The ACA is focused on the uninsured and the individual market for health insurance which is the tail when group employer coverage is the DOG
That has not been changed much as the benefits there were always more reasonable and less smoke and mirrors than in the individual market
And insurance is still done by private companies and all the delivery is by private companies
I fail to see the socialism in health care - anymore than I see it in the laws that we are to wear a seat belt or we can get a ticket and we must have liability coverage on the cars we own and drive. If that is socialism - then yes we now have socialized medicine I guess but sure does not feel any different for those of us with large group insurance
I ask as my understanding was that he eliminated a middle man between the GOV and its guarantee the actual lenders which are individual banks. Sallie was paid a half point or more to do near nothing and to take on near zero risk.
What did he do to socialize it ?
Other than the un necessary added cost of a middle man being eliminated what is different?
Ok which is it. Is he nationalizing FNMA or handing it over to the private banks. Buying health ins. from a private comapany is not socialism. The student loans in this country is no different than they were under Bush. You say no country that practices what you call socialism has ever been successful. Well like I said the US was pretty successful under these conditions after the great depression. It was until Reagan that the country reversed those policies and every president has continued that. If you called Obama a Friedmanite I would agree. Him and every president since Reagan. This has caused the downfall of this country.
You're wasting your time with facts. People who want socialism are basing their opinion on pure emotion. No matter what facts you use, it will never overcome their emotions.