Most doctors weren't in favour of it simply because they couldn't see the sense in getting paid by the government to see lots of people was worth more to them than only seeing those people who could afford a doctor and even then being at the end of a long queue of people to pay.

rlWhen Mitt met a gay Viet Nam veteranrl

At least he was honest, even if his answer did belong in Victorian times.

He certainly was honest but as the veteran said Romney wouldn't be interested in a conversation about it.

Found this funny

Richard Cheese

Did anyone hear Clinton's speech about Romney's proposed military spending?

Which religion sorry country does he want to wipe out?

All that skiing sent him over the edge.

The moron religion?

Or is that his?

Levels ya devils

rlhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19415745rl

rl'We want stoodents to be kept stoopid'.rl

Texas GOP objects to 'critical thinking'.

Another Romney [iown goal[/i?

rlhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19631430rl

While in the US, my son stood on glass and cut open his foot.
In the ER, they gave him an anti-biotic shot, local anasthetic, and 4 stitches.
The bill for this was 1800USD. On top of that we had to buy dressings, and were given prescriptions for more painkiller and more anti-biotics. The drugs alone were over 50USD.
I don't know how anyone can afford to be ill or injured in the US.

Most have medical insurance. If you're lucky and have good employers, then the employers will pay the insurance usually for your immediate family (spouse and kids). My Uncle worked for General Motors and had a very generous medical insurance with minimal excess that also covered the family and still covers him now he is retired.

My Aunt does know of a family who can only afford medical insurance for their kids so have sacrificed their own.

Its a sad state of affairs in the US when you are rushed into the Emergency Room and the Doctor gets straight on the phone; to your insurance company to see what level of insurance you have and how much/far he can treat you

The 47% figure (which hasn't AFAIK been verified to anything) includes the retired and students. But it also reflects the huge concentration of wealth in the US - the reason so many people pay no federal income tax is because they earn about $20k a year and are on the breadline. Whilst you can find examples no doubt, they're not feckless or unemployed, they are caught in the joke that the American dream has become. The idea that they should be brought into the income tax system - as many Republicans claim - is insane; but then the party is that far gone.

Ironically even if 47% is an accurate figure many of those will be the white working class poor in the South who vote for the Republicans because of the religious fundamentalism with which they can identify. So the whole idea that those in this category are down the line Democrats can be dismissed - they probably [ishould[/i be but have come to think the party which works against their interests is somehow standing up for them.

What's Mitt Romney's beef with 47% of the population not paying income tax?

Does he want to make more people pay tax? Does he believe that government can spend taxes better than private citizens?

Sounds like Soviet Communism to me.