Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why the ObamaCare Ruling Stinks [View all]truth2power
(8,219 posts)10. What's not logical?...
Part of Lindorff's article:
"Instead of going for this option when he had broad and enthusiastic support as the newly elected president, Obama deliberately shut out all discussion of the Canadian-style approach to national health coverage a national program of government insurance for all, with doctors rates and hospital charges negotiated by the government and instead devised a scheme that leaves the whole payment system in the hands of the private insurance industry, and effectively lets doctors and hospitals charge what they can get away with.
Obama did this because he was a huge recipient of money from all sectors of the health care industry the insurance companies, the hospital companies, the American Medical Association, the big pharmaceutical firms, and the medical supply firms.
ObamaRomneyCare is at its core an enrichment scheme for nearly all elements of the Medical Industrial Complex, with the possible exception of the lowly family practice physician, nurses, and hospital workers."
Obama did this because he was a huge recipient of money from all sectors of the health care industry the insurance companies, the hospital companies, the American Medical Association, the big pharmaceutical firms, and the medical supply firms.
ObamaRomneyCare is at its core an enrichment scheme for nearly all elements of the Medical Industrial Complex, with the possible exception of the lowly family practice physician, nurses, and hospital workers."
This last paragraph is why I knew the SCOTUS wouldn't strike down the ACA. Because, in the final analysis, it's a gift to big insurance, big pharma etc.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
96 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
well yes, the problem with the ACA is that it continues the same corrupt medical insurance system,
NoMoreWarNow
Jun 2012
#1
Let me add another bit of logic (reality) to this. To get to the Presidency, you have to sleep with
Dustlawyer
Jun 2012
#65
"too much urinating" is also a common symptom from a urinary tract infection.
MichaelMcGuire
Jun 2012
#58
If enough people pay the tax, I wonder if that can become the public option.
freedom fighter jh
Jun 2012
#52
But Social Security didn't start by requiring people to start a private account
Lydia Leftcoast
Jun 2012
#60
it'll evolve, all right. but for whose benefit? already capital is lining up to "evolve" it.
HiPointDem
Jul 2012
#94
The repugs will make sure that the IRS can't hire new agents, so its a Win ,Win for
bahrbearian
Jun 2012
#27
And that translates into "I have health insurance and still can't afford health care".
Arkansas Granny
Jun 2012
#53
Don't get your hopes up. The last time the Republicans gutted funding for the IRS
TrollBuster9090
Jun 2012
#55
Can always count on the Repugs to protect the Rich, while screwing the poor,
bahrbearian
Jun 2012
#67
The title of your Op/Ed should really be "Traditional Western Medicine is SUB-OPTIMAL." Not "Why
TrollBuster9090
Jun 2012
#43
Rome was not built in a day. Subsequent legislation can lead to negotiated
ProgressiveEconomist
Jun 2012
#78