Quote:
Originally Posted by dogzilla
This is a material change alright. You can't expand the pool of people getting access to medical care by this many and not expect there to be some limitation on access to medical staff. It's not like current medical staff has 5-10% free time that they can see these extra people.
It's also change in that you can't increase the number of people covered by medical care without increasing total cost. I've yet to see a government program actually reduce the cost of anything.
This is also a material change. You can't increase the cost of medical care by eliminating exclusions for pre-existing conditions and eliminating caps and then just assume that insurance companies are going to make it up out of their profits.
One way or another, I expect my out of pocket costs to go up. Whether the Democrats take the honest route and raise taxes or use some subterfuge to make me pay for this.
This whole argument that this bill is better than no bill is just nonsense. If the Democrats can't come up with a reasonable bill, then there should not be any bill.
|
Why is the argument that this bill is better than no bill nonsense? The perfect is the enemy of the good.
Also, the bill is quite explicit in what it will raise taxes on. Add to that an increased pool and the costs start getting in line. Finally, implicit in your post is that the 30 million uninsured don't alreay use doctors and facilities. In fact, they use these same doctors and facilities, but often when a condition has turned serious enough that they have to go to the ER.