If I remember correctly, one of the main reasons we rebelled and claimed our independence from the UK was because they were trying to impose too much control through taxes/government (to help pay off the Brits war debts).
I think Obamacare would cause uproar and rebellion if imposed on the UK. (though Cameron is trying to sell off the NHS)but I don't think his plan is the one that is needed. It's not one that, when actually put into effect, will end up working out well for a country like the US.
Well you havnt so far tried. The whole point is that cost goes on general taxation and people never get billed directly for health care. Thus people are never deprived of health care because they dont have money, or never in their lives had money. Apparently Americans believe it is acceptable for the poor to get sick and die.The US isn't Sweden, the UK or even Canada, and we can't just take some other country's and culture's way of doing things and expect it to work fantastically over here like it may over there.
I agree that if this bill gets thrown out it will increase pressure for a more comprehensive one.The irony is that if the courts conservatives overthrow the mandate, they will hasten the arrival of a more government-heavy system. Justice Anthony Kennedy even hinted that it might be more honest if government simply used the tax power to raise revenue and to just have a national health service, single-payer. Remember those words.
I agree that if this bill gets thrown out it will increase pressure for a more comprehensive one.
I agree with Klingsor that no president or Congress in their right mind would touch the healthcare question, maybe for the next 20 years.
I just wonder who is playing who? Repubs do not want Government telling people to get healtcare, but at the same time trying to force women to have an ultrasound in cases of abortion.
But props to President OBAMA for trying to reach common ground. Too bad That won't ever happen...
It is impossible to reach Common Ground when you're dealing with Mental Deficiency complicated by deep-seeded Racism.
HH
It is just as common in the private insurance industry where it is pretty general and might, for example, also apply to subsidence or flooding when insuring a house. It is pretty much an inescapable principle in insurance systems.How common is the term "pre-existing condition" in Australia or the UK?
But I think the larger American reaction is going to be, "Thank goodness this monstrosity is dead. It shows the foolishness of trying to tackle or dismantle the present system. It works fine for most of us and should be left alone."
When I first heard it I thought a law requiring people to take out a contract with a for-profit company was completely insane. It is compulsory indentured slavery. It breaks the link between ability to pay and choice of how you spend your money. It does not address the problem of how to get health care if you have no money. It is a compromise to fit private insurance into a system where it is unsuited.It's for the very reason that the US would be almost screwed beyond hope that I hold out hope the Supreme Court will not strike down PRCare.
If this law is struck down (and I, too, sincerely hope that it is), then it will be the American patriots who actually *understand* Constitutional law and limits on Federal authority, who struck it down.