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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (134419)	3/23/2010 5:27:58 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543056

is to allow people to literally die in the street. I've heard of ravaged old drunks and druggies literally dying in the streets, but not people who were unable to find a way to get healthcare. Where do you get this notion? In a nation of 350 million people, I hope you can come up with some reasonable number, i.e. not one or two. Besides that, if people dying in the streets were a significant number, then the proposed plan would have covered all the uninsured, not just 70%. Why did Obama leave out 30%? If Congress was aiming to help out whatever number of people there are out there who genuinely cannot afford to either buy health insurance or pay for their healthcare costs out-of-pocket, then Congress would have designed a way to take care of them and only them, don't you think? I understand your compassion, but I don't think you realize yet just how expensive this plan is going to be for the government to maintain. It's offering lots of benefits to many more people than the currently uninsured who can't afford to buy insurance.