Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (319286)	8/11/2009 8:59:10 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793824

my vote would be against a "single payer" system back then, and it remains the same now. Since the Gov pays for over 50% of the med today, it's hard to say where a "free to choose" system would have left us. I think we are either going to end up with some sort of hybrid "single pay" or a hybrid "Swiss Ins system." I would prefer the Swiss system. But it may be too late.

To: skinowski who wrote (319286)	8/11/2009 9:06:42 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793824

I remember that Hillarycare had insurance pools to help individuals buy insurance. That might have been useful if it had been implemented. John Stewart thinks the President is a sucky salesman: You know a sales pitch is in trouble when it starts out with "Look, you gotta trust me, we're not going to kill your grandmother." hulu.com Problem is, the President is saying that Medicare benefits are going to stay exactly as they are now...after he removes $500 Billion in Medicare funding. Think that might be the source of some of the skepticism, Jon? Didn't the Democrats absolutely excoriate Newt Gingrich and the Republicans for proposing to merely slow the growth in Medicare funding about 14 years ago? Who taught who about the effectiveness of "they're gonna kill Grandma" campaigns?