If the truly needy need health care they are getting it through Medicaid, clinics and childrens medical insurance. There are states that have children insurance for 30-75$ a month if they don't qualify for anything else. I don't have a problem giving the those in need care but what is the difference between "in need" and those that don't have health INSURANCE an optional voluntary form of payment for until Oct 2013.<quoted text>
All industrial countries in the western world have universal health care except one... and the exception isn't going to be there much longer.
There is something to be said for a country whose priorities is to spend something close to a $1.5 TRILLION dollars but not $600 to save the life of a child needing a tooth extraction.
That TRILLION with a T.
And you can be sure that shortsh!t Canadian in the Texas Senate wouldn't allow his kids to not have health insurance..
The costs or money spent on health care is atrocious along with some of the results. But it's not a funding problem it's a greed and exploitation problem. It's not just the INSURANCE companies either, you have providers bilking the INSURANCE for billions along with patients abusing INSURANCE, a tool used for A catastrophic event being used for minor events and routine maintenance.
INSURANCE creates inflation because the providers bill on INSURANCE fee schedules, not what the patient can afford. The ACA is an INSURANCE bill, not a care bill or even an 'affordable' care bill. I'd rather see a 50$ dollar tax slapped on every taxpayer no exceptions for physical medical care for those in need. But don't try to disguise or open a backdoor to a government funded health care system in a free market society. There should be choices but not everyone will have the same choices.