usernamenumber (
usernamenumber) wrote2009-08-13 02:22 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
(no subject)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
to me.
American Stories
Non-American Stories
Then again, there are still a lot of questions that are bothering me about the current situation:
The proposed plan in the US is not a single-payer system like those described above (though some seem to fear/assert that it will inevitably lead to one). Instead, my understanding is that it creates a government insurance offering that "competes" with the for-proffit companies. But how can it do that without becoming a dumping ground for the least insurable people out there? And if that happens, how can it compete?
I'm also hearing that the proposed plan mandates insurance with penalties against those who don't subscribe. During the primaries, Obama's position against this was one of the main things that I liked about him over Clinton.
Urgh. Anyway, still suffering from head-explody, but helpful information nonetheless. Makes me all the more pissed about the crazy scare-tactics that are being used about people dying in line waiting for care in other countries (the citizens of which, when polled, still seem to like their death camps as much or more than we like our system for some reason, those wacky Canadians), etc... and terrified that so many people seem to be buying them completely. =:(
no subject
I also see the government plans as being a dumping ground for the least insurable people out there, but I still think that these people deserve some care which is better than no care at all.
no subject
no subject
no subject
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561737
no subject