I hear in the states that a person who does not qualify for insurance has to re mortgage he or she house if you break a leg, is that true?

 

No, you pay it back a little at a time. I had a burst appendix when I did not have insurance between jobs. I paid it back and am alive.

 

One of the things that may change is that the Constitution will be trashed in a major fashion. This is from today's Patriot Post:
Because of the election of Scott Brown to the open Senate seat in Massachusetts, Democrats were forced to abandon their machinations in the upper chamber, though not before threatening to use "reconciliation" to jam the bill through on a simple majority vote. Now, the House is planning to "deem" the Senate bill passed, rather than vote on it, in a process known as a "self-executing rule." As Mark Alexander observed, "'Slaughter' and 'self-executing' may describe both the process and the electoral future of many Democrats in the House."

Columnist Tony Blankley explains, "[U]nder the proposed scheme, the Senate bill would be 'deemed' to have passed the House and become law without a presidential signature. Then the Senate would pass the House-demanded amendments, and the House members would then cast only one vote -- for the amendments they like, rather than the underlying Senate bill they hate. Thus (so Pelosi's theory holds) politically protecting House members, who could say they never actually voted for the publicly despised Senate bill." Profiles in courage, no?

Republicans attempted to force an actual vote on the bill, but Democrats defeated that resolution Thursday 222-203. A "vote" -- likely via the Slaughter Rule -- on the Senate bill is tentatively scheduled for Sunday.

Democrats don't care, but Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution is pretty clear: "[T]he Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively." If the bill passes the House via the Demos' trickery, no single bill will have passed both houses. Thus, we have a bill that is disliked by a strong majority of Americans, enjoys strong bipartisan opposition in Congress, and is being rammed into law via unconstitutional means. There's a word for legislation like this: illegitimate.

 

I had my appendix out also, how much does that cost if you have to pay for it?

 

Moose...wonder why specilists like that aren't practicing in Canada? As I said, what are Canadians going to do if they can't get off long waiting lists for outdated procedures by crossing the border?

Overall, I suspect the Canadian system works well. I wonder what their taxes are? Obama says his plan will save money in the long run. That will be a first for a government program.

 

I had carried it for three days. (High pain tolerance) They had to scrape me out. Between the surgeon, anesthesiologist, and hospital stay it was in the thousands. Not tens of thousands, but that was in 1985. I don't know what it would be today. I also think they may have taken some off the bill because the emergency room doctor I saw the morning before I got taken in and operated on sent me home with a laxative. #2 in medical journals for severe abdominal pain is never take a laxative. I was almost dead and what he did almost quickened the process. They didn't charge me for the room. I did have to pay for everything but the room.

I just wonder what happened to the days when all these things were not considered "rights". We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That doesn't mean we will catch happiness. It can be elusive in these trying times. But, the government mulitplies the cost of everything they take over because, at the very least, you add on another layer of bureauracy to the equation. It's less effecient than the already slow system. Additionally, this could also mean another layer of people in between you and your doctor along with your insurer.

 

If our Canadian Doctor are not good enough ,I suspect the jig is up, there's a difference between living and having just having a pulse.

 

My insurance costs will go up. Right now I have catastrophic insurance, all I need and all I want, but it will not meet this bills requirements. So I will be required to get one approved by the govt. and it will be more expensive.

 

That's one of the things that drives me nuts about Massachusetts' system that Romney started. YOU MUST carry insurance. Who is the government to say that I have to pay insurance or not? And then to say that (now on the federal level if passed) that your insurance isn't good enough is infuriating. Their attitude seems to be: We in the benevolent government know what is best for you. We'll take care of things because you can't handle it on your own.... And, I'm sure we'll find that they aren't going to be on this program.

 

It is highly likely that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to require that all citizens purchase health insurance.