Originally posted by no1marauderBut if someone calls the public option "socialized medicine" or "big gummint takeover of the healthcare system", suddenly everyone's against it. Meanwhile, we have a group of chronically ill people under the age of 65 who can't afford the healthcare that they need.
Whatever your opinion is, the link gives the poll results and the poll questions. The majority favor a public option that competes with private insurers; if the latter can't compete tough luck for them - it's not like they have been providing an adequate product at a reasonable price.
There are some legitimate reasons why the current Dem healthcare bill is not the best approach. But the GOP needs to get into the arena with something that will work better and find a way for those chronically ill people to get the healthcare that they need. If they don't want to expand government and instead can find a way that relies entirely on free markets and voluntary charity, wonderful. Just get it done.
Regardless of whether the president's name is Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, or Obama, I'm fed up with listening to minority parties spend all their time cursing the darkness while blowing out all the candles the majority party tries to light.
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76"Onerous" regulation? "Unfair"?
If the latter can't compete because in the free market their products aren't as good as the government product, yes, tough luck on them.
If the latter can't compete because the government, through onerous regulations, forces them into fiscally unsound policies (e.g., charging the same premiums for healthy people as for cancer patients), then it's unfair to the insurers.
The government by legislative fiat is throwing into their lap tens of millions of new customers and paying for a large chunk of their premiums with public funds. In return for this remarkable expansion of their potential profits, the industry has to accept not following practices that are extremely detrimental to the public at large.
That gets a TFB from me and apparently the majority of the American public.
Originally posted by no1marauderWHAT do we need medical insurance for if we pony up for FREE MEDICAL CARE?
"Onerous" regulation? "Unfair"?
The government by legislative fiat is throwing into their lap tens of millions of new customers and paying for a large chunk of their premiums with public funds. In return for this remarkable expansion of their potential profits, the industry has to accept not following practices that are extremely detrim ...[text shortened]...
That gets a TFB from me and apparently the majority of the American public.
WHAT do we need the IRS for if we sic the successful state lottery teams on a system of microtaxation of electronic transactions?
think of the billions we'd save on both!