My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

News

George Bush vetoes child health care bill

10 replies

Bundle · 03/10/2007 15:44

designed to help poor/mid income families

great

OP posts:
Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 15:59

The Republicans don't go a bundle on 'socialized medicine' as they call it. They argue that the law over there already covers essentials.

Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 16:01

no pun intended

Report
Bundle · 03/10/2007 16:02

they say it'll help people who aren't actually poor (but obv can't afford health insurance)

OP posts:
Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 16:07

I think the argument is that people who can afford private health insurance will use state-funded insurance instead. Which, if you've got a limited kitty, isn't that bad an argument.

Report
Bundle · 03/10/2007 16:10

it's teh inbetweenies who'd benefit.

and the extra funding would be from taxing tobacco, which deifnitely ISN'T a bad thing

OP posts:
Report
primigravida · 03/10/2007 16:12

I wonder how much health-care the war in Iraq would have paid for...

Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 16:18

Could we have a new rule that, on a thread about American politics, we can just assume the comment about Iraq has already been made?

Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 16:20

Bundle, I think it's going to be an interesting debate, given that the Democrats are commited to universal healthcare, and the Republicans appear to be not (perhaps, depends who you listen to).

Report
primigravida · 03/10/2007 16:30

Sorry Sue, you're right. It's just something that bugs me but it was an unnecessary addition to the discussion.

Report
SueBarooeeooeeooooo · 03/10/2007 16:32

primigravida, no, my apologies for being quite so sharp.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.