2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI just flat out disagree with Hillary on medical care funding.
Truman was not fighting for the "affordable care act".
Americans do not want more access to INSURANCE. We want more access to MEDICAL CARE.
To be fair I didn't want ACA from the start. I KNOW we can do better. If Hillary does not think she can get universal access to medical care done for all citizens then I can respect that, but I want the next president to be someone who will move the gates of hell if that is what it takes to get it done.
Universal single payer is GOOD for business, good for citizens and good for this country. The only people it's not good for is Congress because it takes one reason to divide us and get slush money from lobbyists.
Insurance corps will not lose one thin dime of profits. They will just alter their business model and keep going. Businesses will be more competitive in the world since medical insurance costs will no longer be a burden and workers will be committed for the work and not for the health insurance.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)questionseverything
(9,653 posts)she neglected to say the aca only passed by reconciliation,public option could of passed same way
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)Reconciliation required Lieberman among others, Ben Nelson I believe.
questionseverything
(9,653 posts)reconciliation requires a simple majority
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)questionseverything
(9,653 posts)the public option never got same vote....this is old stuff
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)the second part passed through reconciliation.
questionseverything
(9,653 posts)reconciliation required is still true
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)questionseverything
(9,653 posts)andrea bringing up bill's affairs
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)unless you're on the board of Etna I wouldn't expect you to agree.
Autumn
(45,064 posts)deceitful as can be in her quest to protect the insurance companies and Wall Street, and I disagree with just about anything else that she says. Truman was not fighting for the "affordable care act". is 100% correct.
onecaliberal
(32,847 posts)Saying we should go with a system that leaves out 26 millions is the height of absurdity.
tokenlib
(4,186 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 18, 2016, 08:34 AM - Edit history (1)
I am really annoyed with that "access" word... ON EDIT, it is like COBRA is meant
to give us "access" to insurance if we lose our job. The number of people that can afford to use COBRA, or are even able to scrape the funds to use it are very few...some "access"...
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)I respect the fact you are willing to just come out and say you think medical care for the sick should be treated as a luxury product only the rich should be able to afford.
pretty brave on a progressive board......
tokenlib
(4,186 posts)I just have problems with the word "access." Access to health insurance doesn't mean you can afford to use healthcare if your coinsurance and deductible is too high. Sorry if I wasn't clear...I think everyone has a right to healthcare regardless of ability to pay. Some people think the "access" to insurance through the ACA enables those newly insured to have access to health care...but if you have a high deductible, high coinsurance policy..that "access" is close to worthless if you can't afford to use it. "Access" in a single payer system is much better than "access" under the ACA.