30,000,000 or so people who don't now have coverage, will. It's debatable whether it's a good bill for the established adults in the college-educated class. I think it is. But regardless of that, it's very much a good deal for those not poor enough for medicaid but still in the less rich half of the country.
This is America. If you want health care, you can either buy it, or go to an emergency room. Forcing people to buy bad insurance doesn't sound like making things better.
I didn't realize that your definition of "health care" only includes life-threatening conditions.
If that's the case, then your idea that making health insurance available to people who otherwise couldn't afford it does not improve the status quo of health care makes a little more sense.
I didn't realize that your definition of "health care" only includes life-threatening conditions.
It doesn't. You were talking about emergency rooms.
Could the health care provided there be better? Yes.
Should people have access to free joint replacement therapy? No.
If that's the case, then your idea that making health insurance available to people who otherwise couldn't afford it does not improve the status quo of health care makes a little more sense.
Nice snark. It is quite possible to improve the status quo of health care, and reduce the overall status quo. I think that's the likely case with Senate bill. In a country where we spend the most on health care, it isn't reasonable to call a bill which will probably increase the cost of health care reform.
And you really think that was for personal gain, rather than a political calculation of what was possible and how to advance his principles, both now and later?
Then please specify what constitutes personal gain in this context. He is already at the pinnacle of power, unless he aspires to US Dictator or World Emperor. Presumably you don't mean sexual conquest.
Do you simply mean re-election in three years? Respect?
OK, you are right..he is at the pinnacle. But all Presidents begin to worry about "legacy" the day they get elected. Re-election is the first step to legacy. I mean other then presidents who died in their first term, tell me a One Term president who is spoken of in grand terms? FDR, Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, Reagan, Teddy R...all multi term presidents.
Re-election is the ultimate Personal Gain. But thats not all. HCR is a legacy event. DADT isnt.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
If that's the case, then your idea that making health insurance available to people who otherwise couldn't afford it does not improve the status quo of health care makes a little more sense.
Reply
It doesn't. You were talking about emergency rooms.
Could the health care provided there be better? Yes.
Should people have access to free joint replacement therapy? No.
If that's the case, then your idea that making health insurance available to people who otherwise couldn't afford it does not improve the status quo of health care makes a little more sense.
Nice snark. It is quite possible to improve the status quo of health care, and reduce the overall status quo. I think that's the likely case with Senate bill. In a country where we spend the most on health care, it isn't reasonable to call a bill which will probably increase the cost of health care reform.
Reply
abso freaking lutely.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Do you simply mean re-election in three years? Respect?
Reply
FDR, Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, Reagan, Teddy R...all multi term presidents.
Re-election is the ultimate Personal Gain. But thats not all. HCR is a legacy event. DADT isnt.
Reply
Reply
Reply
" I mean other then presidents who died in their first term, tell me a One Term president who is spoken of in grand terms?"
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment