Health Care Bill

[Aisling]

by the way... i'm pretty sure we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one ;)

no hard feelings :)

[Softcarver]

can we outlaw smoking and fat people now?

Love it. I hope so. LOL

[BobD]

for the socialist, er ah "progressive" political leaders of the former democrate party, it was never about "healthcare", it was always about Big-Gov and furthering recruitment of dependents on said same

your belief is mistaken. case in point the lawful killing of innocent children...

And which party, when in power, always grows the goverment, spends more, creates deficits. reduces standards of living, and takes away more individual rights ? It ain't the Dems that that resemble the old East Bloc socialist.

This was about social justice, not corporate justice. What's right, not just what's profitable. It's was about people, not politics.

[Jack M]

And which party, when in power, always grows the goverment, spends more, creates deficits. reduces standards of living, and takes away more individual rights ? It ain't only the Dems that that resemble the old East Bloc socialist.

fixed.

[BobD]

fixed.

Touche'

[lonbordin]

Just for full disclosure at the get go. I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative and dying for multiple party system. The corporate two party system doesn't represent me.

Don't even say Libertarian.

Has the bill made it into law yet? NO. Reconciliation is going to be a real problem and potentially a show stopper. Stay tuned campers it could get interesting.

Should PROFIT be a part of health care?! NO.

Does the bill in its present form address that? NO.

I'll be ready to discuss the merits of the legislation once it has made it through reconciliation. :rolleyes:

note: the poll was a perfect 50/50 when I posted this and I did not vote... who could disturb such beauty?!

[BobD]

The mandated insurance that so many republicans are complaining about is such a republican ideal, I am surprised. Instead of the rest of us paying for people who don't have insurance, when they go to the ER, they will have to get insurance. It will be means tested, so the cheaters who could afford it, but spend their money on cigarettes, booze, and lottery cards, will have to pay. We will still have to pay for the really deserving cases, but it will be a lot cheaper than ER visits when diseases become chronic.

I don't see what could be so wrong with a fiscally responsible solution. Unless of course this is about politics, and not deficits, and personal responsibility.

[Petrol]

Touche'

Exactamundo!

btw, the Only reason I didn't include the republicrates in my original post is because None supported this piece of communist-bloc socialism, er ah, "social-justice"

[Petrol]

Has the bill made it into law yet? NO. Reconciliation is going to be a real problem and potentially a show stopper.

ONLY because it (the senate Bill) is NOT truely 'reconcilible', but I don't count of the crooks in DC letting a lil thing like that get in the way.

It WILL be jammed down Tax-Payers throats to the cheers of big-gov dependents everywhere

Should PROFIT be a part of health care?! NO.

WHY??

Example = Lasik costs dropped like a rock while tech & patient care improved at the speed o light.

Does the bill in its present form address that? NO.

Sure it does. big-gov Will control not only every aspect of your life (you incured your injury how? how dare you risk snowboarding!) but theyWILL also run evil for profits out of business with over-reaching regulation

I'll be ready to discuss the merits of the legislation once it has made it through reconciliation. :rolleyes:

ah yea, just pass it and let the "fog" clear and we'll then be able to see the bright world that lay ahead :lol:

[lonbordin]

WHY??

When a business can make the decision to deny health care to an individual and profit from that decision there's a problem.

we'll then be able to see the bright world that lay ahead

Petrol is the world coming to an end? No.

Is the world a better place to live now than it ever was? Yes.

The ~5,000 years of recorded human history lends heavy weight that the future is indeed bright.

So bright I gotta' wear shades...

[Jon Dahl]

Let's look at realities;

1) Will this bill, as written, pass Constitutional muster? Probably, IF the whole thing comes under Title 26 of the US Code.

2) If so, what will happen to any court challenge? It will lose.

3) Who will it apply to? A) Anyone who fails to look at the legal language and gets sucked in to it. B) If, again, it falls under Title 26, anyone involved in Federal income-generating activities.

Which brings us to this point; If we do not know A) legal language and how it is used, B) Where it ends up being put in Codified law, these arguments are useless. If you refuse or fail to understand these points, your case is lost, period.

BTW, I think there is a place for health care reform. It is at the State (common usage, not Title 26 usage) level, should begin as tort law reform, and be optional for anyone, not mandatory.

[Arclite]

what's ironic about it?

This thread might go on forever. :p

[Jack M]

The ~5,000 years of recorded human history lends heavy weight that the future is indeed bright.

Two of several tell-tales of the beginning of the collapse of any society in history have been the debasement of its currency and the debasement of its language. Check and check.

[skategoat]

can we outlaw smoking and fat people now?

health as a right fails the two people on a desert island test.

What about snowboarding, riding motorcycles and cheating on your Swedish wife?

[skategoat]

The one thing that puzzles me about this whole debate is how Americans, both for and against, are always comparing against the Canadian system. What about the rest of the world? The chart below shows green and blue for countries with some sort of universal health care. The grey is without.

[newcarver]

Looks like the insurance companies are getting their way. Healthy people who may not choose to buy health insurance normally will have to buy it now. Kind of like car insurance in most states. You are required by law to have it if you have a registered vehicle on the road. Many states will give you a ticket if you can not show that you have current valid insurance on the vehicle. Are they going to give out tickets to those who do not have insurance at the ER? Will be interesting to see if privately purchased insurance premiums keep going up. Hope it doesn't, cause mine keeps going up every year by $100. Over $500 month for family plan with a $5000 deductable. Can't really afford to pay much more. Does give me discounts for doctor visits and perscriptions at least. They ought to make preventative healthcare, like physicals and screenings free or inexpensive to keep people from getting sick in the 1st place. This would save a lot of money for everyone in the long run. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[Aisling]

just an FYI i was in South Africa last year. it has a 2 tier system of public (universal) and private (rich people who can afford it) so your map is a bit off for that country.

[Petrol]

Looks like the insurance companies are getting their way....

just about 180 degree off base.

using your auto-insurance example, this is like saying you can risk a $700 per yr fine and drive about all you want. Then AFTER you "Experiance" an at fault crash resulting in property loss and persoanl injury to others, you "purchase" insurance and the insurance compay is REQUIRED to cover your pre-existing condition

btw, there is quite a bit of differance between auto-insurance, which is designed to cover cat CATOSTROPHIC loss and "Health" insurance

for one, chances are that your auto insurance does not cover repairs, oil changes and tire rotaions

btw II, what WERE the cost esimates for medicare at inseption??? what are they now??? why couldn't big-gov simply work to "fix" and possibly "expand" medicare to include these estimated 11m folks???

[Transistor Rhythm]

Situation in Holland:

I pay about €125 for everything and this is uncluding better dental care coverage, about the only thing I have to worry about at my age, and some other small extras. Basic insurance is at least €83, it will cover the most important things but sometimes you still have to pay if the drugs you get aren't on the list. These fees are the same for everyone I think, elderly people or people that have battled cancer before too.

To me it's a lot of money since I rarely have any health issue, but it's a luxury not having to worry when I do. I think it always looks like a bad deal for a lot of people until it's too late.

------

Actually I have never heard anyone talking about making it optional. Lots of people still feel it could be improved on.

[Kent]

In no particular order...

1) Can someone point to a poll which showed a majority of Americans supported this? Heck...use CNN. I don't care, but none of the polls I've seen where even close. Thanks.

2) To the point above, I think I need to remind people that we don't necessarily live in a democracy in the US where 50.1% rules. We have this little thing called the Constitution which trumps majority rules...which is one example of balance of power.

3) Not sure whether it was CNN or Fox last night....but I think an anchor netted it out by saying: "Democrats view healthcare as a moral issue while Republicans view it as a economic issue". I think that sums it up pretty well and might fight through some of the emotion in this thread.

Out of disclosure...I'm as conversative as they come minus issues regarding education and healthcare. I'm disappointed because I was hoping for more change rather than simpy spending more money while taking it from someone else....

[Kent]

Ah...finally an article which I agree with.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35984872/ns/politics-capitol_hill/?GT1=43001

[Aisling]

Kent, decent article.

this quote is part of why this bill passing irks me:

"I am used to explaining to foreigners that the US political system is, by design, exquisitely sensitive to public opinion, with its lower house up for election every two years. American governments cannot ignore their people, as Europe's governments can and frequently do, I used to argue. And I would cite my favorite example. Germany's government abolished its currency and forced the euro on a country that was opposed to monetary union throughout, saying, "You are wrong. We know better. We will do this regardless, and you will come to like it." Can you imagine such a thing happening in the U.S., I used to ask? Could anything be more un-American? The usual response would be laughter. "

I abhor the elitist idea that "we bureaucrats know better than you peons" and the sentiment that those who oppose the bill are hillbillies or rich snobs who don't care about others. I am university educated, thousands in the hole financially and I was by the side of my grandmother last month when she tried to draw her last breaths, breaking my heart. So yeah, that's me, opposed to this bill, a stupid, unfeeling, rich person :p

[scrapster]

In no particular order...

1) Can someone point to a poll which showed a majority of Americans supported this? Heck...use CNN. I don't care, but none of the polls I've seen where even close. Thanks.

2) To the point above, I think I need to remind people that we don't necessarily live in a democracy in the US where 50.1% rules. We have this little thing called the Constitution which trumps majority rules...which is one example of balance of power.

3) Not sure whether it was CNN or Fox last night....but I think an anchor netted it out by saying: "Democrats view healthcare as a moral issue while Republicans view it as a economic issue". I think that sums it up pretty well and might fight through some of the emotion in this thread.

Out of disclosure...I'm as conversative as they come minus issues regarding education and healthcare. I'm disappointed because I was hoping for more change rather than simpy spending more money while taking it from someone else....

Polls are a finicky thing. I remember George W proclaiming that he didn't govern based on poll numbers in regards to the popularity of the Iraq war. But I digress. In terms of health care polls, you're right...sort of. As a single package, public sentiment has been against the health reform bill for a while. But just about every single major component of the bill enjoyed wide public support when polled individually (even the mandate for individuals to purchase insurance--which surprised me.) You can take that a number of ways. Republicans have been trying to say that its the cost of the bill in its entirety that turns people off. I tend to think it was tarnished packaging. But that's debatable. I heard one good comment that historically, major health care reforms always scare the public before they are enacted--but are usually extremely popular and almost impossible to repeal after they are passed. If I was a Repub, I'd move on to other issues.

As for the Constitutional grounds, again, you may have a point there. But we also have the judicial system as one of the primary interpreters of the Constitution. Up to this point, they haven't been very amenable to your side. Things that the Constitution makes no mention of have been allowed or outlawed since the beginning of our country--making it more of a broad framework, one that many feel the founders did not intend to meddle on the policy level outside of certain parameters. Interestingly, two of the more concrete things that the founders did enshrine were the federal power to tax and the right to own slaves. Go figure...

But, I have to agree with you that the split on health care reform comes down to the different sides seeing it as either an economic or a moral issue.

PS- I don't watch CNN or any cable news anymore. Its all tabloid junk.

[Alaskan Rover]

I am just wondering what in the world is sooo bad about socialism, anyway. I am not talking about Marxism (a form of communism),Stalinism or other any type of totalitarianism. It seems communism always degrades down into a totalitarianist "state of control"...The old Soviet system and present North Korea being good examples of bad communism. Communism simply doesn't work.

Socialism, however, should NEVER be confused with communism or totalitarianism....it is FAR removed from those old idealogies. A true socialist country embraces both social values AND capitalism. Six countries come readily to mind: Sweden; Norway; Denmark; Finland; Netherlands and Switzerland....Oops, I forgot Iceland (although Iceland IS having very tough times, presently). I have been to many of these countries as an adult (minus Iceland and Finland) and have lived in Switzerland for many years as a child (granted, I had a child's eye view of the political world back then!)...and have found ALL the countries I have visited to be working VERY well as governmental systems. Yes they HAVE higher taxes than us...as high as 60% when local, and "federal" taxes are added up. But they ALSO have HIGHER wages, and often shorter work weeks to boot! The countries are VERY clean and well-run...trains are on time; the governmental services that people pay for actually work! They don't have all this nonsense about "State's Rights" and "State Soveignity" (good grief...what a bunch of malarkey, anyway! We're ALL the same country...let's start acting like it...driving down most economic Best Buy and Home Depot-strewn boulevard's these days, I can barely tell what state I am in anyway, and if I was blind-folded, and shunted off to a different state, I MOST SURELY wouldn't be able to tell...I think that would be true for most, too).

Anyway, what I am getting to, is that those six countries that I have mentioned are very well-run countries, mostly the people are happy and proud of their countries, the countries are clean and for the most part VERY sensitive to environmental and social issues. They DO have capitalism (that what drives their economies, of course), but just not such a lob-sided capitalism as we have here. Capitalism in this country is almost a religion...whereby the biggest ideal that we seem to teach our kids is that "you, too, can get rich, boys and girls!" I have spent much time traveling in those countries, and they seem more concerned about bringing up their children in a socially-responsible manner, one based upon 'family values', social acceptance. I realize, of course, that these countries are far smaller and more culturally homogenic than the U.S....but they give us a shining example to strive for nonetheless. If we would get rid of 90% of our corporate federal tax loopholes...and stop funding wars for oil, we would have enough money to have working programs like the afore-mentioned countries.

And contrary to popular opinion, their healthcare systems DO work...some of which are a composite between single-payer and optional private health plan purchase.

So, what EXACTLY is so bad about socialism (in the above context), anyway?...I must ask again.

Gravity IS Life.

[carvedog]

can we outlaw smoking and fat people now?

health as a right fails the two people on a desert island test.

I read that somehow as can we start smoking fat people????

Wheh.