Of course, it is not true. One should actually READ the damn thing first, which I have. Apparently Sarah Palin and Dr Jekyllus, which I have long ago put on ignore, have not. Palin is merely using her own child as a political pawn.
One negative is in new treatments, experimental treatments. these tend to be very expensive. In a government system the threshold will be higher before these can be tried. With limits on Pharmaceuticals profits there will be less R&D into new medicines
That's funny, you read it and your elected representative didn't but wants everyone else to accept what they have to offer. It's also amusing that this plan is the panacea to all our health care problems yet they are exempting themselves from the plan. It's tragic to have a sick child and god forbid but you have to think of what happens if your child requires an operation or treatment of some kind that will extend his life by 10 years but some jackass gov't employee says no, it's not worth it and sends you home with a bottle of percocete instead. How are you going to feel then? It's amazing anyone trusts the gov't to make their decisions for them. Look what a friggin mess the current gov't healthcare programs are.
Serious questions, for adults only please. 1)Is it or is it not true that Obama's health care plan is similar to the one in implemented in Massachusetts? If it's not that's fine I'm just asking. 2)Is it true that the plan in Massachusetts has "failed" (somewhat subjective obviously) or is that just "anti health" care rhetoric? 3)For national health care supporters, how is it you expect the federal government to run a nation wide health care plan better than they have administered Medicare or Medicaid, not to mention SS and virtually every other federal program? 4)If it's so much "better", why is congress NOT going to participate in any national health care plan, like the rest of us? Again, I've read all the stupid bickering and politically biased rhetoric (including my own) until my vision is blurry. So save that shit for another response if you would.
Honestly, you do not have to know a thing about the plan, nothing. When you know the answer to this question I think you have all the information you need. 4)If it's so much "better", why is congress NOT going to participate in any national health care plan, like the rest of us?
Everyone in this thread realizes of course that there is no "plan," yet. There is only a thousand page jumble of U.S. Congressional House abortion and right-wing media blasting loud about "Obamacare" and "death" and "euthanasia," and more death for granny. fools
And yet, they act like it has to pass NOW. First, Obama says our health care system is SO BAD we have to fix it NOW. But when, asked he says if you like the plan you have now, you can keep it. Well, if HC is so FU under the current system, how can you rationalize someone keeping what they have now? Second point: The whole idea of "reform" is to come up with a viable plan that will be an improvement over what we have now. Well, why do you need a "public option"? You might as well admit that you know the "reform" you want won't work, so you need a public option. I was watching the "Ed Show" on MSNBC today. The guy got "owned" by the supposed instigator of the town hall clashes. if you want to see how a left wing luny thinks, go watch that clip.
Both of your "points" are based in fiction. They have no basis is fact at this point. But they sure do make great media to poke a stick at the uninformed.
of course there is ... massive new taxes and massive new federal bureaucracy. that is always the plan.