Some made a good point, I forget where but it was in a comments thread, about health care in America. If the point was to reduce costs brought forth by fraud and inefficiencies, then why not tackle those issues straight on? Why introduce Obamacare which apparently does none of those things?
It's similar to a question I asked when Obamacare had yet to be law. If the goal is to get 50 million uninsured (and that figure was inflated - some studies pegged it realistically at 15-20 million) then why force everyone else into the same pot? Why not just design a new program for those uninsured? At which point, isn't that what's Medicare for?
A friend of mine is an American doctor. He treads carefully about Obamacare. While he understands what they're trying to accomplish and sees some pros to it, at this point, he feels this thing is going to spiral into a direction not meant to go into - and not necessarily for the better.
Insurance is funny. People won't buy it if they feel they don't need it. Young people in particular look at it that way. Why take on an extra cost like health insurance when A) they feel healthy and B)won't use have of what's offered anyway? It was a rational decision.
Alas, government has different plans for you. Like car insurance.
In any event, like anything the government claims will be "equal" or "fair" always ends up being anything but. Always. Obamacare is so full of exemptions at the moment - including politicians looking to get it - it's a laughable, hideous joke.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.