Skip to main content

Reply to "Supreme Court upholds health-care law, individual mandate"

Originally Posted by ocatchings:

I'm not a fan of the individual mandate, but before we continue debate on which way is right how about some accountability? If a person can afford it but doesn't want to opt in and they get sick, then sin loy.

I think everyone agrees that something needed to be done other than the usual congressional hot air, but we will have to see if this was the right decision ofr not. From what I've read, it is estimated that if nothing was done then cost were expected to nearly double by 2016.

 

I think for me one of the most interesting bits of information that have come out of the discussion about this is the fact that the U.S. spends billions of dollars more on health care than any other developed country ... almost doubt the percentage of GDP in some cases, yet we are sicker, die younger, and less of our children survive birth than at least 30 other industrialized countries.

 

It's also pretty much agreed that we also spend double the amount of money paid for health care costs on non-medical "administrative costs" .... i.e., which means insurers are pocketing more of the money that is taken in than they are spending it on care and quality and efficiency.

 

Just those facts, if nothing else, makes it seem to me like SOMETHING needed to be done in the area of reforming health care!!    And, it's unlikely that ANY attempt at reforming the health care industry could have made things any WORSE than they already were.

 

No other president before President Obama had been a strong enough person to INSIST and eventually FORCE the issue of changing the health care industry from what it was (and had always been and the unfair, overpriced system it had evolved into).  And for all the people who are complaining about the "imperfections" of this new reform plan ... I wonder if they would have preferred that yet another presidency went by with nothing having been done to at least try to make it better ... and that we were continuing to be charged (at the whim of insurance companies) 30%-per-year annual premium hikes yet receiving less services for those increases ... without any possibility of regulation or control in sight??

 

I mean, I can understand that it's not a "perfect" plan ... but is it REALLY worse than the our-of-control "no plan" that we had before?

×
×
×
×