Supporting or not supporting Obamacare is based on a false premise.
In general:
You have a person with an illness on one side and a doctor who can (hopefully) heal on the other side. To have a for-profit corporation between the two that dictates the terms and conditions between the above two parties is ridiculous.
I tend to lean right on a lot of issues, but I swear to God I would've rounded-up donors and campaigned like hell for Obama if he'd given the finger to the insurance companies and tried to nationalize health insurance.
Instead, whereas Republicans will keep things status-quo re: health care. Democrats put in some work and secured millions of new customers for the insurance lobby.
To preempt a rebuttal, I understand that nationalized health insurance in the US would be the most corrupt, bloated federal program ever and that's saying a lot. Nationalizing health insurance is probably a solution more complicated than the problem and the problems with health care run deep. Start with "health": we don't take care of ourselves as a nation.
At the same time I would urge you to step back from the political theater and ask, "Why the hell do we need, really need, to have 'private' health insurance in the first place?"
In theory:
Nationalized health insurance covers everyone.
If you can afford it, the best doctors will work outside of the national health insurance scheme and take cash.
In reality:
We have a mess of a program that only politicians would dare claim is working.
The funniest thing about Obamacare is that it's labeled "Socialist." The government compelling citizens to purchase a private product / service sounds much more fascist than anything. It's just another team-up by government and corporations to fuck people out of money that they don't have.
In general:
You have a person with an illness on one side and a doctor who can (hopefully) heal on the other side. To have a for-profit corporation between the two that dictates the terms and conditions between the above two parties is ridiculous.
I tend to lean right on a lot of issues, but I swear to God I would've rounded-up donors and campaigned like hell for Obama if he'd given the finger to the insurance companies and tried to nationalize health insurance.
Instead, whereas Republicans will keep things status-quo re: health care. Democrats put in some work and secured millions of new customers for the insurance lobby.
To preempt a rebuttal, I understand that nationalized health insurance in the US would be the most corrupt, bloated federal program ever and that's saying a lot. Nationalizing health insurance is probably a solution more complicated than the problem and the problems with health care run deep. Start with "health": we don't take care of ourselves as a nation.
At the same time I would urge you to step back from the political theater and ask, "Why the hell do we need, really need, to have 'private' health insurance in the first place?"
In theory:
Nationalized health insurance covers everyone.
If you can afford it, the best doctors will work outside of the national health insurance scheme and take cash.
In reality:
We have a mess of a program that only politicians would dare claim is working.
The funniest thing about Obamacare is that it's labeled "Socialist." The government compelling citizens to purchase a private product / service sounds much more fascist than anything. It's just another team-up by government and corporations to fuck people out of money that they don't have.