> Can I make an old-fashioned suggestion: whether ACA is any good is not a popularity contest. So the church mouse is being looked after. Good. One of the signs of a decent society is that it also looks after people who prove incapable of looking after themselves. Big deal- what real impact does it have on your lifestyle?
>

JR - might surprise you to read this, but I am OK if a country decides to start an initiative to provide health care for those who can't afford it. I have said all along I am fine with a society helping people who NEED help.

But here's the problem - it's come too much at the expense of too many lower-middle and middle-class Americans who had aspects of their lives disrupted (some minor, and some more than minor). And the actual number of new people who now have "any" kind of acceptable coverage is far lower than what was projected. It's been a rather expensive proposition for a much smaller benefit than what was anticipated.

And on the question of "what impact does it have on your lifestyle"...that is verbal class warfare and truthfully, an unfair statement on your part. This is something I don't talk about normally, but my wife has fibromyalgia and complications from it. The last year and a half has been a very frustrating sequence of events related to coverage (or lack) and doctors no longer participating in certain plans. Much of it can be attributed to impact from the new laws. We also had to switch pediatricians months ago, something we did not want to do. It has cost us headaches and frustration (and stress on my wife, who had physical therapy session schedules disrupted from it) and higher premiums. So you can imagine my reaction to the term "lifestyle".