Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucco
Sure....
1. I expressed a "WOW" due to the language as if folks were always looking for free, and that is totally not true. I am not, but have an avid interest in whether pre existing conditions will be covered as our government on one had says yes but in June took action to the Supreme court to disallow.
2. The assumption that people are always looking for free is not true and the implication that the many who got coverage from ACA for pre existing are "takers" or whatever term you might use is.....well, can't think of a nice word. Your direct implication that people blame others all the time is not valid.
These are simple generalizations that simply do not stand up.
3. We were told before the election and many times since that there was going to be a “terrific,” “phenomenal” and “fantastic” plan unveiled. Now after all these years we are told "it is ready". We shall see how the balance between actions to derail pre existing conditions as high as the Supreme Court versus promises to keep in this yet unseen plan works out. Many candidates are struggling mightily with this exact issue.
4. As you well know, I adamantly was opposed to the ACA when it passed, and still find fault with much of it, but never the pre existing condition part. It is not right for our government to hold this over peoples head and to have people say those who approve of that act are looking for "handouts". Some are blessed with the ability to buy or self insure......most are not.
Vast majority of Americans do not have company plan, are unable to "self insure" and want to cover their family. My objection with the passed ACA was the lack of involvement by all parties and we are now faced with the same situation but worse because of the timing. COVID is a new ingredient that needs exploring but publicly and not in what appears to be false promises for the last few years
|
Regarding your Item No. 1, the last time I checked, the Supreme Court is part of "our Government".
So, what is wrong with the Supreme Court deciding if the ACA is constitutional?