Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
air_ogi
Participant[quote=ucodegen]
I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.
[/quote]Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.
[quote=ucodegen]
And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”.
[/quote]The Senate bill, that contains 99.9% of the reform, had 60 votes in the Senate and majority in the house. The only thing you can argue about is reconsilation fixes.
Participant[quote=ucodegen]
I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.
[/quote]Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.
[quote=ucodegen]
And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”.
[/quote]The Senate bill, that contains 99.9% of the reform, had 60 votes in the Senate and majority in the house. The only thing you can argue about is reconsilation fixes.
Participant[quote=ucodegen]
I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.
[/quote]Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.
[quote=ucodegen]
And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”.
[/quote]The Senate bill, that contains 99.9% of the reform, had 60 votes in the Senate and majority in the house. The only thing you can argue about is reconsilation fixes.
Participant[quote=ucodegen]
I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.
[/quote]Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.
[quote=ucodegen]
And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”.
[/quote]The Senate bill, that contains 99.9% of the reform, had 60 votes in the Senate and majority in the house. The only thing you can argue about is reconsilation fixes.
ParticipantRushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?
California passed Tort reform in 1970s. It didn’t help that much with the rising cost of healtcare.
Stop with the talking points.
ParticipantRushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?
California passed Tort reform in 1970s. It didn’t help that much with the rising cost of healtcare.
Stop with the talking points.
ParticipantRushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?
California passed Tort reform in 1970s. It didn’t help that much with the rising cost of healtcare.
Stop with the talking points.
ParticipantRushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?
California passed Tort reform in 1970s. It didn’t help that much with the rising cost of healtcare.
Stop with the talking points.
ParticipantRushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?
California passed Tort reform in 1970s. It didn’t help that much with the rising cost of healtcare.
Stop with the talking points.
March 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM in reply to: OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”) #524216ParticipantThere are provision in the healthcare bill that would restrict premiums in case of pre-existing conditions.
Something like 2x your age group average.March 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM in reply to: OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”) #524352ParticipantThere are provision in the healthcare bill that would restrict premiums in case of pre-existing conditions.
Something like 2x your age group average.March 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM in reply to: OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”) #524794ParticipantThere are provision in the healthcare bill that would restrict premiums in case of pre-existing conditions.
Something like 2x your age group average.March 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM in reply to: OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”) #524890ParticipantThere are provision in the healthcare bill that would restrict premiums in case of pre-existing conditions.
Something like 2x your age group average.March 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM in reply to: OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”) #525148ParticipantThere are provision in the healthcare bill that would restrict premiums in case of pre-existing conditions.
Something like 2x your age group average. -
AuthorPosts