Plenty of evidence that no-one was going to play the game: myriad connectors until a useful regulation is brought in which makes everyone's life easier.
You are actually complaining about things like the rule that phones must be chargeable over mini USB?
Apple's refusal to do this properly is one of the reasons I have a different kind of phone, despite happily using their computers.
This rule is a seriously good move, allowing you to be near certain that your phone will be chargeable when you are at a friend's house without your charger.
Corporations would never do this without being forced. In fact they would do the opposite, and deliberately use mutually incompatible charger connections.
Or you end up with stories like the linked one in Buffalo - make lots of noise about cosmetic procedures being covered so you can remove coverage for disfigurement.
I do not understand Cosmetic Surgery - you just look at the people who have had it - they look absurd.
They must all surround themselves with sycophants who look into their bizarre undead faces and say they look wonderful.
To borrow a phrase from Mitchell and Webb, "Do they look younger, or do they look like they've had cosmetic surgery?"
Being disfigured in a fire is not the same as crows' feet or receding hair.
Neither is needing a hip replacement the same as skin losing its elasticity.
free condoms will encourage risky behavior no matter how you frame the issue.
Got any evidence for that? I am fairly sure that access to contraception reduces unwanted pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted disease, rather than making everyone drop the knickers.
You are a deluded religious maniac if you think that chanting "Take us back to the clean protestant 50s, Oh Lord" is a sensible course of action.
Pregnancy out of wedlock was not less common before, it was just covered up in shame and woman-hating.
patient must pay directly out of pocket for their services they will be more sensitive to the consequence of their lifestyle choices
Given your position on abortion, I am going to presume you are a "Christian". Please justify denying healthcare to someone who suffers an unforseeable accident or major illness because they were not rich.
Perhaps you can explain how society benefits (by increasing social mobility?) when children born into poor families are have reduced chances of a better life due to lack of good healthcare, and abysmal education. Where is the Love for your neighbour? Believe it or not, some children turn out to be cleverer or harder working than their parents. So how about trying to move towards equality of opportunity whilst still acknowledging that there will never be equality of outcome.
Out of business is not good enough
The right wing are forever claiming that corporations are people. Let's see these lowlifes in jail, and I will believe the rightists for once.
your health system can be excellent since you manage to be 33rd even though one in three americans are fat.
Reducing obesity rates is part of preventive medicine, so by definition such high rates are evidence of an at least partly failing healthcare system. In that you are unable to stop such grotesque obesity that the fat scooter is actually a thing.
when you don't know jack shit other than the propaganda you've heard about how awesome it is.
What, precisely can you prove about the knowledgablity of the GP poster?