{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/25/2015 6:36:37 PM
10
ACA should give people the money to get insurance, not give them the insurance itself.
That way, people would be able to keep their doctors, decide what doctors they want and not be run by the idiots in the government who don't know (and don't care) how to run the current system.
English
-
Hey quasi
-
Got anything to say?
-
-
erm, that is exactly what the ACA does.
-
Wasn't the whole big problem at the startup (other than the many technical glitches) the fact that most people couldn't keep their doctors?
-
Edited by Seggi: 7/7/2015 1:28:28 PMPeople couldn't keep their doctors if their new insurance plan didn't include them as a covered provider of healthcare. That's not because the ACA directly provides people with insurance (It doesn't - it does exactly what you suggested: giving people money to pay for insurance themselves) but generally because covering fewer providers costs less for insurance companies (especially when the excluded providers are expensive), so they can charge lower premiums and their plans can be more competitive. That's really just down to the fact that the ACA increased the competitiveness of the health insurance market, it has nothing to do with the way individual insurance plans are funded (which, again, as you suggested would be best, is through the subsidies this case upheld, not single-payer).
-
^please repost this to top comment
-
i thought you got kidnapped by australian wildlife
-
come on, australian wildlife doesn't take hostages
-
I guess I was misinformed. Thanks.
