To be clear, forcing millions of people to change insurance policies back then was plenty disruptive, far more so than the law’s advocates realized it would be. But that disruption was part of a transition to a new environment for health insurance -- one in which more people had coverage and those with coverage were more secure. By contrast, the (considerably) greater disruptions from a Supreme Court decision eliminating tax credits would signal a return to the pre-Obamacare status quo -- an environment in which many fewer people had insurance and those with coverage couldn’t be as confident it would pay for their needs.
Such a transformation could be a nightmare for whichever politicians the public holds responsible -- to say nothing of the people who suddenly find themselves with no way to pay their medical bills.
Stop making sense.
BTW, single-payer nationalized health care would make more sense. And no, I don't give a fuck about the health insurance industry. I'll say to them the same thing the GOP radicals say to poor people. Go get a job.
TS
Such a transformation could be a nightmare for whichever politicians the public holds responsible -- to say nothing of the people who suddenly find themselves with no way to pay their medical bills.
Stop making sense.
BTW, single-payer nationalized health care would make more sense. And no, I don't give a fuck about the health insurance industry. I'll say to them the same thing the GOP radicals say to poor people. Go get a job.
TS
No comments:
Post a Comment