Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Reply to thread

Message

1. A penny saved is a penny earned. 2. The GOP was not locked out of the process. If it was there would be a public option or even single payer instead of welfare for private insurers proposed. 3. I don't need to demostrate math. It "is". Take three systems now existing for public healthcare, combine their clerical costs, however minimal, focus on cheaper preventative care instead of costly traige. Now set those numbers next to what the taxpayers are footing now. Less is always less in math, unless you have a parallel universe you're referring to? 4. Which article did you cite? I didn't see a link. Would you provide it again? 5. If China has indicated that they don't want to see our government saving money on THE EXISTING PUBLIC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, then you need to cite where you saw these statements.

<blockquote data-quote="Sihouette" data-source="post: 128528" data-attributes="member: 1186"><p>1. A penny saved is a penny earned. 2. The GOP was not locked out of the process.&nbsp; If it was there would be a public option or even single payer instead of welfare for private insurers proposed. 3. I don&#039;t need to demostrate math.&nbsp; It &quot;is&quot;.&nbsp; Take three systems now existing for public healthcare, combine their clerical costs, however minimal, focus on cheaper preventative care instead of costly traige.&nbsp; Now set those numbers next to what the taxpayers are footing now.&nbsp; Less is always less in math, unless you have a parallel universe you&#039;re referring to? 4. Which article did you cite?&nbsp; I didn&#039;t see a link.&nbsp; Would you provide it again?&nbsp; 5. If China has indicated that they don&#039;t want to see our government saving money on THE EXISTING PUBLIC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, then you need to cite where you saw these statements.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Sihouette, post: 128528, member: 1186"] 1. A penny saved is a penny earned. 2. The GOP was not locked out of the process. If it was there would be a public option or even single payer instead of welfare for private insurers proposed. 3. I don't need to demostrate math. It "is". Take three systems now existing for public healthcare, combine their clerical costs, however minimal, focus on cheaper preventative care instead of costly traige. Now set those numbers next to what the taxpayers are footing now. Less is always less in math, unless you have a parallel universe you're referring to? 4. Which article did you cite? I didn't see a link. Would you provide it again? 5. If China has indicated that they don't want to see our government saving money on THE EXISTING PUBLIC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, then you need to cite where you saw these statements. [/QUOTE]

Verification