@UniteRight For many it will be lower cost. http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/obamacare-myths/ …
But I doubt you'd care to entertain conflicting data.
-
-
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison
@UniteRight for many it will be higher cost. For source, please see the link you provided.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed For some, not many. And the aim is to bring down healthcare costs overall, not just premiums.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed By at least acknowledging this http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/us-health-spending-breaks-from-the-pack/ … as an American problem, not a party one.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison ACA does not equal free health care. People still have to pay for care which means people will still default on payments.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@emlynaddison I'm assuming the link you provided shows healthcare costs crippling families.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed It shows the percentage of GDP spent on healthcare in the US vs other developed countries. A solution seemed appropriate.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison there r many private companies who provide affordable/free HC 2 those in need. Quality of care is great in our current system.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@WillNotBeSwayed This is like the argument I've heard about smaller government: Let private charities be the safety net. That doesn't work.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.