>>And that final sentence regarding prejudice was trashy.
Prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
If people haven't enrolled- can they claim to have actual experience? And what "reason" is there for negativity when the real life evidence seems positive? I don't agree that this sort of prejudice is trashy, it's just not relevant to a proper study.
Without wanting to belabor: of those who had enrolled in the Commonwealth study:
- Only 9% agree they are worse off.
- Only 5% agree that their preferred doctor isn't covered.
I've not seen anything to suggest that this will be turned on its head as enrollment accelerates. Care to share?
"... They ne'er cared for us
yet: suffer us to famish, and their store-houses
crammed with grain; make edicts for usury, to
support usurers; repeal daily any wholesome act
established against the rich, and provide more
piercing statutes daily, to chain up and restrain
the poor. If the wars eat us not up, they will; and
there's all the love they bear us."
-- Shakespeare: Coriolanus, Act 1, scene 1
