(June 28, 2012 at 12:02 pm)Minimalist Wrote: It's a mistake to regard this as a victory for the lower classes. It is a victory for the health insurance companies.
Yes, the law has some good features but primarily it failed to set up a national health care plan like more modern and evolved nations have done.
I really hope that is not the case, but nothing about big money in the hands of greedy people surprises me. But if that is the case, when you look at human behavior, you can only abuse people for so long and the opportunity will eventually long term, come up to the point of a revolution.
The Romans feel for that reason, they exploited everything and spread themselves to thin.
China is stable now, but the problem is that the population is much more in tune to global issues and may in the future get to the point of bucking their modern system. We even now, hear stories of abuse. When those people get enough power themselves, they will rebel.
So my advice to the people at the top, if what you are saying is true, this short term gain for the top, will fizzle out when too many people become poor. As long as we have our constitution, I see no long term power for their monopolies, once the money dries up, there will be a power vacuum they will have to pay for.
The only moral rule is one that takes into account the least in that society, and to maintain power the best thing to do is ask yourself how you would want to be treated when you lose it, because power is never static in evolution.
I am taking a wait and see approach on this issue.
