More than most US citizens can afford and why many US citizens cross the border for drugs and treatment.
Look. I'm against the idea of us having to purchase insurance to operate a vehicle. Its ridiculous. But if we have to do that, what would be the problem with having to purchase insurance. Especially if its offered at a affordable rate with no way of them canceling or upping the premiums on you guarenteed. Millions of people, including myself, have no insurance and can't afford it. So I think this would be the best decision. It would affect everyone. Not just the people without it, but the people with insurance. Because they could get it cheaper. This would also help bring the US out of debt. Or it should. If this completely passes. It will be a victory for the american people. But with every bill their comes a debate on the cons. Nothing put into the system in imperfect. So of course their are going to be problems. But why debate on it? Lets just pray that it works and if anything goes wrong, try to solve the problem. Ha.
Really, think about it. 500 million people in the USA all having insurance.. 40-50 a month. or maybe more. Do the math. And only 15% will prolly only use it every month. Correct me if i'm wrong. But thats just a guestimation.[Stole that word from Juno]
Well the problem with this is there is only about 307 million people in the United States. The current estimated cost of the bill by the congressional budget office is about $900 billion over 10 years.
I really think that if it passes the senate it will be a victory for the American public.I dont like having to do anything the gov. wants me to but there is not much in the way of better options being proposed by anyone.Something must be done to try and control the insurance leaches before they suck the whole country dry.I have no problem paying a reasonable fee for insurance,but the way it is now is not reasonable.They wanted to charge me 300$ a month with a 1500$ deductable WTF.I have no heath issues so how can that be considered a reasonable fee.
I think heath care should be avalible to all who need, but state run anything is going to have horrible service.. your not even going to want to go to the doctor after the first 2 years
Actually, if the bill doesn't get passed by the Senate - a lot of people will be pissed off - hopefully that includes the masses and the public. But after it gets passed (which it will someday) the bill then gets worked on and is sent back to the lower house where Congress will vote on it again. So even if the document as it stands doesn't pass completely, the point is that there is a process for the people in government to continue working on the bill before it officially becomes law.
It'll pass, trust me it'll most surely pass. They may have to water it down though, either to get Lieberman to stop being a douche or to get miss Snowe to switch sides and vote for it.
The problem with their plan is making it against the law to not have health insurance. Someone else pointed out that we have to pay insurance to drive a car. This is true, but the difference is that you do NOT have to own a car and so you do NOT have to pay car insurance. Mandatory health insurance, on the other hand, is like a tax for being alive. It is bullshit and totally anti-freedom. Why is it that healthcare is automatically outside the reach of the average citizen? Or college? It is simpley another bar in your cage.
Yeah, but by being alive you have a responsibility for paying for your body's health issues to some extent. The point of having car insurance is also to protect others from caused injury. If you get into an accident with me and have no car insurance, I'm SOL because you have not been responsible for insuring my safety. Same thing can be applied to the health care system. Some people get ill and hurt and it's totally irresponsible to be without it.
I totally agree...This bill will be bad for the elderly who BTW helped to build this nation. It will not save people lives it will just kill them faster mark my words...
In California part of the mandated auto insurance includes uninsured motorist coverage so that's not an accurate comparision. This is not going to save anyone money. It's simply a mandated market for the insurance industry. It's totally irresponsible to do a lot of things since when is it constitutional to control individual irresponsibility by making blanket laws to control all? Wasn't irresponsible for the banks to only hold one dollar in reserve while loaning out 30 dollars. Didn't they have insurance. Yet they had to be bailed out.
I watched a movie recently that brought up that in 1965 things were different. And I got to thinking about the progress that is 2009. In 1965 everyone could receive adequate healthcare. We had county and state hospitals that charged on a sliding scale and housed the poor elderly and mentally unstable when they needed long term care. Reagan and friends closed all the state and county hospitals. In 1965 there were interest rate caps that said anything over 10% was usuary. But Reagan and friends pushed to remove regulation and banking caps. We watched it lead to the Savings and Loan scandals. More currently California had to watch as Enron became a rising stock market star but provided no valuable goods or services or even could be said to be legally profitable. And today we have a new recession. In 1965 there was truly public education and it was quality and inexpensive at the college level, free for all elementary and high school age. There's been a concentrated push to undermine public school funding and to privatize education. I had a really hard time coming up with any area where the consumer was better off today than they were in 1965.
I remember when health care cost were reasonable after the insurance companies got involved then the cost went up.