7 Responses for "How is the Hillary Clinton helth plan version 2 anything like car insurance?"

1. Vanessa Hudgens February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 1

   >>Hillary supporters: Is it even possible to argue this? Go ahead and try.No, it's not really possible but I'm sure they will try….assuming they can get past the big words like "bureaucracy" and "mandates."Good question, Dan!

2. selena gomez February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 2

   Think about this ,it may pay for your shrink to help you get over your Paronoia…Hillary/Obama 2008 !!!

3. miley cyrus February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 3

   It's only a proposal, and even if Hillary is elected, the terms and provisions will be changed substantially by citizen input and legislative bargaining. The sky will not fall.Your points 4 and 5 are well taken. "4) Goverment mandates what is covered, not you." Under the current system, people who are insured have no input into what is covered. The provisions of the contracts are all determined by the medical insurance companies. At the present time, you may have a choice between a premium and a basic plan, and this will very likely also be offered in any national health care plan. "5) Violates freedom of religion for those whose beliefs prevent them from getting hospital care." Another very interesting point. You're right, the very small number of people such as Christian Scientists who do not believe in medicine should be allowed to opt out. They should be allowed a tax refund. You have a very good point.

4. lady gaga February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 4

   we are screwed under Hilarycare so we get the end of the stick anyway.

5. justin bieber February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 5

   If we're going to require that emergency rooms treat people regardless of whether they have insurance, then it makes sense that we should require insurance. It will cut everyone's medical costs by moving these cases from the emergency room to doctor's offices, which are much cheaper ways to provide service for non-emergencies. If you really oppose this plan, you should be fighting the more fundamental battle, that the emergency rooms are required to treat everyone. I can understand quibbling about the details, but requiring insurance does make a lot of sense.

6. justin bieber February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 6

   Wouldn't it be lovely if the world were so simple?States require car insurance because if they didn't, they'd have federal highway money withheld. It's a routine mechanism for the federal government to do things it's technically not constitutionally able to do, and it'll be that way as long as we have an income tax (which is why THAT was unconstitutional initially).So far as I can tell, there's no added limitation on providers. We live in a world of HMO's and PPO's anyway.Coverage very much protects society. Trauma centers have closed left and right because their uncompensated care is such a large percentage of their business. Acute care hospitals can cost-shift better, but that's becoming a less viable option as actuarially-based private insurance tightens its grip on payments. About 20% of my business is uninsured, and about half of that is uncompensated. I therefore charge everybody else more, though the difference between charges and collections is still substantial.Some floor is needed, but there's nothing I've heard that restricts you from insuring yourself against additional costs.Your health care is already driven by government spending of tax money. Without Medicare and Medicaid, the whole system would fall like a house of cards.I'm no Hillary supporter. I even supported White for governor of AR once (and that's mighty extreme) just to avoid Bill for a couple of years. But what she's unveiled of her plan appears no less intrusive than the other Democratic plans, and the Republicans seem married to actuarially-based insurance which doesn't work well; it leaves too many out in the cold, and it drives the insured nuts, especially when they discover they aren't covered for something they thought would be.

7. selena gomez February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 am 7

   ive got the best argument of all against hillarycare which is to avoid having someone of a questionable reputation administer ANY health insurance or municpal office in the united states. do you really want a repeat of the clinton…legacy…in the white house…- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance – Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates* – Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation – Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify – Most number of witnesses to die suddenly – First president sued for sexual harassment. – First president accused of rape. – First first lady to come under criminal investigation- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case- First president to establish a legal defense fund.- First president to be held in contempt of court- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions – Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court you must realize that a person of ethics and honor doesnt knowingly and willingly participate in these types of activities and if you think for one minute that health insurance authored by ms clinton doesnt serve poltical rather than practical needs as her previous activity demonstrates her interests are, then ive got a bridge in brooklyn for you real cheap.