SATX John

Yet the current law does not do this.... This would be a different law.

Remember "we have to pass it to know whats in it" (Nancy).

That was the problem, no foresight as to 2nd and 3rd order effects.

fatbrit

Plenty of foresight. But, if you remember back, we had one party who would rather kneecap that damn n***** in the White House than actually concern itself with the people's health care.

Brit3964

The US looks like it may well take the easy way out again, ie. YOYO (Your On Your Own). Thanks 5-4 SCOTUS The problems will still be with us. The numbers will get bigger. Market-based private only healthcare will fail to work for all because it can't.

SATX John

Shouldn't you be on the racist thread???? Really, that has nothing to do with it.

OBTW we had a dem congress the first two years, and they lost it due to their actions.

frrussre

"The American dream"

Still, some of us have insurance, who cares about the rest.

I am one of the lucky ones, I have pretty good Health Insurance, yet oddly enough, I do care about those that don't. Call me a big old softy.

Reg. Frank R.

Sally Redux

You're a big old softy

Giantaxe

Not half as curious as quoting Russia, Ukraine and Greece as "someone else" on this thread did.


Too many lobbying $$$ from insurance companies for that to happen here. Switzerland heavily regulates its insurance companies to achieve near universal coverage, but again those pesky bribes will prevent it happening here.

I'd have chosen different language but essentially he's right. Before Obama was even inaugurated, the Republican leader in the Senate said that their main goal was prevent Obama from doing anything so he wouldn't get reelected. So much for addressing problems the country was facing. I certainly had no problem with people opposing Obamacare; what I did have a problem with was the outright lies and scare tactics employed, and the complete lack of alternative proposals from them. Just as the promised "repeal and replace" has been very noisy about the repeal part and entirely silent on the replace bit.

And, yes, we did have a Democratic Congress, but as you know it takes 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate. When your 60th vote is a certain independent from Connecticut, your options are kind of limited.

frrussre

Thank you Sally, I try.

Frank R.

fatbrit

I'm not even on this thread. Just sitting on the sidelines watching a guy who's paid by the government and enjoys health care provided by the government arguing that it should be nothing to do with government. Gawd, America's in a mess. Luckily I can go live elsewhere if the morons don't die off quick enough.

SATX John

Mine is for my work, not free. Yep work for the gov't. If you care to, soldier up to the same risks. Cost me 3 years of the last 8 years in hostile fire zones. I think that paid for most of it, vs others who expect it for nothing.

OBTW care is through a company not the gov't once retired. Care on duty is through other soldiers providing that care.

Your immigration status is your choice.

Lion in Winter

Your assertion that military service means you have earned health care from the taxpayer, but that those with other roles in society have not because they "do nothing", ie they "expect it for nothing", is unattractive to say the least. Consider the contributions to society of scientists and builders, engineers and teachers, those who grow and pick your food and wait on you at table in restaurants, doctors, nurses, and those who wash the floors and equipment of the hospitals. Elevating military service to a level that is higher than any other function of society is, at worst, a principal characteristic of a totalitarian state. At best, it is arrogant and inaccurate. My father, who spent six years at war, would not have been impressed.

fatbrit

Well thank you for your service, John.

My immigration status is citizen, John. Just like you, eh?

Giantaxe

So the person who gets sick, loses their job and becomes uninsurable is expecting something for nothing?

All paid for by taxpayers, regardless of who is providing the actual healthcare services.

HarryTheSpider

I haven't read the rest of the thread yet, so this may already be covered...

I am a Brit, moved here 18 months ago. In the UK I paid tax at several rates, including a smidge at 40%. I don't have a problem with a lot of my money going to the government. I'd love to be in the position of having enough income that I fall in to the higher tax brackets...

I was asked when I got here if I liked paying less tax.

I replied that while I pay less income tax, the effective tax rate, defined by me as income less additional expenditure to have almost, but not quite, the same health cover as I had back home, amongst other things, worked out to be about the same.

For us, in our situation, comparing our 'not unusual' situation in the UK with same 'not unusual' situation in the US, it works out to be the same. It's just that here in the US we can choose - have less health care but more money in our pockets, and risk having some medical issue down the road that utterly buggers us financially, or forego some of that cash now and be 'rest assured'...

So, our choice...

My point? Don't ever presume that the 'high tax, socialist model' that is found in many places in Europe is some kind of 'loss of freedom, nightmare scenario if visited upon America' - that is simply bollox made to scare unthinking people to vote for somebody who has very much their own agenda in mind. Not everything in America, done by Americans, is the best - not by a long chalk. Neither is it all bad.

I would really like to see a genuine debate on this (not skewed by the seedy money & politics of big business and the uber rich), here in the US, and at home - we all face the same challenges - how to feed, clothe, look after, educate an ageing population while enjoying some standard of living and dignity. Frankly I think it appalling that the richest country on the planet, for the moment, has such instances of poverty and lack of health care affecting 10s of millions of its own citizens.

Not one of the GOP candidates has had anything constructive to say on health care in a very long time, if ever. Meantime they enjoy outstanding health cover, paid for by the tax payers - what utter, utter hypocritical wankers. I hope to God or whoever that the Dems don't replicate the moral vacuum displayed so far. And I'm not demanding the GOP candidates have the same view as me on this - just that they contribute meaningfully, and credibly. Debate suggests some conflict & discourse, out of which can come a common perspective and solution we can all buy in to. If I was a USC abroad I might hide in embarrassment in this respect.

Basic healthcare is a right, in my mind, and is enshrined in UN charter on human rights. Here in the US, it is a right only for those in public office, paid for by everybody out of public office, as far as I can tell.

And for those who don't believe basic healthcare is a right, would you honestly feel the same way if you couldn't afford medical care and you or a family member needed it? Really, honestly, would you? Has ANY supporter of the 'sort it out by yourself' camp rejected/refused to accept health care provided by others, employer or tax payer? I can't believe it is many...

These are complex issues, complex problems, and critical ones. Throwing mud around every 4 years, and spending more than half of any legislative period running for office, is not going to address them...

Is 'Obama care' wrong in what it is trying to achieve? I don't think so, from what little I know. Is it wrong in HOW it tries to achieve that? That is what is being debated in SCOTUS now. Whether it stands or falls in its current form is one thing. I hope that it's overarching objective doesn't. I don't hold out much hope.

HarryTheSpider

Sadly I feel compelled to say this is the kind of perspective that, IMHO, when exported outside the US by members of it's government services, including the military, engenders a suspicion of America, it's actions and intentions. It may paint a false image of the true nature of America - I'm sure it does - but that's the image that gets painted in the hearts and minds of many overseas. You didn't have to serve, and neither did I, but we did, and we got paid for it. I didn't serve in the military to feel good about me benefiting from government subsidised health care. To be honest, I don't believe you did either. For what ever reasons we serve/volunteer, the end result is that our actions contribute to something bigger than us. What do we want that bigger thing to be, to stand for? Compassion for the vulnerable, or "I'm alright jack, and it's your own stupid fault for being unlucky, now piss off and stop bothering me".

And by way of short circuiting an obvious response to my post here - to tell me to sod off back to my own country... I choose to be here. I pay taxes, unlike 53% of USCs, and I'm OK with that. I pay more than 2x the average, and I'm OK with that too. I like it here. The people I've met have almost to a wo/man been sincere, genuine, kind, and normal(!) I have no illusions or delusions about trying to make the US more like other places around the World. Nor would I want to - it makes a unique and valuable contribution to Mankind, not just by what it gets right, but also by what it gets wrong, by what it models that people want to replicate, and by what it models that people never want to see replicated even remotely, anywhere else, ever again.