nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 133:
Line 133: + + + +
→"Bzzzz....No!" Reverting latest attempt....: new section
:Aiming to be affordable and actually being affordable are two different things. I highly doubt that Canada ''tries'' to cost $5,000 per year. Plus you are making a distinction between tax dollars and out-of-pocket dollars. Obviously ''no'' health care is truely free, but that's not what it's aiming for. (Also $5,000/year doesn't mean anything to me. How much do other countries pay?) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 18:38, 18 August 2007 (EDT)
:Aiming to be affordable and actually being affordable are two different things. I highly doubt that Canada ''tries'' to cost $5,000 per year. Plus you are making a distinction between tax dollars and out-of-pocket dollars. Obviously ''no'' health care is truely free, but that's not what it's aiming for. (Also $5,000/year doesn't mean anything to me. How much do other countries pay?) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 18:38, 18 August 2007 (EDT)
== "Bzzzz....No!" Reverting latest attempt.... ==
The phrases ''"One of the benefits of the [[Massachusetts]] plan, which was devised by [[Mitt Romney]], is that a free market solution was created while ensuring that even the sickest of residents can get access to health care and without creating additional government bureaucracy via a "public option"'' among others, are totally unsupported by citation, and smack of subjective opinion. In fact, the "Massachusetts Plan" really isn't conservative, inasmuch as it is forcing the citizens, compelling them, to purchases what they might not want or need. Recent news stories (use Google News)so them to be in deep fiscal do-do. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 19:41, 18 July 2009 (EDT)