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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (24411)	7/31/2012 5:46:13 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 42652

>> Lots of Docs, insurance companies and hospitals supported and support it. We've got to let it run it's course, try to tweak when it needs tweaking, and if it doesn't work try something else. Sort of, "We have to enact the legislation so we can find out what's in it?"

To: Road Walker who wrote (24411)	7/31/2012 7:44:46 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Respond to of 42652

The status quo was expensive, and created long term fiscal problems, so we replaced it with an item that outlaws the cheaper forms of insurance, and adds more federal spending making our fiscal problems worse. If Obama started to pour gasoline on a house fire, would you argue that we should let it run its course, tweaking it later on? Edit - Not that I think its as destructive as pouring gasoline on the fire, but the previous situation wasn't the house burning down either. Its just that, "It was bad, doing something was a good idea, this is something, so doing this is a good idea", is a lousy argument.