It is going to be tough – - I mean can you imagine standing in line at your doctor’s office with those poor people that did not have insurance before – - – -
@Radish – How could they possibly load it with a poison pill? The GOP were essentially locked out of the negotiations and it was voted in strictly by Democrats.This just shows how Desperate Liberals are to blame anybody but their Looter in Chief for a terrible piece of legislation.
@Radish – How could they possibly load it with a poison pill? The GOP were essentially locked out of the negotiations and it was voted in strictly by Democrats.This just shows how Desperate Liberals are to blame anybody but their Looter in Chief for a terrible piece of legislation.
@Michael Whine – I’m not sure about most but I see very few people that are receiving something from a piece of legislation complain about that legislation. So if many people are now being given health care or being given huge supplements for health care I can see why they would like it.
I dare say that if a piece of legislation was passed that said the 1% would each be immediately taxed $1 Million a piece and that money would be redistributed to the other 99% that it would be a wildly popular piece of legislation. It would be wrong and evil but all those people who resent the 1% would be dancing in the streets.
The reason for the rise in Libertarianism is because the government spends too much time redistributing wealth and way too little time being a government for all. Those of us who pay the taxes see very little in the way of benefits and yet we see money pouring into every gimmee program the Democrats can invent.
I consider myself a libertarian but that doesn’t mean I’m for NO Government. I’m for a reduced Federal government that doesn’t spend any time looting and redistributing. I think the Federal government should worry about interstate commerce, National defense, and leave the rest to the states or local governments.
First, and most important, Romney didn’t have to force his plan with a government takeover. It had very strong bipartisan support. He created a consensus among stake holders to support RomneyCare.The Massachusetts legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic. Democrats hold about 160 out of 200 seats. Romney had a choice of working with the legislature or seeing the law passed over his veto. Romney did veto several provisions of the bill, which were promptly overridden by the legislature.http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/understanding_romneycare.htmlRomney managed to get some concessions, but the Republicans in the US House long ago decided to go for all out repeal instead of any compromise.BTW, there is going to be a doctor shortage. Proponents of obamacare admit that.The projected shortage has a lot more to do with our aging population than the ACA. Most of the fixes need to be done at the state level, since states will continue to hold most control over certifying doctors & other medical professionals, as well as deciding how much nurses can do without doctor supervision. Mississippi has a dire shortage of MDs, yet is one of the most restrictive on allowing nurse practitioners to treat patients.Short of telling millions of people they don’t deserve healthcare, the only option is to use doctors’ time as efficiently as possible, and do what we can to bring down the cost of educating health care professionals. The ACA is supposed to do that. If the provisions are too weak or not working as intended, I would encourage both parties to address the problem.
Republicans have generally opposed the idea of a single-payer health care system in the past.That’s rather circumspect, even by my standards! The Republicans have always opposed single payer. The ACA was their ‘market based’ alternative, until Obama picked up the idea.
lyle122 over 10 years ago
It is going to be tough – - I mean can you imagine standing in line at your doctor’s office with those poor people that did not have insurance before – - – -
Mephistopheles over 10 years ago
@Radish – How could they possibly load it with a poison pill? The GOP were essentially locked out of the negotiations and it was voted in strictly by Democrats.This just shows how Desperate Liberals are to blame anybody but their Looter in Chief for a terrible piece of legislation.
Mephistopheles over 10 years ago
@Radish – How could they possibly load it with a poison pill? The GOP were essentially locked out of the negotiations and it was voted in strictly by Democrats.This just shows how Desperate Liberals are to blame anybody but their Looter in Chief for a terrible piece of legislation.
Mephistopheles over 10 years ago
@Michael Whine – I’m not sure about most but I see very few people that are receiving something from a piece of legislation complain about that legislation. So if many people are now being given health care or being given huge supplements for health care I can see why they would like it.
I dare say that if a piece of legislation was passed that said the 1% would each be immediately taxed $1 Million a piece and that money would be redistributed to the other 99% that it would be a wildly popular piece of legislation. It would be wrong and evil but all those people who resent the 1% would be dancing in the streets.
The reason for the rise in Libertarianism is because the government spends too much time redistributing wealth and way too little time being a government for all. Those of us who pay the taxes see very little in the way of benefits and yet we see money pouring into every gimmee program the Democrats can invent.
I consider myself a libertarian but that doesn’t mean I’m for NO Government. I’m for a reduced Federal government that doesn’t spend any time looting and redistributing. I think the Federal government should worry about interstate commerce, National defense, and leave the rest to the states or local governments.
Uncle Joe Premium Member over 10 years ago
First, and most important, Romney didn’t have to force his plan with a government takeover. It had very strong bipartisan support. He created a consensus among stake holders to support RomneyCare.The Massachusetts legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic. Democrats hold about 160 out of 200 seats. Romney had a choice of working with the legislature or seeing the law passed over his veto. Romney did veto several provisions of the bill, which were promptly overridden by the legislature.http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/understanding_romneycare.htmlRomney managed to get some concessions, but the Republicans in the US House long ago decided to go for all out repeal instead of any compromise.BTW, there is going to be a doctor shortage. Proponents of obamacare admit that.The projected shortage has a lot more to do with our aging population than the ACA. Most of the fixes need to be done at the state level, since states will continue to hold most control over certifying doctors & other medical professionals, as well as deciding how much nurses can do without doctor supervision. Mississippi has a dire shortage of MDs, yet is one of the most restrictive on allowing nurse practitioners to treat patients.Short of telling millions of people they don’t deserve healthcare, the only option is to use doctors’ time as efficiently as possible, and do what we can to bring down the cost of educating health care professionals. The ACA is supposed to do that. If the provisions are too weak or not working as intended, I would encourage both parties to address the problem.
Uncle Joe Premium Member over 10 years ago
Republicans have generally opposed the idea of a single-payer health care system in the past.That’s rather circumspect, even by my standards! The Republicans have always opposed single payer. The ACA was their ‘market based’ alternative, until Obama picked up the idea.
zambiland over 10 years ago
You do know that Obamacare is a conservative plan hatched at the Heritage Foundation in 1989, right? It’s not a liberal plan at all.