by Vicente ➕follow (1) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 78 - 82 of 82 Search these comments
I disagree. Pre-existing condition exclusion on it’s own is a reform. I suppose it depends on what definition you use for “reform†but I am not a semanticist.
OK, ok, it looks like a significant reform. But it is a reform of health insurance not a reform of health care.
I agree that this reform will allow more patients to see doctors more. However, it very likely will force doctors to see their patients much less, because they will be even more than today preoccupied with other stuff.
I know what is going to happen.
1. Cost overruns
2. Fraud
3. Additional coverage extended to groups
4. Rising deficits in the program
5. Lower payments to physicians
6. Lower payments to hospitals
7. Delays in payments
8. Rising taxes on the rich
9. Rationing by doctors, hospitals, government
10. Delays in treatment
11. More HMO care: assembly line medicine
12. A search for scapegoats
Come back to this in 2016.
You miss that by barring an industry from selling a product/service, you would be barring individuals from the choice of purchasing that product/service.
Do you really want me to provide you with a list of things that you can not legally sell to other people?
This is such a stupid argument I don't even know where to begin.
« First « Previous Comments 78 - 82 of 82 Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,267,338 comments by 15,153 users - Ceffer, Misc, Patrick online now