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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (1033784)	10/12/2017 2:46:51 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	3 Recommendations Recommended By locogringo PKRBKR steve harris Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576124

BC, Obama "care" was never about lowering costs. That was the big lie. Lowering "costs" by having government provide huge subsidies for the previously uninsured. Also platitudes toward "modernizing" health records. Even liberals acknowledge that ObamaCare has failed to reduce costs ... which is why they're advocating for "Medicare for All." Failure of liberalism only means we need more of it. Tenchusatsu

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (1033784)	10/12/2017 3:31:25 PM
From: zzpat	Respond to of 1576124

Which is more expensive insurance or paying the original price? We both know insurance is cheaper. When we help the poor buy insurance instead of paying for their care directly the cost to taxpayers falls dramatically. Why? Because insurance companies pay the bills and we only help the poor with the premiums. We can also see that the costs insurance companies incurred hasn't harmed their profits. They report quarter after quarter of record profits. We have 20M insured Americans and record insurance profits. We need a few tweaks to make the law perfect and Democrats can do that.