Number of uninsured in America as of March 31, 2016 drops to historic low of 11.0%

So now only something over 30 million people do not have access to adequate healthcare and insurance. The population of a decent sized country. I guess it's progress.
 
So now only something over 30 million people do not have access to adequate healthcare and insurance. The population of a decent sized country. I guess it's progress.

4.3 million of that 30 million are denied health insurance by Republican legislators who refused to accept enhanced Medicaid from the Federal government.

"Tea Party votes are more important than the health of #ThosePeople"
 
its so great that both hillary and bernie want to change it.
 
its so great that both hillary and bernie want to change it.

Yep. Single Pay will dramatically increase the number of insured to 100%.

That's why Republicans are fighting it tooth, fang and claw.
 
Considering that there have been a few Democrats in power since the end of WWII it would appear that profits trump the people's health. Not just Republicans who have denied the American people access to healthcare in the search for greater profits.
 
I'm happy that we don't have that big stinky cesspool of political threads on the GB anymore.

And I'm sad that the USA has become a banana republic.
 
Considering that there have been a few Democrats in power since the end of WWII it would appear that profits trump the people's health. Not just Republicans who have denied the American people access to healthcare in the search for greater profits.

I absolutely agree. Thankfully, though, Max Baucus and the loathesome Joe Lieberman are no longer in the Senate. Those two single-handedly kept Single Pay ("Public Option") from even being debated in 2008.

The tide of public opinion is slowly turning though, not unlike recognition of gay marriage. I'm hopeful that we will see single-payer in my lifetime.
 
Don't really know what single-payer is. Probably some convoluted still watered down universal health care system. Make it simple. Skim an ever so tiny amount of military spending and gift the nation with a UHC plan.

You folks really need to have a proper revolution down there and give the country back to the people and take it out of the hands of the moneyed land owners and politicians.
 
Don't really know what single-payer is. Probably some convoluted still watered down universal health care system. Make it simple. Skim an ever so tiny amount of military spending and gift the nation with a UHC plan.

You folks really need to have a proper revolution down there and give the country back to the people and take it out of the hands of the moneyed land owners and politicians.

Single-payer is UHC where you pick the doctor and the government pays the bill. Elective treatments (nose jobs, hair grafts) are paid out of your own pocket.

Conservatives like to categorize UHC as akin to the British model where all doctors are employees of the government. There are different kinds of UHC.
 
Soon the GOP candidates will lay claims that they got rid of "Obamacare" and start calling it "Romneycare" instead.
 
more welfare for the lazy - why bother working when uncle obama will support your lazy fat ass
 
Considering that there have been a few Democrats in power since the end of WWII it would appear that profits trump the people's health. Not just Republicans who have denied the American people access to healthcare in the search for greater profits.

You say that like the president sits in the oval office and just says things and makes it so. There's a whole process that involves all three branches of government that are RARELY held by just one of the 2 dominant parties.
 
I met with my doctor the other day and asked him about preventative care. He said that insurance companies don't invest in it because they don't see a return on investment. Why? People switch insurance with jobs, and people switch jobs every few years.

Based on this, single payer would be beneficial, since people would keep the same insurance for life and the provider - government or otherwise - would see a return on investment in preventative care and decide to start, y'know, actually covering it.
 
You say that like the president sits in the oval office and just says things and makes it so. There's a whole process that involves all three branches of government that are RARELY held by just one of the 2 dominant parties.

That is the problem with your political system. Up here the PM has control of all three. Worst case scenario is if he only has a minority government. Canadian PMs have powers vastly greater than mere presidents of republics. Watered down healthcare and watered down governance. If our PM has a majority he can do anything he wants as long as it is legal. Technically the Senate can stop him but rarely does if he has a majority mandate.

Our political system has evolved over centuries. Yours is a throwback to the days before Imperial Rome. You would have been further ahead to adopt a Westminster parliamentary system after your rebellion and made Washington the King.
 
That is the problem with your political system. Up here the PM has control of all three. Worst case scenario is if he only has a minority government. Canadian PMs have powers vastly greater than mere presidents of republics. Watered down healthcare and watered down governance. If our PM has a majority he can do anything he wants as long as it is legal. Technically the Senate can stop him but rarely does if he has a majority mandate.

Our political system has evolved over centuries. Yours is a throwback to the days before Imperial Rome. You would have been further ahead to adopt a Westminster parliamentary system after your rebellion and made Washington the King.

Are you really this stupid?
 
I can understand the appeal of turning your money over to the government and having all your medical problems taken care of. But it doesn't work.
In my newspaper tomorrow we're going to have two stories about government benefits. One regards a woman who claimed she had cancer in order to get a third-trimester abortion paid for by taxpayers. Turns out she didn't have cancer, though her attorney is fighting the conspiracy charge by claiming she thought she had cancer.
The other story is about a guy who bilked the government out of millions with phony Obamacare claims.
This is just the tip. It's a very big iceberg.
 
I can understand the appeal of turning your money over to the government and having all your medical problems taken care of. But it doesn't work.
In my newspaper tomorrow we're going to have two stories about government benefits. One regards a woman who claimed she had cancer in order to get a third-trimester abortion paid for by taxpayers. Turns out she didn't have cancer, though her attorney is fighting the conspiracy charge by claiming she thought she had cancer.
The other story is about a guy who bilked the government out of millions with phony Obamacare claims.
This is just the tip. It's a very big iceberg.

That is only because of the fucked up watered down system you have in place. A true UHC system cannot be screwed over by citizens. Docs can submit bogus bills but not regular folk. Get a proper UHC system. Fucking Yanks could fuck up the Lord's Prayer!
 
She may have health insurance but we are still going to figure out a way to toss grandma on the street.


Thanks Obama!

:mad:
 
No, it's more akin to "Medicare for everyone".

But I can see how you'd look for the black lining in every silver cloud.

And that would be the Medicare for everyone when the real-live Medicare is about $50 trillion short of its obligations.
 
And that would be the Medicare for everyone when the real-live Medicare is about $50 trillion short of its obligations.

It's 27 trillion for Medicare, you're including 26 trillion in Social Security for your scary 50 trillion figure. Math is hard.

So is it time for Grandma to eat cat food yet?
 
Back
Top