Laws are never perfect. They should though, have some consideration for the consequences. That's why governments spend billions of your tax dollars to employ experts like lawyers and economists to make sure, as best as possible, that there are no loop holes, no cheats and the potential for abuse is limited. Not with Obamacare. The longest, most complex law ever enacted in US history is barely a month old and we're looking at more than 17 million people losing the plans they liked but can't keep...no way to enroll, lies, screw up and now rat baggers who have already found a way to, well not cheat the system, but use it to their most socialist advantage. They got married to get insurance, and now they are getting divorced to keep it. http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/11...ons-lead-brooklyn-couple-to-consider-divorce/ This is just the beginning. When you have lived in a socialist country and seen what CAN go wrong - Murphy was an optimist - you know that if these guys have figured this out in weeks, there's a whole raft of tax wasting loopholes in here. And Obamalemmings insist there is no need to go back, to change anything, not even crap like this, getting divorced to score welfare essentially. That's just bad lawmaking. Incompetent law giving.
To get philosophical about this, perhaps the very fact that a party -- exclusively the Democratic Party -- when they had majority control power in this nation turned out such an atrocious law will do our nation some good in an unexpected way. Nobody believes -- I hope -- that our Republican leadership would have done much better or much by way of a telling difference were they in a position to ram through something equally reeking of self-serving partisan ideology and politics. Perhaps though seeing what the 'Good Party' did to this nation all by themselves will finally be enough to get various power brokers to stop and think in a way similar to what this nation once would do from time to time . . . to consider the needs of the nation itself instead of merely to push party politics and party loyalties. Perhaps . . . but then again the aging cynic that I have become says; no, probably not.
