It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What kind of philosophy says that it's O.K. to subsidize insurance companies, but not to provide he

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 05:52 AM
link   

What kind of philosophy says that it's O.K. to subsidize insurance companies, but not to provide health care to children?


www.alternet.org

Now, why should Mr. Bush fear that insuring uninsured children would lead to a further "federalization" of health care, even though nothing like that is actually in either the Senate plan or the House plan? It's not because he thinks the plans wouldn't work. It's because he's afraid that they would. That is, he fears that voters, having seen how the government can help children, would ask why it can't do the same for adults.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 05:52 AM
link   
Living in the UK, I'm obviously a huge supporter of free healthcare.

Free healthcare should be the main aim of ANY government, they are, after all, elected to look after the needs of the electorate.

Less money on wars and supporting corporations, more money on the needs of the citizens - after all, why do we pay tax?

www.alternet.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 06:07 AM
link   
The "Philosophy of Ensuring that Mega-Corp Inc Gets Huge Profits". Plus even for a fake republican/conservative like Bush "socialized medicine" would be total suicide.



new topics
 
0

log in

join