With a significant increase in insured individuals entering the health care market, there should be a corresponding increase in jobs available in the medical field. Do you agree?
sort by best latest
Thank you for the clarification; I should have addressed it as the Affordable Health Care Act! Thanks for your input :)
The official title is "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," or PPACA. The acronym doesn't work well as a propaganda tool, so the more benign-sounding "Affordable Care Act," or ACA, has been adopted by friendly campaigners and media.
To Attikos...Would you prefer we call this bill Romneycare? Everyone knows this as the Affordable Health Care Act...it is the right who have called it something else.
I'd prefer people stop pushing campaign talking points here, but I'm a dreamer. If you must, and especially if you want to correct others' terms, you might want to use the correct ones yourself instead of the propaganda substitutes, but it's yours.
Ted Kennedy would have been proud of the current Affordable Health Care Act because at least it was passed with compromise and can be adjusted upward in the future. The campaign talking point on this bill is simple...John Roberts upheld its validity.
Partisan fanatics are incorrigible.
It appears that incorrigible partisan fanatics are only on one side of the aisle if you don't agree with someone else and their skewed views of things. Too bad people can't accept compromise anymore.
Well, this is a writers' group. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect writers to write, not just to regurgitate the focus group tested talking points of their favorite campaign, including marketing terms calculated for propaganda value.
Very well said.
I have to respectfully disagree. First of all,with the law as it is now,allowing people to get treated in the ER whether they can afford it or not puts the burden on everyone. That btw was signed by R. Reagan. Imagine if Obama would suggested that?
I was referring to the free-rider provision in the law which requires employers to pay a penalty if one of their employees has subsidized insurance. Not free-rider, as in a person who seeks services and then does not pay. Sorry for the confusion.
No prob. I re-edited my comment to reflect the change.Understand, I don't think it is the best law, but without a doubt a step in the right directn. Keep in mind admin's have been trying to fix the HC indtry for 65+ years, no success. We needed this
It is true that a small business will think twice before going over the 50 employee threshold. However, at the present time, businesses are not hiring at all due to the state of the economy (regardless of this future bill or not).
Check out Trumans speech from 1945 to congress regarding healthcare and how the lack of it is destroying American families. That speech could have been said word for word up until recently. I will post an small part in the next posting...
1 answer hidden due to negative feedback. Show
1 answer hidden due to negative feedback. Hide