Hillary's health plan???????

Question

In this article, Clinton makes the statement that health insurance will be individually mandated much like most states mandate automobile insurance.
I tell you what. In Georgia, if you're caught without auto insurance, there is a VERY good chance you are going to jail.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070917/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_health_care

Will this be the case for Hillary care? Get caught without her plan and go to federal prison?
I mean really. If it is mandated, then that must mean it will be enforced. How will she go about doing that?
Fining people that can't afford her plan to begin with would be stupid.
Of course that is the Dem way. Being stupid.

Answer 1

Is it any wonder that some of her biggest contributors are the HMOs? It's all about complete control and this is fascism in it's purest form. Let private enterprise run it, but let that enterprise be run by the government. FASCISM!

A recent Hillary quote:
"When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything."
Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference

And as Neal Boortz has said:

Wake up, people ... and smell the socialism.

Answer 2

That is exactly what it will mean in the long run. What it will do initially is bankrupt the middle class. You want to talk about homeless? Enact stupidity like this and it will be the middle class who will become homeless very quickly. The poor will be taken care of by section 8 housing, but the middle class will be making too much money to qualify, and not have enough to have a house or an apartment. And they will be loosing too much money from funding this stuff and having to pay the costs of their own healthcare.

If you want to fix healthcare, then fix the tort system. When a liberal judge awards $30 million for spilling hot coffee, we have a serious problem. Or someone else who has a hangnail caused by a traffic accident getting $10 million, there really is a very serious problem here.

Answer 3

When it comes to Hillary and healthcare, I see a common thread through it all. It's Insurance. When she screwed over the health care services the first time around (in an attempt to lower the costs), she took the decision making process out of the hands of the physicians and dropped it squarely in the laps of the insurance companies. Now she wants to make it mandatory that EVERYONE carry healthcare insurance? From whom is she getting paid and who exactly is she representing? *A sarcastic quip* Left to her, we'll be seeing the reinstitution of Debtor's prison.

Answer 4

Wouldn't that be a fine how do ya do? Boy, ya gotta hand it to those Liberals, especially Hillary, for being out of this world ridiculous. We don't want Hillary Care, it ain't free, it is Socialism.

Answer 5

most of the 47 million people without health insurance are twenty somethings that choose not to purchase it, because most of them don't have a need for it. I did that for years, pocketing the money instead. Now that I'm older, I take the payroll deductions.

Answer 6

Actually this is a good thing because it will force the states to step up to the plate and rip a new posterior orifice in the greedy insurance companies.

It will also give a good boost to non-profit health care companies to grow also.

First hand experience of profit vs non-profit health care.

For profit company monthly premiums $1785.
Not For Profit company monthly premiums $977

The difference goes to the greedy administrators whose salaries are astronomically high. In one case the top five administrators of a for profit company amounted to over $45 million in just salaries not including bonuses. As compared to a leading non-profit at $1.2 million and no bonuses.

Plus the balance of profit goes to share holders of which over 40% are held by big mutual funds as "growth" stocks. Making the rich richer and the stiff on the street paying higher insurance bills.

It is my opinion that ALL insurance should be handled by non-profit foundations that should be created in this legislation to provide affordable full coverage to all who want it. Subsidies would be less than half of what the article above is talking about.