Obamacare, An Englishmans view

I've looked at the terms set out in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and really cannot see why everyone is using the British NHS as a reason not to support it.
The new "Obamacare" system seems to be nothing like the NHS and just a tweaking of what is all ready there. Let me explain,

In Britain we have a simple-ish system. The employee pays nothing on the first £110, 11% of any earnings between £110 and £844 with a further 1% on any earnings overs £844, Per week. In addition the employer pays an additional amount equal to 12.8% of the said employees weekly earnings after the first £110.
That's the maths bit over with!
This then pays for GPs surgeries, hospitals, ambulances, and other associated costs in the NHS.
We also have a private health service called BUPA, (there are others but bupa is the main one.) as well as private clinics for specific medical needs.
The American system Seems to be based on Bupa and every one has health care insurance. There are many charitable or free hospitals that don't charge but in the main the medical service most Americans receive is paid for and the cost is covered by insurance pay outs.
For those unable to afford this insurance or over over 65 there is Medicare. Signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B Johnson it was a form of insurance that covered basic health care but is capped at a certain level, leaving some with out cover for the most serious of conditions.
Add to this the way most insurance firms will do anything to get out of not paying, health care in States for the vulnerable became a major issue that President Obama sort to address.

The act itself is so long with so many add ons its hard to get a good handle on it but in summery we have

-cheaper drugs
-health care for native Americans
-insurance for people with pre-existing complaints
-children staying on their parents health plans till they are 26
-medicare extended to those earning 133% of the poverty line.
-10% tax on indoor tanning salons! (WTF?)
-those earning $200k will pay and extra 0.5% in tax (kinda like our national insurance?)
-no cap on what medicare can pay out for

Etc etc, with some happening right away but others coming in over the next 4 years.

So, is this moving towards the dreaded NHS that scares Americans so? Nah, no where near. Fear not America all that you fear about the nasty NHS will be kept away from you.

As an accountant i can see that those with decent incomes will be paying more to benefit those without and insurance firms will look for any excuse to raise premiums. But apart from that I'd say don't worry about it. As Benjamin Franklin said, In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.

child benifit

Why are the Tories backing down on the idea of taking child benefit away from the rich? And what the hell are Labour doing questioning this?

To pay the higher rate of income tax a British subject needs to earn over £850 A WEEK! I'm sure they really need the extra £26 that child benefit brings.

In this difficult time we need to make massive cuts and we need to make sure the poor don't suffer. Taking benefits away from those that don't need it and will hardly miss it ticks both these boxes.

Whats the problem?

poacher turned gamekeeper?

I awake today to the news that the Tory party conference will attended by one M Mcguiness. For those too young or not from the UK, Martin McGuiness is the leader of Sinn Fein in the Stormont parliament and spent many years as a Commanding officer in the IRA. He was in a senior position there when the IRA bombed the Tory conference back in 1984 killing 5 and injuring 34. In this age of peace and reconciliation we have many conflicts across the world that are now over and those involved need to admit what they did, apologize for the hurt they cause and move on. The IRA/Sinn Fein have never shown any remorse for the thousands of innocent civilians caught up in the war and for McGuiness to attend the conference is a bitter pill to swallow.