no offense but your figures are short -- estiimates are18% live below the poverty level. i find it awfully amusing he is pushing health care packages at all. kind of like if cheney were to start building shelters for knocked up lesbians. oh -- maybe he did buy his daughter a house.
2007-02-26 07:05:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually what I have never seen is real statistics on who is not covered. I know many young people who are not covered by choice. Their companies offer health care and they can afford it, but just do not see the value at this point in their life. I was the same way when I was young, but now that I am older and require more visits to doctors it is no longer cost effective or preferable not to be covered. Mr. bush's plan is not a good one in my opinion, but it at least calls for some personal responsibility, unlike the plans of people like Hillary Clinton who want to give health care away at the expense of already overburdened tax paying citizens. Universal health care is not free, nothing in life is. The government does not pay for anything, the taxpayers do. We need solutions to issues with health care in this country, but we do not need to create the largest entitlement in American history.
2007-02-26 15:04:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am always amazed at how many people post questions like this without the slightest idea of what they are talking about.
First: 'poor' is a relative term. The 'poverty line' is a self-imposed imaginary level under which you supposedly can not live.
Do you know how many people starved to death in the US last year?
NONE.
Would you care to compare that to any other countrys 'poor'?
This is the only country in the world where the poor drive cars and have TVs...everything is relative!
As for Mr Bushs plan. It raises taxes on the wealthy to help those in need. Have you even read the plan?
no doubt you prefer the Democrat Party platform which is:
'We'll wait until Bush is for something...and then we'll be against it(even if we WERE for it before he said anything!!)'
True leaders indeed.
2007-02-26 15:37:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Garrett S 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because it keeps health care out of the politicians hands and keeps it in the private sector, If you want to lower the cost , making it competative is a smart move.. If you would take the time to actually look into his ideas, it has some merit.. As for the 12% they can receive free health care they have been able to for years..
2007-02-26 15:12:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by bereal1 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
With so much of the population without health insurance, it IS A
plan that has some credance --- waiting to hear a better one, and
have been for years.
2007-02-26 15:00:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Actually, its now 13%. 20% of children are below the poverty line, and 25% of senior citizens are there as well.
2007-02-26 14:59:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by mamasquirrel 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
My health care is free from work. I knew those college degrees would come in handy when looking for a good job.
2007-02-26 15:06:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Abu 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Hello... that's why he offered the plan to offer a tax credit for the lower incomes that they could use to buy insurance.
He just isn't saying, "go buy some." He's saying, "here's some of YOUR money back, go buy some with it."
Hope this helps.
2007-02-26 14:58:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by theearlybirdy 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
At least it is a step by Republicans to make wealthy people pay more.. They usually want to give them tax breaks.
2007-02-26 14:57:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Because it increases the federal government's hold on our lives.
2007-02-26 14:59:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by tain 3
·
1⤊
1⤋