First, please look up “insurance” by definition.
TX Kevin
1

Republicans in general would just rather not destroy the system that works for about 90% of the population and kills entry level jobs in the process.

Works for 90% of the population?? WTF color is the sky in your world? The mean income in the US is under $30k and insurance premiums can easily take 25–30%, or more, of that. Even with insurance, one living at that income level is likely to be bankrupted by a major health event simply from co-pays and out of pocket expenses. I know this from experience, not ideology or parroting some politicians rhetoric. Before my wife died of cancer she took chemo for 2 yrs and just one of the meds not approved by our “Cadillac” policy cost $5k per month and that didn’t contribute to the maximum out of pocket level of the policy. If someone is going to have life and death authority in our system I’d just as soon it be someone without a profit incentive to not pay.

As horrible as the conservative ACA legislation is, it has slowed the rate of increase in our health care cost. Sorry if that pokes holes in your belief system, but math doesn’t give a damn what you believe. Insurance, by definition, is socialism, and trying to make it work with free market profit taking is just a fool’s errand to begin with. Insurance works most efficiently with larger base participation and a diverse demographic representation of sick and well customers. What could be a larger and more diverse base than “all of us”? Take away the profit factor and include all of us and you have a single payer system, and the only possible objection to such is ideological, so just stop with the phony numbers. Your argument always boils down to “gubmit bad”.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.