The three most conservative justices?

The program has improved the lives of millions of middle class and poor Americans. It is not a perfect system by any means, Like Social Security and the Civil Rights Act, it will go through a long period of incremental improvement, at least as long as we don't allow the Neanderthal party to stay in control too long.

I also don't get why Gun Control Advocates are singled out. The anticorporate left are more likely to take excption.

But I for one am glad they upheld it. I have friends and relatives in stats that would have been hammered by the Conservative wet dream of repealing the ACA.

the rest of us.

Bernie Sanders agrees with this decision. Ted Cruz and the Teabaggers are the ones who are complaining.

If you're suggesting that the only three honest justices are Alito, Thomas and Scalia, you've gone off the deep end.

That's all you really need to know.

I'm glad those who need the subsidies are getting them. This whole process, however, has become a convoluted nightmare for our party.

although there are (count 'em) 3 whacks whose anti-government ideology even overrides their corporate ass-kissing.

You know who Bernie Sanders is, right?

just lol.

Millions of people are keeping their coverage.

That's a good thing for people who care about other people.

Also, note that the only three judges to dissent were the three worst justices of the modern era-Scalia, Alito, and Thomas.

The liberal judges voted to keep the subsidies.

Also, the ruling was the correct legal one.

This is what we learn from "progressives" today. People must suffer first. It's the ONLY WAY!!!

just have a gander and tell me what WALL STREET thinks of it :

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AUNH&ei=7WOMVbCZHIaSmAGG04Fw

sP

day had it gone the other way.

The sane people are glad this ruling turned out like it did.

who would say this is all about the people who get to keep the subsidies. it is good that they do... AND it is very good for the health insurance sector.

sP

this was kind of like avoiding a meteor strike. Everyone benefits from avoiding it, including corporations.

The Terrible Three were willing to vote for a meteor strike. that's the mentality

or at the very least something that will stretch out the goal of single payer... probably past my lifetime. but i could be wrong...

sP

Give it some time here. Just because something is good for business does not automatically make it bad for everyone not in that business.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

Here's a good timeline on how it began to where extra-billing was banned.

http://www.bestlibrary.org/ss11/files/History.pdf

Eventually I think we'll have single payer, especially once more of the whiny Republicans die out.

But as for the OP's contention that healthcare is not now affordable, a lot of people would disagree with that since ACA (well, except for some POSUCS-slingers).

Should it be more affordable? Absolutely.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

because, in Canada the federal government has primacy whereas the US has state primacy, very different Constitutions as well as governance structures. The federal government in the US is much more limited as to what it can do than the federal government in Canada.

I do think it will happen but will be more likely to have to be a state by state change as opposed to a federally mandated program.

that would be just too much systemic shock, with too many unknowns and unpredictability surrounding the outcome

First, it needs to work in a place like Vermont, where it collapsed because there wasn't the political will to say "yeah, taxes will have to go up."

You thought that if the ACA had died today that somehow we'd have gotten closer to single-payer?

That's like a little kid strangling his pet cat so maybe Mommy and Daddy will buy him a new dog.

There there.