If they had said, "we need to reform entitlements because we are spending too much money" and the population had protested, that would have been courage.
If they had said, "we need to limit pain and suffering awards and you will need to pay a portion of your health care to reduce costs", that would have been courage.
But what they did is mandate (order under the force of law) everyone to buy insurance, mandate new, impossible levels of coverage and mandate acceptance regardless of condition with a lower level of patient participation while just flat lying that this absurdity will lower the cost of care, over the objection of the population.
No, we will not "move on"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"Impossible levels of coverage"? Like what?
"Mandate acceptance regardless of condition" So - what is your counter proposal? What did the GOP do for this circumstance when they had a monopoly on power? I will answer it for you - they gave the finger to anyone with pre-existing conditions. They genuinely did not care and did nothing about it.
David Frum wrote an excellent piece that I will cut and paste separately.
Jim,
I am with you.
For me, the learning from this debacle is that sensible people have made the mistake of leaving politics to others. We must engage, and we must make a difference.
Statism is not good for citizens, and citizens must fight to preserve freedom. Reagan was corny, but he was right.
Hags
Welcome back, Hags! Your contributions have been missed.
Rich
Why do you think that insurance can't cross state lines, because various states mandate coverage for multiple conditions and services.
You think the Federal government is not going to do more?
You assume a "health care crisis" which did not exist. Yes we needed reform, but in the name of some million American's your party blew up the system for everyone.
How...just how exactly are we going to "cover" 30 million more, have no preexisting conditions, no lifetime limits and not spend A LOT more?
How can "o" take over health care turning insurance companies into public servents and THE STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM and GM and we not be Socialists?
Jim ~
I support the sale of health coverage across state lines. It is a shame the GOP did not participate in the negotiations and get that included. Tort reform as well. If you don't think Obama would have traded those for GOP Senate votes, you are crazy.
So - what would you do for those 30mm people? What did Bush/GOP Congress do for them? I think the expression is "Let them eat cake."
You favor lifetime limits and denial due to pre-existing conditions? Should those Americans just be left out in the cold, on the outside looking in? When you watch Its a Wonderful Life, do you identify with George Bailey or Mr Potter?
Socialism is defined as government ownership of the primary means of production and services. That is certainly not what is going on here. Have you heard of all those big corporations throughout the western world? Which country meets the actual definition of socialism, rather than your high pitched, erroneous usage?
Post a Comment