While President Obama’s health care act (which is essentially similar to Mitt Romney’s one he introduced when governor of Massachusetts) has flaws. The opposition to it seems absolutely amazing, since it is not the least bit socialist.
Because real socialist health care system has things like doctors being paid directly by the government. Along with the government owing and running hospitals and other health care facilities. You have that in the United Kingdom and a lesser degree Australia (with the state run hospital systems)
The flaws I do see is the health care reforms President Obama has introduced impose more costs upon employers, the basic level of insurance required to be taken over too extensive and that insurance companies can still make a profit off at least basic insurance.
In Switzerland for example, the basic insurance which citizens are required to take out is less extensive (however still enough for a lot of people) than in the USA. If you need extra health insurance you can purchase that on top of the basic insurance.
Also in Switzerland if somebody's health care insurance exceeds a percentage of their income, they get a subsidy from the government. Along with employers there not being obliged to pay for their employees health insurance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/health...wanted=all
Apart from not allowing health insurance companies to make a profit off a basic level of health insurance. There is nothing I cannot see a lot of Republicans (apart from the Tea Party Crowd) would object.
Because real socialist health care system has things like doctors being paid directly by the government. Along with the government owing and running hospitals and other health care facilities. You have that in the United Kingdom and a lesser degree Australia (with the state run hospital systems)
The flaws I do see is the health care reforms President Obama has introduced impose more costs upon employers, the basic level of insurance required to be taken over too extensive and that insurance companies can still make a profit off at least basic insurance.
In Switzerland for example, the basic insurance which citizens are required to take out is less extensive (however still enough for a lot of people) than in the USA. If you need extra health insurance you can purchase that on top of the basic insurance.
Also in Switzerland if somebody's health care insurance exceeds a percentage of their income, they get a subsidy from the government. Along with employers there not being obliged to pay for their employees health insurance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/health...wanted=all
Apart from not allowing health insurance companies to make a profit off a basic level of health insurance. There is nothing I cannot see a lot of Republicans (apart from the Tea Party Crowd) would object.
undefined
