@WillNotBeSwayed As one of the justices said, health insurance is actually unlike anything else; there are no good comparisons.
-
-
-
-
-
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed Ah, I see. When you wrote "liability is req by law. Not full coverage" I assumed you meant auto ins. I had seen this a lot.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison I did. You compared ACA to being req to have car insurance. Car ins only req 4 liability...which is to protect others not self
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed But the logic stands: when OTHERS aren't insured, who foots the bill?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison & since there will still be costs even if insured there will still be unpaid bills paid 4 by taxpayer.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LibertyLvnIndie
@WillNotBeSwayed The logic is (was?) that lower premiums would motivate more to be insured. But we're back to education again.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison I hope it does work. Not sure why it must invade privacy of all however.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@WillNotBeSwayed Like most watered-down laws, it will have modest success, unless gains real traction. Single payer would have been best.
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.