Granted, it's only half the bttle,and it is certain to hit a filiuster in the Senate, but this is the farthest healthcare reform has gotten since Medicare was passed. Universal healthcare was first suggested by Teddy Roosevelt. He left office in 1909. Since then, we have had 18 presidents and countless Senators and Congressmen and Congresswomen, millions have died early deaths due to inadequete healthcare, and every year since 1955, a bill for reform has been introduced by Rep. John Dingall. This, byevery strech of the imagination, is WAY overdue. If only Ted Kennedy were alive to see this...
I'd love to think it was a glorious victory. But, all I see is it openning up a whole new list of mandates that citizens are forced to buy with no guarrantees that we ever receive any return or services for what we are forced to purchase. It hands a whole captive market over to the insurance industry, with few real guarrantees of services for payment. I fail to see how it solves any of the real problems. The fact that the mandate was justified because vechile owners have to purchase insurance made no sense to me. I have a choice to operate a vehicle...I have no choice in existing as a human. I'd like to know where the fines from those that refuse to purchase insurance is going to be used. Will they be by default insured, or on top of the fines will they also be required to purchase for profit insurance? And if we don't insure illegal aliens what happens when they become ill or injured. Who picks up the bill? Do we just pretend 12 million people don't reside here?
Why in god's name would we insure illegal immigrants. You're just asking to create an NHS style problem of medical tourism.
I thought we were discussing health care reform not health insurance reform. And if you have 12 million people residing in a nation you have to consider at some point they will become ill or injured. Of course we could pretend they don't exist like we do with the homeless. Perhaps economically it's in our best interests to ignore their health concerns today, but I would consider the effects that may have on the society as a whole if they become without health care a hazzard to rest of polite society.
You have 12 million people residing in a nation illegally who aren't supposed to be there to begin with., "Yo, dudes! Go to America! Free doctors!" Should we give them food stamps and Pell grants too? I mean they are living here.
Don't we already do that? It's my understanding they do receive foodstamps, they don't qualify for PELL grants if their documentation is checked out thoroughly, but many times I think it's overlooked. Fact is they reside and co-mingle with the citizens of this country if we try to ignore that fact we risk our own health. It's comparable with pretending at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic that only gays were impacted. And we've seen how well that worked. Fact is they have universal health care in Mexico...I doubt they are immigrating here for our glorious plan.
How much does not providing it cost this nation? How many productive lives are lost? And who really is measuring the loss of each of those lives and on what basis. Money isn't the only measure of real worth. If by not providing health care to 12 million residents resulted in an epidemic what would that cost account for? Of course we could assume Goldman Sach's employees wouldn't have any direct contact with their housekeepers or lawn and pool boys, but if those housekeepers and cooks corrupted the grounds, homes and foodstuffs consumed by their wealthy employers, maybe then there might be a concern. But then they got the H1N1 vaccine before hospitals and high risk populations.
We shouldn't. I agree. But until those that employ them are held accountable there is no real solution. And Mexico has universal health care coverage. So they aren't coming here for health care.
Universal is a vague term, you really think outside of Mexico city and the resorts Mexican health care is anything to talk about?