Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
There are many issues I flat-out disagree with, including her idea of 'taking your money away, and giving it to the poor.'
Hillary Clinton made news by saying she might allow workers' wages to be garnisheed if they refuse to buy health insurance.
"I think there are a number of mechanisms" that are possible, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."
Right.
You're Joe Blow living in Alabama....you're 25 years old, and you make 10 bucks an hour. You make enough money to get buy, and live at least a decent life. You have a 50 year mortgage on your house, and with your current paycheck, along with your wifes, you can narrowly pay the payments each month. Along comes Hillary, who goes after your wages, and FORCES you to buy health insurance.
Did I mention that Joe Blow and his wife have no serious health problems, they work simple office jobs that puts them in no danger?
Now what kind of screwed up plan is it to force them to give up part of their direly needed wages to pay for health insurance they don't want?
|
When it comes to Iraq, I agree that she has a small problem. I console myself a little with the thought that she had a lot of company in playing craven politics when Bush was riding his post 9/11 wave of popularity. But I think your understanding of her health plan is flawed.
For one thing, ken0042 is right: you can't have universal health care if not everyone participates. In fact, the truth is that universal entitlement programs are typically cheaper for governments to run than ones that consumers can "opt out" of. The U.S. desperately needs health care reform--the system here is broken and immoral, and fails to provide even the most basic services to millions of people. But worst of all: it's expensive. No government program in history has paid so much for so little.
44 dollars, by the way? Pretty good. I pay 350 dollars a month for Health Insurance, and my wife pays 250 for our daughter. Joe Blow will be better off under Hillary's plan.