The Best Reason Now To Be An Expat In Argentina...

As one of those 80%, I have to say "acceptable" is not exactly the right word. I was paying about the same amount of money every year for my family as Steve's entire yearly expenditures, and for that, I had a huge deductible, an unknown amount of cash out of pocket if anything actually happened to any of my family members, and the knowledge that, due to pre-existing conditions of 3 of my 4 family members, we could not even consider changing health plans- we were stuck, forever, with our provider, as no other plan would accept us without charging us 3 or 4 thousand dollars a month.

I would say the word he was looking for was "resigned".

If the ACA did NOTHING else but abolish the pre-existing condition clause, it would still be a very good thing for the third of so of americans who bought and paid for their own insurance (or went without, which many did).

There is no going back on that, no matter how much the phrases "death panel" or "freedom" are bandied about.
 
80% is a funny number that applies almost not at all-

to understand US health care, it helps to look at how it actually works.

Basically, the USA is divided into thirds.

1/3 of the US has government paid for health care, roughly divided into two parts-

About ten percent of the USA has true socialist health care, and has for fifty years or more- this would include the Veterans Health Care system, where the government owns the hospitals and equipment, and pays the doctors a salary, just like the NHS in England.

Another twenty percent of the USA has government paid for private health care- this would be the US Marshalls, the Forest Rangers, the Senate Staffers on the Government employee health care plans, and everybody on Medicare and Medicaid.
Private hospitals, private clinics, for profit doctors, just single payer.

Another third or so of americans have private industry, employer paid for health care. This has been declining every year, for the past fifty years or so, dumping more and more people into the other categories. These people know, and care, the least, except when their employers steadily stick them with more and more of the bill.

Then we have the 16% or so who have no insurance whatsoever, who either go to the emergency room, or die.

And, finally, the people, like me, who pay their own way, and buy individual insurance.


Each of these groups has very different ideas about the ACA, as it impacts each of them differently. Some, like Vets, not at all. Others, like the previously uninsured, an enormous amount. And, to many in the middle, its just a football game on TV, with no real impact on their lives, but a team they have chosen to root for.
 
Not being American myself, would you say Michael Moore's Sicko comes near to the truth about health care in The States?
 
The discussions (not just this one) on the Affordable Care Act has taught me some things:

1. Most of my fellow 'mericans are very quick to form an opinion.
2. Most of those opinions are based on zero- and/or mis-information.
3. Those opinions create sticky contradictions when presented with real data. Eg, the Christian Right Wing who abhors the idea of helping "the poor."
4. Most of my fellow 'mericans freak out at anything labeled "Socialist." Most of them can't accurately define "Socialist" however many of them happily partake in programs that are clearly Socialist.
5. Most of my fellow 'mericans relate to the ACA the same way they relate to college football. You are either with us... or against us. (sound familiar?)

They remind me of my 14-year old daughter who already knows everything about life - regardless of the fact that she has not yet finished school, gotten a job, rented an apartment, paid a mortgage, gotten married, had kids, bought and sold cars, paid taxes, etc etc etc.

Gives me such hope for the future. :)
 
The discussions (not just this one) on the Affordable Care Act has taught me some things:

1. Most of my fellow 'mericans are very quick to form an opinion.
2. Most of those opinions are based on zero- and/or mis-information.
3. Those opinions create sticky contradictions when presented with real data. Eg, the Christian Right Wing who abhors the idea of helping "the poor."

Ae you asserting that the "Christian Right Wing actually abhors the idea of helping "the poor," or is that an example of an opinion based on zero and/or mis-information?
 
Let me clarify: They support the idea. They just abhor actually doing it.

What specifically are you referring to?

It is easy to demonstrate that the "right wing" does not favor irrational and unending expansion of the government based on the claim of "helping" the poor.

Their biggest reason for this is that programs "designed" to "help" the poor creates poverty (increases the number of "impoverished" individuals) as well as perpetuates it.

As far as private charity goes, the right wing (Christian or not) has no problem with it whatsoever.
 
Ae you asserting that the "Christian Right Wing actually abhors the idea of helping "the poor," or is that an example of an opinion based on zero and/or mis-information?

Christian "conservatives" care about fetuses but, once they're born, they're on their own.
 
Back
Top