The ACA model in the US is very similar to what exists in many places in the world e.g. here in Australia. And it was driven from the needs of the government not the needs of the health care industry. Although they are a beneficiary. That said the model really does work.
The fact is that uninsured people has a devastating effect on the economy. It prevents movement of labour, affects productivity, promotion to higher socio-economic levels, prevents people starting businesses, affects crime and countless other social effects. You need to force people who don't think they need it to have it.
From experience, an Australian doesn't have the correct frame of reference to even engage in the US healthcare debate. I have tried to understand the issues many times but it comes from such a fragmented starting point it's difficult to understand unless you've been in it for a long, long time.
Your points about uninsured are valid, but it's much more complicated than just saying 'hey, you guys should insure everyone'. So I generally try and observe from the sidelines.
We're clearly coming from very different places with regards to whether governments exist for their people, or people exist for their government. FWIW, forcing someone to purchase something they otherwise wouldn't actually hurts movement of labour, promotion to higher socio-economic levels, and people starting businesses.
The ACA model in the US is very similar to what exists in many places in the world e.g. here in Australia.
Does your boss decide what your health insurance will be?
Are health insurance companies in Australia publicly traded for profit corporations?
There's other questions I have but I wont ask because I feel that people may take them as attacks. (I don't mean to attack)
it was driven from the needs of the government not the needs of the health care industry.
The white paper that became thd affordable care act was written by Liz Fowler who was a VP at one of the largest health insurance companies. After the ADA was passed she became a lobbyist for a major pharmaceutical company.
Comments
The ACA model in the US is very similar to what exists in many places in the world e.g. here in Australia. And it was driven from the needs of the government not the needs of the health care industry. Although they are a beneficiary. That said the model really does work.
The fact is that uninsured people has a devastating effect on the economy. It prevents movement of labour, affects productivity, promotion to higher socio-economic levels, prevents people starting businesses, affects crime and countless other social effects. You need to force people who don't think they need it to have it.
From experience, an Australian doesn't have the correct frame of reference to even engage in the US healthcare debate. I have tried to understand the issues many times but it comes from such a fragmented starting point it's difficult to understand unless you've been in it for a long, long time.
Your points about uninsured are valid, but it's much more complicated than just saying 'hey, you guys should insure everyone'. So I generally try and observe from the sidelines.
We're clearly coming from very different places with regards to whether governments exist for their people, or people exist for their government. FWIW, forcing someone to purchase something they otherwise wouldn't actually hurts movement of labour, promotion to higher socio-economic levels, and people starting businesses.
Does your boss decide what your health insurance will be?
Are health insurance companies in Australia publicly traded for profit corporations?
There's other questions I have but I wont ask because I feel that people may take them as attacks. (I don't mean to attack)
The white paper that became thd affordable care act was written by Liz Fowler who was a VP at one of the largest health insurance companies. After the ADA was passed she became a lobbyist for a major pharmaceutical company.