Hey man, I stated in my first post of this forum that I didn't understand the whole concept of the health care system. I based this off of these links:DelPen wrote:A majority of money going in is not paying for CEO salries, etc. To say that is ludicrous and shows that you are incapable of having a rational discussion on the topic if you actually think that.
http://machineslikeus.com/news/where-mo ... -us-system
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/ ... uch-money/ (The graph on this page tells a nice story).
http://www.healthcareforall.org/healthcare_crisis.html
At least I admitted that I wasn't overly knowledgeable of the situation. I am not attacking anyone, and was looking for good discussion. Your snap back actually shows you're incapable of having a rational conversation on a subject you disagree with. We're all just trying to figure everything out. Calm down.
I can see that. "What standards" would be a good question, indeed. If done right, it would be a great thing. Like you said, everything is open to interpretation.bhaw wrote:I think the issue with this thing on page 72 would be the vagueness of it. What limit is placed on the governments regulations? Can the make the rules so prohibitive it forces "competitors" to leave the market?
All the nit picky stuff is open to interpretation. The overall issue is that this is a hybrid social/private health care solution that has no precedent of working anywhere else. I'm not sure I trust a government that just threw hundreds of billions at the economy in an attempt to quick fix (that didn't do anything really) to implement something totally new. Especially considering no one has read the damn thing.