world

U.S. House votes to repeal Obama's health care law

57 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

57 Comments
Login to comment

“job-killing, socialistic”

What embarassing trash!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

While the repeal isn't going to go anywhere, all should welcome the discussion. There are a lot of socialistic and job killing elements to it. Why do so many support the idea that foreign medical device makers can enter the market, while my company has to pay taxes and high health care costs thus making our products cheaper? Why do you support the idea that several large companies and large unions get a free pass? Why should we simply hand over business the the "evil" insurance companies guaranteed business? Why should I pay for a full medical insurance when my wife, a doctor can take care of almost every ailment I may have and anything on the low end, including dental up to root canal can be handled by me? A person at the age of 26 is NOT A KID! And why should those of us in Japan while already FORCED to have med insurance have to buy US Medical insurance?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"“Has anybody, any family in America, any single mother, any spouse, any child, any grandparent met a more bureaucratic system than the American health insurance system? There is no more bureaucratic system.”"

I haven't lived in the US, and I don't trust what I think I know from TV and movies, so I'd like to ask the Americans here, who've lived abroad. Is there some truth to that?

((I've lived in two countries and always just went to a clinic, hospital, or pharmacy, for what I needed. No HMOs. No worry about pre-existing condidtions. No worries about whether I was employed or between jobs. No checking in with an insurance company to make sure something was covered, before a procedure.))

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When did "social"-based words became something negative?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

taj: it is bureaucratic and mostly due to government regs. For example, the "being able to use insurance across state lines" is a government trap and to be simple in the short, its mostly due to who gets to keep the taxes. So, if you live in say NJ but a better doctor and cheaper clinic is in NYC 10 mins over the bridge/tunnel, you most likely won't be able to use it. As for pre-existing conditions, hey, even the Japanese insurance, the UK insurance, the Canadian insurance won't roll you over if you are not a citizen but on a work visa or recent immigrant. Procurement: this is a very big problem. I can not sell a scanner in Fla for the same price I can sell it in Iowa; but an overseas company can have a flat price. If you are poor in the US, there has always been medicaid and in many states, such as Tenn. there have been free clinic which were funded through church charities and facing a gov regulation to be shut down.

There are a lot of good reasons to at the very least look what was put through and perhaps start over. Personally, I can't see why a person from Tenn should have to pay the same as someone in Cali, which is what it is looking like will happen.

For the US, a nationalized health care NO, for a state health care Yes, like Mass, Tenn, Cali, Hw

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ skipthesong "Why should I pay for a full medical insurance when my wife, a doctor can take care of almost every ailment I may have and anything on the low end, including dental up to root canal can be handled by me? "

Good question. While I may well come down with something serious very soon, it seems to me that up till now (I am 45) doctors are the people with the key to the antibiotics. All they do is ensure that I do not over use them. In order to get antibiotics I must go to a doctor.

However, are the republicans proposing, with their rejection of the bill, that there will be greater freedom of access to medical care (e.g. rights to self-administer antibiotics to all those that pass an exam, or right to have stitches put in by a nurse, greater prescription powers to pharmacists?)

Or should one oppose force health care because it is unfair on health professionals?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is probably the lamest, most pathetic piece of pointless political posturing I wished I had never seen. The GOP knew full well this was going to go straight into a brick wall and yet they still went ahead regardless. When a party is as void of ideas as the GOP is, shameless political posturing is probably the only thing you can do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's posturing but I'm not sure it's completely pointless. The debate might produce some improvements. Then again, given how Washington works, I doubt it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

timtak: you raise a good question. But one of the problems I hear is that the US's system is being compared to other countries system which is not good. As you are aware, prices change from state to state on everything where as in Japan, from Hokaido to Kyushuu prices don't. So, being against a national system in the US is a good thing IMO

I don't know what the repubs are proposing, but if you recall, "you'll know what's in it once its past" well, our company get get hardly anything sold at the moment and our prices are now almost twice that of foreign companies' products forcing the makers of the products we push to move factories outside the US - thus one area where job killing is not a wrong term.

doctors are the people with the key to the antibiotics" Doctors are also a sales, research and marketing for the pharmaceutic companies too... a doctor in Japan is forced to give you xyz while ABC is clearly a better option and more cost effective. Docs in the US have more options.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I haven't lived in the US, and I don't trust what I think I know from TV and movies, so I'd like to ask the Americans here, who've lived abroad. Is there some truth to that?

I opted for a high deductible so I shop around for my doctors and you wouldn't believe how difficult it is just to get the price of a doctor’s visit. Even worse, the price between equally qualified doctors can vary by hundreds of dollars that most people never even see because they just let the insurance company take care of it. People wonder why healthcare is so expensive, it's because you can't see the money.

If I were to tell you that the procedure would cost 5 grand at one doctor and 10 grand at another equally qualified one I doubt you'd be willing to dole out the extra 5 for giggles. But thats what people do because they just let the insurance handle it so doctors and hospitals can charge absurd amounts.

You want to increase quality and decrease cost? Increase deductibles, allow FDA approval for drugs to be voluntary to allow experimental drugs onto the market, get some better protections against frivolous malpractice suits, and encourage doctors to post their rates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pointless.

The GOP attempt will not get through the Senate and even if it did, Obama will veto it and there are not enough Republicans to come up with the 2/3 majority to override the veto.

It is sad how Republicans are against any notion to reduce the number of those uninsured and with not plans to even come up with a "decent" alternative (which would most likely only benefit the rich insurance companies more than the uninsured).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is not even "takeover" of healthcare, it is private insurers operating with tougher rules from the government to make sure that they give coverage to practically everyone and with reasonable rates!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

in Japan, from Hokaido to Kyushuu prices don't (change)

But the insurance premiums differ depending on where you live and even what kind of work you do. I'd like to see that evened out a bit. Being self-employed and living in an area with a high oldies population, I'm paying through the nose.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo: I know about the earnings, but I think you are incorrect on the location...

Being self-employed and living in an area with a high oldies population, I'm paying through the nose." now that is a very true statement and one reason not to like The national health care in the US as it is going to hurt people who are self employed and as I am sure you are well aware, people are already paying more for their insurance. To force someone to pay into to something is not good. A self employed person may want to take a certain risk and forego buying int on insurance, even for a short bit, but now won't be able to even take a calculated risk.

Moderator: Readers, please note that Japan's health care system is not relevant to this discussion. Please stay on topic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

reasonable rates

My left eye. If you make them cover people with pre-existing conditions and/or crap credit of course rates are going to go up. They already have.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

taj: "When did "social"-based words became something negative?"

When the Republicans decided to destroy the meaning like they did with 'democracy' and 'freedom'. Next they'll be changing the name of school subjects like 'social studies' ("Freedom Studies"?) and the word 'society' to something ridiculous.

Anyway, it'll be vetoed when Obama gets it, and rightly so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bravo, republicans, for making good on a campaign promise.

The democrats pushed the Barack Hussein Obama Memorial Healthcare Scam through against the will of the people. Obama said voters could show their support or opposition in the mid-elections, "That's what elections are for" he said. Democrats took a "shellacking".

That's what elections are for.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Romeo: Except the biggest falsehood being perpetuated is that a majority of Americans don't favor the bill. In fact a majority did support it at the time of the election and still do now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Originally, the opposion was at 47% during the November elections.

However, after a couple of weeks when the first set of Healthcare reform kicked in (seniors getting free preventive care and paying half for prescription drugs and young adults staying in their parents health plan until the age of 26)...the opposition went against healthcare reform went down to 41%

40% approve of the bill while the rest are not sure.

Americans are gradually getting that the healthcare bill is not all that bad than how the right wing is trying to make of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TheQuestion: That is why there is the mandate that requires almost every American to have it.

With such a large market and government watching over the health insurers, the insurers would have no choice but to lower their rates to please an expanded market. That is the plan and if they refuse, the government will not let them be part of the online healthcare exchange site it seeks to create by 2014.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The healthcare reform law is not even fully applied yet (2014). It is the fault of the insurance companies that keep rising the premiums.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

More proof of the United States not being united.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Looking at the USA. It has been polarized for too long time.

Question in my mind is how much longer the population, etc is willing to be used as a Ping-Pong Ball. Get X today, have it revoked tomorrow, etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zenny11: But sometimes things work out for the better. Social Security and Medicare in the US were also vilified when they were passed many years ago,but now are considered a fact of life. Although unbelievably, some conservatives still want to do away with those programs because at the time they considered them "socialist"(some things never change) and continue to do so now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see Romeo is still mentioning his president's middle name, showing that he is petrified of Obama. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said the legislation will not see the light of day there

Heh, look who's becoming the party of "No"?

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm telling you, let this repeal go through see really who's for it and against it. Just heard there is like two or three dems who may cross over. We really should find out, for once, what is really in the health care legislation. If you look above, "The healthcare reform law is not even fully applied yet (2014). It is the fault of the insurance companies that keep rising the premiums." Is a point blank reason why people need for it to be opened up. Clearly, the poster lacks basic understand on how insurance works. Least we not forget, it was passed behind closed doors and that Nancy Pelosi ranted that once its passed you'll know what's in it, yet most health care workers still can't even give you answer. IMO, a nationalized health care is not going to work with private insurance!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

U.S. leftists continue taking a beating.

When they were voted into total power in 2008 they honestly believed they were immortal and immune.

Then came the porkulus maximus stimulus bill that didn't live up to the hype of keeping unemployment at 8 percent.

Then there were the town hall meetings in August 2009 and the democrats didn't listen.

Then came the House passage of the senate's version of the health care bill (along with all the backroom bribes) in December 2009 against the will of the majority of the American people. The democrats didn't listen.

Then the House fell on them with the landslide republican victory in November. Still, the democrats didn't get it.

Now that republicans have taken control of the House, democrats are screaming insanely. When they tried to blame conservatives for Loughner, it blew up in their faces. They tried to call for more gun control and got crushed. Now they are claiming that the vote to repeal Obamacare is a waste of time.

Republicans had a reading of The U.S. Constitution at the start of this session then voted to cut spending. Even three democrats saw the light and crossed party lines to vote for the repeal.

U.S. liberals are frothing at the mouth and screaming even wilder nonsense than ever before. However, it is quite entertaining to watch the American leftists' heads explode; especially since they were the ones who dug their own hole.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip, the House republicans are in a position to really put the squeeze on Obama and the democrats during the next two years by ensuring every new and necessary piece of legislation has some type of Obamacare reform or repeal attached to it.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong.

It can work. But private insurance needs to provide a better service at the same price as national(unlikely in the US, IMO) or be relegated to top-up schemes to the national one.

Look at Japan. Law states you need to have medical cover, default is national but you can also be covered by company and/or private. No one is forcing the national scheme onto people that prefer private coverage, etc. National and private still charge (30/70) but coverage differs for some procedures.

Me and my wife were covered by company(same scheme/similar profession, different company) with private top-up and to be honest we actually got a bundle back after she was diagnosed with cancer, surgery, etc.

Even if you got private coverage you can still get many refunds from goverment, etc.

Similar systems also work in europe, etc.

Moderator: Readers, please keep your comments focused on U.S. health care reform, and not other countries'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRameII

"Barack Hussein Obama Memorial Healthcare Scam . . . "

It's amazing. Amid a much-needed wake-up call for Americans to cease with the endless vitriol that has become part od parcel of day-to-day politics, you still spew this garbage.

Why are you so insistent on making certain the labels "uneducated" and "ignorant" continue to dog the rank-and-file that make up GOP support? Do you really think that mentioning Obama's middle name carries political weight any more?

Which is it?

"Oooohh! Obama's an Islamic terrorist!" Which obviously isn’t true.

or

"Oooohh!! Obama's a secularist military dictator!" Which obviously isn’t true either.

or

"Oooohh! Obama's a (gasp!) Socialist!" Maybe a bit closer to some truth, but still not enough to rile the “and this is bad because” vibe, particularly when the Health Care bill ushered in by Obama was the collaborative effort of duly elected Representatives and Senators.

So again, Romeo, which label were you suggesting when you decided to throw Obama's middle name out there like a taboo word?

If you want to continue to be the poster boy for every negative connotation the GOP currently engenders, go for it, but know that not everyone is gullible enough to buy your nonsense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Elections have consequences."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zenny 11, I wish I had your confidence but I don't... and its not just insurance that is going to cost. I just told everyone what's happening at the medical device level, then there's the unionization of health care workers. Those low cost and free clinics are going to hve a lot of regs placed against them adn they are virtually going to have to close.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skipthesong.

Reason why I said I doubt it will work in the USA. Up to you guys to find a working solution for everyone. But looking abroad might give suggestions/ideas.

Mods: I was giving an example NOT a comparison.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If there isn't going to be any sort of personal responsibility rules in place, this thing will surely fail. They are already pushing to have abortions (that is a personal responsibility last I checked), we've got people feeding kids complete junk, we've still got a lot of smokers and drinkers, and half the population are junkies... And people ask why am I a crude person.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Our Gov has done little to lower health care costs -if all Drs had to live off Medicare payments (ObamaCare) they would be out of business. Example Dr. Office visit: Medicare pays $1, Self pay -$150-200. Insurance pay ~$60-120. =The people who actually pay subsidize the Medicare payment/uninsured.

With ObamaCare the bureaucracy would get more and Drs less. I say roll-over health IRAs will help with large deductible insurance policies. If your IRA/deductible was large your insurance will be very cheap/free/or they pay you (interest from account covers insurance+)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Gov would just stop the Wars and put that money into Medicare to fund at 70-80-90% of what insurance pays Drs/Patients would be in a better position and costs could be lowered for all. -Libs won't do that (stop the wars) so we must have a health dictatorship/ObamaCare.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shame on the GOP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Shame on the GOP"

No, shame on the Democrats for passing this job-killing, socialistic healthcare boondoggle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, that might be funny if it had a shred of truth to it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LFRAgain - Do you really think that mentioning Obama's middle name carries political weight any more?

It appearently gets a reaction from you. President Obama's middle name is still his middle name. He was sworn in as President using his full name. If you have a problem with that, shouldn't you be addressing that issue directly with President Obama?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

With such a large market and government watching over the health insurers, the insurers would have no choice but to lower their rates to please an expanded market.

That makes absolutely no sense. If everybody must buy your product there is no incentive to een slightly lower your price. My insurance cost has gone up, everybody I know who has insurance have had their rates go up, and the insurance companies have come out saying that they will continue to go up. It only makes sense, if somebody who needs dialisis or a similar regular, and expensive, treatment the insurance company doesn't have a chance in hell at recouping the loss they'll experience on that person. That cost gets handed down to consumers who have no choice but to have healthcare.

So how exactly is any of this condusive to lower insurance rates?

That is the plan and if they refuse, the government will not let them be part of the online healthcare exchange site it seeks to create by 2014.

That sounds like a win win, accept the minor fines associated with not covering pre-existing conditions and people with high risk factors and you get to avoid being forced into a market inhabited only by those to poor or stupid to look for insurance on their own. Avoiding two problems simply through neglect.

In the end the healthcare plan would have not done anything but jack up prices for those already insured. No increase in quality and no increase in affordability.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TheQuestion has nailed it. My insurance costs have gone up by 9%, the "copayments" have gone up by 25%, the amount I pay for perscriptions has gone up, and the paperwork and bureauracy have increased as I now have forms to fill out and the doctor to defend the use of some medications for asthma. I will have to switch dentists and opthamologists as my current doctors are no longer "in plan." So, for a working engineer such as myself and my family, this health care plan has turned into a costly and frustrating exercise. Just remember the three great lies: the check is in the mail, I'll respect you in the morning, and WE'RE FROM THE GOVERNMENT, WE'RE HERE TO HELP!

At least I stil have my Ebina hospital card....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is little more than a farce. The bill will never get past the senate, and the authors know it. This waste of time serves not purpose other than Republican theatrics. I suppose they deserve some credit for (attempting to) fulfill their campaign promises, but given neither the attempt nor the original promises were ever serious in the first place, it remains a farce.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Easy for rich, white Republicans to play with our tax dollars, they have the best health care system in the world! Look at that old fat slob of a fart Dick Cheyne, if he was your average American he would have been 6 feet under a long, long time ago, but since he is RICH, and our TAXES pay for these parasites, he can have all the heart surgeries to his blubbery heart's content! When the average working American has to have major surgery, they have to worry about insurance, not loosing their jobs, paying their mortgage etc...so I do hope and pray Mr. Obama can turn this situation around and not let all the parasite Republicans that are making money hand over fist from the wars in the Middle East get away with murder!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Americans had any understanding of basic economics (which they obviously don't) then they wouldn't be in this farcical mess in the first place. Universal health insurance can not be provided at a profit by the private sector, therefore it is not. All customers get sick, and all customers die, so the true cost of the premium is too high and can't be charged. So either you want everybody to have health care or you don't. If you do, it can only be provided by government.

Claiming that understanding that basic reality is "socialism" is a joke, and is just cover for the parasites who want to cherry-pick the profitable parts of the market.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

elbuda, you didn't read the bill did you? And if you are expecting everything stamped medical, why do you support the fact that foreign firms get peddle their medical devices in the US while US companies have to NOW pay a higher tax?

Easy for rich, white Republicans to play with our tax dollars, they have the best health care system in the world!" I'll go with you on the rich and white, but least you not forget dems are on that same system and that is in fact NOT the system we are paying into. They themselves won't move over to it. Maybe Dennis Kucinich will, but I doubt anyone else would.

Face it, repubs played us before and dems are playing us now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TheQuestion: The healthcare plan is not even fully implemented yet.

Did you even read the timeline when it will be implemented?

The majority of its impact will not be held until 2014.

Honestly, the rising premiums are the fault of the insurance companies because they do not have to follow the rulings until 2014 and cover preventive care until 2018.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is located on a website for crying out loud.

Try looking for it at google.

I am not a big fan of this bill because it does not go far enough (it does not have a public option) but at least it is better than the current system that America has.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Honestly, the rising premiums are the fault of the insurance companies because they do not have to follow the rulings until 2014 and cover preventive care until 2018.

And I have no doubts than rates will continue to increase as more portions are put into effect. The insurance companies helped write the bill for heavens sake, they've got democrats and republicans both in their back pockets, do you really think anything in this is going to increase the quality of care? Not a chance.

The reason healthcare is so expensive in the U.S is because having insurance disconnects people from how much procedures and drugs cost, thus allowing doctors, hospitals, and drug companies to charge more and more. This government plan, or any kind of public option, further extends that disconnect.

Case in point. One of the few procedures not covered by most insurance companies is lasik eye surgery, people have to pay out of pocket for it. The result? It has gone down in price, up in quality, and the recovery time has gone down at a staggering rate. It's because clients shop around for the best and cheapest providers. Competition between providers made the procedure better across the board.

My idea of improving the system would be for the insurance company to compute the average cost and give people hard cash when they want to go to the doctor and let them use the difference as credit on their insurance account. How fast do you think doctors would start scrambling to prove to their clients how good they are compared to their competitors or how much cheaper? Pretty darn quick I'd wager, unless they don't like being in business. And if they dare reduce quality they'd be out of the job quicker yet when people start wailing, which they do very well.

And I can't stress enough how much our medicine could be improved if FDA approval on new drugs would be voulentary. Let people and doctors try new products, if the patient accepts the risk I can think of no reason why they shouldn't be able to get access to life saving drugs. That way if people want a safe, tested drug they can just look for the FDA seal of approval. But if all other products fail they should be able to seek alternatives.

Yet none of this has even been mentioned. Not by democrats, not by republicans, not by anybody in the media. The government has thus failed utterly to increase quality of care through any of its attempts to influence healthcare. You may argue that this new bill increases accessability but I contend that it hardly matters if it allows equal access to a steaming pile of horse dung.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Said that read an interesting opinion piece that pointed out why the repeal won't work and why steps to remove portions will make the law less likely to be repealed.

Basics was that the AMA, Insurance and Drug companies are benefiting from it and thus will oppose any repeal.

Add to that the more you remove the bad portions and leave what benefits the population will make it nearly impossible to get rid off.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Question seems to have a lot of answer. Not all, but he's somewhat on the right track. I think many who are either in support of it or against need to speak with people in the medical and insurance fields.

And I have no doubts than rates will continue to increase as more portions are put into effect." Everyone one of us on this board works a job, we want to get paid for it and eventually we would like to get a raise. In order to get a raise, you need to perform and bring your company PROFITS in order to operate. A company = business which = money just in case you all hve forgotten. The insurance companies helped write the bill for heavens sake, they've got democrats and republicans both in their back pockets, do you really think anything in this is going to increase the quality of care? Not a chance." Yup, and they are now be given business on a silver platter and I am so amazed at how they were vilified up to this, and still are, yet so many seem to erase the above fact out of memory.

The reason healthcare is so expensive in the U.S is because having insurance disconnects people from how much procedures and drugs cost, thus allowing doctors, hospitals, and drug companies to charge more and more. This government plan, or any kind of public option, further extends that disconnect." To give you a best scenario is look at Singapore and Japan's health care and see how it has risen over the years and why. Its gonna go up way up. Case in point. One of the few procedures not covered by most insurance companies is lasik eye surgery, people have to pay out of pocket for it. The result? It has gone down in price, up in quality, and the recovery time has gone down at a staggering rate. It's because clients shop around for the best and cheapest providers." You should call yourself the Answer

Competition between providers made the procedure better across the board." Couldn't have said it better myself.

My idea of improving the system would be for the insurance company to compute the average cost and give people hard cash when they want to go to the doctor and let them use the difference as credit on their insurance account. How fast do you think doctors would start scrambling to prove to their clients how good they are compared to their competitors or how much cheaper? Pretty darn quick I'd wager" Anyone gonna bet him? My money's on him.

And I can't stress enough how much our medicine could be improved if FDA approval on new drugs would be voulentary." I think I've hit on the price of our devices. Well, when the hospital buys our products and they've gone up, they have to throw that back at the patient. Yet none of this has even been mentioned. Not by democrats, not by republicans, not by anybody in the media. The government has thus failed utterly to increase quality of care through any of its attempts to influence healthcare." for most here, you'll be talking to a wall.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

for most here, you'll be talking to a wall.

I've accepted as a foregone conclusion that anything that makes sense is wrong and/or immoral. There can be other option than what is presented by Democrats or Republicans because they are all so much more brilliant than I.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Clarification:

There can be 'no' other option

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Does Obama's liberal cheering section understand that this vote to repeal essentially represents 291 Electoral College votes?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The sad fact is that a nation as rich as the USA, has a system in which 25% recieve superb medical care, 50% patchy at best and 25% cannot afford hardly any care. Right wing / left wing whatever, this is criminal and needs to change.

Firstly health care is much too expensive, everything else in the US has benifited from reduced prices, not medical care though. Drugs again seem extortionatly expensive.

I was vacationing in Vietnam recently and got into conversation with some Dental students from California, They told me that their tution would come to more than 1 million, but they expected to earn over a million a year when qualified. A little extreme dont you think?

Lack of competition, Big pharma, Vested intrests within the medical field and buying of senators and congressmen by lobbists has sold the average american down the river of corporate greed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I was vacationing in Vietnam recently and got into conversation with some Dental students from California, They told me that their tution would come to more than 1 million, but they expected to earn over a million a year when qualified. A little extreme dont you think?"

Jealous?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites