^^ reading comprehension. It is a statement in favor of healthcare reform utilizing already available resources.

11/5/2010 7:20:47 PM

From page 60 back in March:

me

Quote :

"this could prove to be a Pyrrhic victory for the Dems. Expect to see quite a bit of "buyers remorse" from fiscally conservative independents in November. "

moron

Quote :

"How? Health reform, including a public option, was a major planck of his platform. Obama definitely needs to focus on the debt and deficit I think though, because that was also a major planck."

me

Quote :

"How? HOW? Just look at all the opposition to this bill. It's not just tea partiers. A lot of people HATE it. And they will be extremely energized in the fall. Just watch. Hell, even a lot of Dems don't like this bill. It's a partial success for Obama, but in the process the incumbent Dems in congress became the most despised people in the country, with the Repubs a close 2nd."

moron

Quote :

"But people hate it BECAUSE of the tea-partiers. This is what happens when you scream about Communism, hitler, killing grandma, and death panels for a year straight. when the bill passes, and people realize that the world hasn’t ended, and it’s not as bad as the tea-partiers have been screaming about, it’s going to deflate the tea-partier’s sails, not bellow them out. My prediction is that this helps Obama and the dems, not hurt them. The health bill shouldn’t have been a surprise to anyone that voted for Obama."

me

Quote :

"Good luck with that prediction. We may not see any negative effects of this bill right away, but we won't see any positive effects either. Shit doesn't kick in for a while. Meanwhile, the opposition will be beating the drums of war, playing up all the real and perceived negatives of this bill with crazy deficit projections, scare tactics, etc. You know the drill. Fear is a much stronger motivator than promises. Use your head, not your heart. You know how this will play out in the polls. Or at least you should."

moron

Quote :

"^^^ the tea-partyers are going to look lame by harping on a done deal. The dems and Obama are going to move on to the next issue, and assuming it’s something that’s harder to spin as communism, their complaints aren’t going to stick."

Quote :

"The majority of Americans don’t have the attention span or depth of memory or knowledge about how things actually work as the people in TSB. This might make you hate the dems more and longer, but most people only know what’s on TV for the week."

Supplanter

Quote :

"Most sweeping legislation in decades to run on, is way better than the worst fears the right and tea party was spewing. The right and tea party and fox news has so demonized this bill that this there is no way the reality of it is as bad as how far they've lowered the bar and lowered expectation. Tonight is the best news for dems for Nov they've had in a long time."

me

Quote :

"Yeah, because all voters cared about in 2006 and 2008 was what happened the week before the election. Years of shitty leadership, unpopular wars and ballooning deficits had nothing to do with the Dem sweeps. I'll stand by my statement that this is a partial victory for Obama but it'll serve as a net loss for the Dems in congress in this election cycle. But I suppose we shall see in the fall."

Supplanter

Quote :

"According to the GOP stopping this reform was supposed to be President Obama's Waterloo, it was supposed to break him, and the GOP has failed. And they were right, not passing reform would have been seriously damaging, and passing it will give the dems something to run on in November. I guess, since the GOP said not passing Health Care Reform would be President Obama's Waterloo, that upon the reform passing they'll admit this helps the Dems chances in November/that this is the GOP's Waterloo right?"

Yep, pretty much the way I called it. moron and Supplanter pwnt. stay home.

11/6/2010 7:04:30 PM

Insurance Company Bailout

[Edited on November 6, 2010 at 7:19 PM. Reason : You can't regulate these fuckers. Public option or leave them completely alone for competition.]

11/6/2010 7:14:06 PM

^^nice job. We are STILL waiting on that post obamacare bump. lol

Just wait until the 85% who currently have ins and are happy with their health care, but concerned with the costs, premiums go sky high.

11/7/2010 12:17:17 AM

I was way off on that first statement. I'll admit I was wrong. I thought all the talk of death panels & the like, combined with a reality of no-death panels after it was implemented would help change opinions. I still think the state of the economy had more to do with election results than anything else.

The second one was right on though. It was simply calling out hypocrisy (although since you didn't include the pic I had posted w/ said quote the sarcasm may not have come through with your re-quoting it). They said if it fails, game over. And when it won, they still said that also means game over.

And now almost every quote I have in this nearly 1.5 year old thread:

Quote :

"not taking any strong sides on the health care debate here, but its nice to see who is funding the buses to bring out of staters to yell down the debates"

I'm still a fan of the ideas I pointed out below (helping kids get coverage, promoting preventive care, and most especially helping young adults not have gaps in coverage as they transition from education to work.

Responding to this quote: "As a father who is currently dealing with my 1yo's "pre-existing conditions"

Quote :

"The absurdity of someone who has barely existed for much time at all already being tagged with pre-existing conditions I think speaks volumes about how much need there was for health care reform."

Quote :

"it does things like extend the length of time you can stay on your parents insurance (I know I was insuranceless towards the end of undergrad, while searching for a job, and during the probationary period of my first full time job) which is nice that the bill is considering college age and young adults rather than just the elderly"

Quote :

"No more insurance gaps for a lot of young adults between high school, college, and first job/probationary period at said job. And more preventative care and less ER visits ftw."

Quote :

"That is one of my favs. When I was working full time for several years between under grad & grad school, I had friends without insurance and coworkers waiting for the probationary period to end who relied on the ER for medical needs with no intention of ever paying those bills. Less gaps for young adults in the high school to work period, or high school to college to work period, or during the probationary periods, or for those having trouble finding work as new & thus inexperienced workers in this economy, is a very good thing imo."

I posted this link:
http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/08/death-panel-architect-a-pro-life-republican-from-georgia.html

Quote :

""Death panel" architect a pro-life Republican from Georgia? Last week former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted a statement to her Facebook page in which she warned that President Obama's health care reform plan would result in a so-called "death panel" with the power to kill elderly people and those with disabilities: The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil. U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) also recently accused the Democrats' health care reform plan of putting seniors "to death." But there is nothing resembling the alleged "death panel" in the health care reform plan. A spokesperson for Palin told ABC News that the former governor was referring to a section promoting advance care planning that appears on page 425 of the House Democrats' bill. Advance care planning includes living wills and durable powers of attorney that allow individuals to make clear their wishes for end-of-life care, whatever they may be. And as it turns out, the cause of advance planning has been championed especially strongly by a pro-life Republican -- U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia. Isakson (photo above) is a member of Senate Health committee that played a key role in shaping the health care reform legislation. He successfully offered an amendment in committee that allows funds for a government-funded program that provides in-home services to people with disabilities to be used for advance care planning, according to the national Hospice and Palliative Care Organization."

Quote :

"A protester at Rep. Brad Miller's "town hall" meeting in Raleigh, NC compares Obama to Hitler and says Democratic reform legislation will make people "55 and older will not be allowed to have hip replacements" and other surgeries. She also echoes erroneous claims that the legislation will allow government "grim reapers" (Sarah Palin's alleged "death panels") will tell the elderly to "take a pill and just die." She also bemoans the fact that she "was accosted by a woman who was Jewish."

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/19/americans-poll-out-medicare/

54% of of Americans either want gov to stay out of medicare, or are unsure if gov should be involved with medicare according to a poll released yesterday.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/20/health.care.bad.info/index.html

Quote :

"However, when asked directly about one of the most controversial statements by some Republicans -- that a House bill would create "death panels" to decide who gets treatment -- Steele refused to acknowledge that such language was misinformation."

Quote :

"The big vote is happening right now."

Quote :

"It passed."

That is a collection of most of my comments from this thread (other than a few "oh, so this happened" or "what does this term/idea mean?" or "this is what I think that means" or in one case explaining the difference between how veterinary clinics work & human hospitals, etc).

Now if you want to paint that as someone who was all tied up in HCR you can try, but if you go through this thread you'll find that I'm hardly the most frequent poster, or ardent defender on this topic. I found a few parts I liked, and advocated for those.

But none of that matters now. The governments ability to respond to problems isn't my concern for the time being, instead I'm focused on the new wave of social conservatives elected to our state government, and how to keep them from imposing their religion and socially conservative nanny-state on North Carolinians. Unanimous GOP support of marriage-only sex ed, nearly unanimous support of amending the state constitution to be redundant w/ law banning gay couples from marriage, and the list goes on.

11/7/2010 1:55:12 AM

^Don't try to derail this thread with your gay agenda.


I have never been adamantly opposed to the healthcare reform bill that was rammed through congress. It has some good policy within. My whole point was that it was a can of worms that the Dems didn't need to open while the economy was spiraling. I will give Obama a lot of credit for using most of his political capital to get the bill done. But ultimately, it cost his party in the polls, and that was no surprise to me.

Now he will have to pull a Clinton and seize on some republican ideas if he wants to get anything done in the next 2 years.

11/7/2010 11:04:44 PM

Quote :

"I still think the state of the economy had more to do with election results than anything else."

I don't think any one thing was the tie in issue. Washington has given the perception of being severely disconnected from the rest of the Nation for at least 2 years now with a vague sense of disconnection stretching back to the middle of the Bush administration. According to Chris Cillizza's daily e-mails, this isn't far from the truth:

Quote :

"Bill McInturff, who handled polling for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the 2008 presidential contest, disagrees. And, in two surveys - one in mid-October and one on the day of the election - McInturff found considerable evidence that seems to contradict the exit data. Seven in 10 voters in these districts said they had seen some television advertising about the health-care law, and, of that group, 70 percent said the ads they remembered had opposed the legislation. In the Election Day survey, 45 percent described their vote as sending a message of opposition to President Obama's health-care law, while 28 percent said they voted to show support for the plan and 27 percent said their vote was neither in support nor or in opposition. Among respondents in the 100 most targeted House districts, 51 percent called their vote a message of opposition to the law, while just one in five said it was a sign of support for it. A majority of independent voters, a voting bloc that Republicans won by a whopping 18 points, also said in the McInturff survey that their vote was in opposition to the law."

also

Quote :

"Health-care reform "had an impact because the number one issue on Tuesday, by far, was the economy, and by focusing so much attention and resources and political capital on health care, Democrats were not perceived as focused on jobs and the economy," said Fred Yang, a Democratic pollster. "It is not correct to say Tuesday's vote was a referendum on health care, but it did help set the stage for Tuesday." A senior Democratic strategist who has worked closely with the White House and congressional races, and who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid, agreed that although health-care reform was not the entire electoral puzzle, it clearly was a piece. "The successful Republican national narrative was one of overspending, overreaching Democrats," the strategist said. "The election wasn't a referendum on health-care reform, per se. But there is no question it played a role in the overarching narrative.""

FWIW

11/7/2010 11:41:50 PM

Quote :

"^Don't try to derail this thread with your gay agenda."

LOL. I write a post with over a thousand words, you focus in on one sentence, and try to turn the focus there (I guess it worked), and in the same breath say don't take the focus there. wow. And for the record writing anything about gay people into the constitution is the NC GOP agenda, not mine.

But for the record, I don't care any more, it doesn't matter how many issues I talk about it, it always comes back to you're a one issue guy accusations in TSB, and b/c of the election results I have little choice but focusing on the constitutional issue, so I'm not going to bother defending against that any more.

However, I'm ready not to mention it again here, if you are, unless you're just trolling. We'll see.

11/7/2010 11:42:41 PM

Did someone say "Gay Agenda?"

11/7/2010 11:50:00 PM

Wait Supplanter is gay?


^ no way that is Elton John. No openly gay man I know, no matter how flamboyant, would have poor enough taste to wear windshield-wiper glasses. That is for closeted rich white Republicans who actually order stuff out of Hammacher-Schlemmacher (or however you spell it).

11/8/2010 12:02:41 AM

I hear they where them at the Bohemian Grove.


And now ten thousand hit-men are after me.

11/8/2010 12:15:42 AM

Quote :

"Federal judge rules unconstitutional parts of Obama health care law. Justice Department expected to appeal."

12/13/2010 12:28:59 PM

Quote :

"U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson found that Congress could not order individuals to buy health insurance. In a 42-page opinion, Hudson said the provision of the law that requires most individuals to get insurance or pay a fine by 2014 is an unprecedented expansion of federal power that cannot be supported by Congress's power to regulate interstate trade. "Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market," he wrote. "In doing so, enactment of the [individual mandate] exceeds the Commerce Clause powers vested in Congress under Article I [of the Constitution.] Hudson is the first judge to rule that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. He said, however, that portions of the law that do not rest on the requirement that individuals obtain insurance are legal and can proceed. Hudson indicated there was no need for him to enjoin the law and halt its implementation, since the mandate does not go into effect until 2014."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/13/AR2010121302420.html

12/13/2010 1:42:01 PM

I'm surprised it took this long.

12/13/2010 1:52:54 PM

fantastic, now we all get to keep paying for these individuals who get sick, rack up huge bills, but don't have health insurance because they "chose not to".

12/13/2010 2:53:47 PM

You don't have too. Why not just refuse to cover their expenses? It was not always the law that any individual must be cared for just by arriving at the emergency room.

12/13/2010 3:10:08 PM

Quote :

"'Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market,' he wrote."

So would the public option have made this law constitutional?

12/13/2010 3:24:52 PM

public option would be legal the same as the income tax or social security or medicare are legal.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 4:08 PM. Reason : a]

12/13/2010 4:08:47 PM

Just to clarify my question:

Would this judge have ruled the mandatory coverage provision unconstitutional if people were able to opt into a public option?

His reference to purchasing a commodity in the private market is why I ask.

12/13/2010 4:21:18 PM

Quote :

"public option would be legal the same as the income tax or social security or medicare are legal. "

Im not sure shaggy. In order to face these penalities you have to do something, in this case work. People who do not work pay none of those taxes. To tax you for not doing anything, Im not sure that is legal.

Lonesnark, I agree. The hospitals should be allowed to turn away people, not based on ability to pay, but on triage. "oh you have a sore toe that you have had for 3 months? Please leave and call a doctor."

12/13/2010 6:05:33 PM

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/flashback-when-asked-where-constitution

Quote :

" FLASHBACK: When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans To Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: 'Are You Serious?' CNSNews.com originally published this story in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed the question of whether Obamacare was constitutional on Oct. 22, 2009. (CNSNews.com) - When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday where the Constitution authorized Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance--a mandate included in both the House and Senate versions of the health care bill--Pelosi dismissed the question by saying: “Are you serious? Are you serious?” Pelosi's press secretary later responded to written follow-up questions from CNSNews.com by emailing CNSNews.com a press release on the “Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform,” that argues that Congress derives the authority to mandate that people purchase health insurance from its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com[...] that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a "serious question." “You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”"

12/13/2010 9:56:29 PM

Quote :

"Henry E. Hudson, the federal judge in Virginia who just ruled health care reform unconstitutional, owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in a GOP political consulting firm that worked against health care reform."

http://tinyurl.com/33wll65

OMG LIEBERAL MEDIA!!!

12/14/2010 12:15:03 AM

The ruling could have an unintended effect if it is overturned by a higher court.

12/14/2010 12:20:41 AM

^^

Quote :

"Ken Cuccinelli, the Virginia attorney general who filed the lawsuit that Hudson ruled in favor of today, paid Campaign Solutions $9,000 for services rendered in 2010."

12/14/2010 1:32:11 AM

It seems to me that an insurance mandate is certainly unconstitutional, but a public option wouldn't be. I hope the failure of this act will lead to a better one in the future that actually benefits citizens.

12/14/2010 2:11:49 AM

public option is just as retarded. insurance should not pay for all your healthcare costs. its fucking stupid to put in a middle man for no fucking reason.

12/14/2010 10:42:03 AM

Public option is dead, and it won't be ressurected. Rightly or wrongly, it is viewed as a precursor to a government-run single payer system, and that will never happen in America.

Republicans used to advocate the individual mandate. McCain, Romney, Frist, Scott Brown and others have supported an individual mandate on healthcare at various times. It is pretty much a requirement if we want to extend coverage to everyone.

If the Supreme Court rejects the mandate as unconstitutional, they will have to go back to the drawing boards because the bill doesn't work without it. In that scenario, Healthcare will once again be untouchable and nothing will happen for at least another decade.

[Edited on December 14, 2010 at 11:26 AM. Reason : 2]

12/14/2010 11:24:01 AM

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/judge-who-ruled-health-care-reform-unconstitutional-owns-piece-of-gop-consulting-firm.php

Quote :

"Judge Who Ruled Health Care Reform Unconstitutional Owns Piece of GOP Consulting Firm Henry E. Hudson, the federal judge in Virginia who just ruled health care reform unconstitutional, owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in a GOP political consulting firm that worked against health care reform."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/health_care_judges_interest_in_anti-health_care_pr_shop_raises_questions.php

Quote :

"Health Care Judge's Interest In Anti-Health Care PR Shop Raises Questions Federal judge Henry E. Hudson's ownership of a stake worth between $15,000 and $50,000 in a GOP political consulting firm that worked against health care reform -- the very law against which he ruled today -- raises some ethics questions for some of the nation's top judicial ethics experts. "

Quote :

""Federal judges are required by statute to disqualify themselves from hearing a case whenever their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. It's a hyper-protective rule and for good reason. At the very least, his continued financial interest in Campaign Solutions undermines the perceived legitimacy of his decision.""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/henry-hudson-judge-in-hea_n_665240.html

Quote :

"Another firm client is Ken Cuccinelli, the Attorney General of Virginia and the man who is bringing the lawsuit in front of Hudson's court. In 2010, records show, Cuccinelli spent nearly $9,000 for Campaign Solutions services. "

Oh noes! Legislating from the bench!

Seriously though, how long will this take to make it to SCOTUS (since their decision will be the only one that matters)?

12/14/2010 12:00:26 PM

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46383.html

Dems throwing out 1 Trillion in spending trying to pay for Obamacare so the new repubs cannot elect to fund the beast.

Whats another trillion at this point? And they wonder why they got voted out.

12/14/2010 6:13:47 PM

Quote :

"Public option is dead, and it won't be ressurected. Rightly or wrongly, it is viewed as a precursor to a government-run single payer system, and that will never happen in America. Republicans used to advocate the individual mandate. McCain, Romney, Frist, Scott Brown and others have supported an individual mandate on healthcare at various times. It is pretty much a requirement if we want to extend coverage to everyone. If the Supreme Court rejects the mandate as unconstitutional, they will have to go back to the drawing boards because the bill doesn't work without it. In that scenario, Healthcare will once again be untouchable and nothing will happen for at least another decade. "

I agree with everything you said here for the most part, but it wouldn't take much to expand medicare/medicaid to functionally be a "public option." I think it could be done if it was packaged in the right way.

I think we have bigger fish to fry though between banking reform, and maintaining our standing globally in science/research. I think we're on the verge of losing the research edge to Asia, which is investing heavily in this arena.

12/14/2010 6:58:57 PM

Quote :

"Obama maintains double-digit leads over the GOP in two big areas: helping the middle class and health-care reform. ... Americans believe the president is more genuine in wanting to reduce the deficit. More than two in three said Obama is sincere in his commitment to deficit reduction, while only a bare majority say the same for congressional Republicans."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/14/AR2010121405575.html?hpid=topnews

12/14/2010 7:19:32 PM

^so sad. lol

12/14/2010 10:16:40 PM

'helping the middle class' my asshole

there is no way that any sort of federal healthcare (in the form it is now, by 'requiring' it) will be found 'constitutional' by the supreme court....

that's the whole purpose of the 3 way system we have, congress makes laws with no real eye on the constitution, the USSC eliminates non-con ones that congress comes up with, and the POTUS 'enforces' them

12/16/2010 4:40:06 PM

ObamaCare pwnt. Stay home

2/1/2011 6:07:11 AM

^^its definitely working its way to SCOTUS

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/01/31/federal-judge-voided-entire-affordable-care-act-because-of-lack-of-severability/

Quote :

"You know by now that the Affordable Care Act has been found unconstitutional by a right-wing, Reagan-appointed judge who the plaintiffs forum-shopped to get as the magistrate for the case. What you may not understand is why the entire law was ruled null and void, if the ruling really only discussed the unconstitutionality of the individual mandate. As District Judge Roger Vinson explains in his ruling, the bill did not pass with a standard severability clause, which typically bills like this would have. That allows a judge to split off unconstitutional pieces from a bill in litigation while leaving the rest of the bill, having passed Constitutional muster, intact"

I see no reason why the letting young adults stay on their parents health insurance couldn't survive a finding of the individual mandate being found unconstitutional. Apparently 12 judges have thrown out the cases entirely, 2 have considered it and found it to be constitutional, one found it to be unconstitutional but severable, and now one has found it unseverably unconstitutional. At least SCOTUS will have a wide variety of case history to consider when it gets there I guess.

2/1/2011 6:29:11 AM

damn those REAGAN-APPOINTED JUDGES!!!

2/1/2011 6:33:03 AM

I know I wasn't the only one that said this would make it to the Supreme Court. It's only a matter of time, at this point.

2/1/2011 12:15:08 PM

^yep. But it gives the Repubs more ammo for the repeal vote. (not that it is enough to overcome the senate numbers)

2/1/2011 12:25:54 PM

http://www.forbes.com/2011/02/04/health-sector-earnings-aetna-amerisourcebergen-marketnewsvideo.html

Quote :

"Health insurer Aetna posted fourth quarter earnings of $215.6 million, or $0.53 per share today, compared to $165.9 million, or $0.38 per share, in the same quarter last year. Operating earnings of $0.63 per share were just ahead of analyst expectations. Revenue dipped 2%, to $8.5 billion. Aetna's earnings expectations of $3.70 to $3.80 per share for 2011 are well ahead of analyst forecasts."

earnings up 30% guess we know what all those premium hikes were for after all

2/4/2011 2:04:59 PM

$215 million in earnings on $8.5 billion in revenues? What's that, 2.5% profit margins?

Let's not pretend that the for-profit nature of our healthcare system is the only reason we spend so much for so little, or even the primary one. An unhealthy, fat populace full of smokers, who expect the very best of the best care no matter the cost, is why we pay so much. The profit margins for private insurers factor in, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to the enormous costs of providing the most advanced equipment, drugs, specialists and cutting edge procedures to an unhealthy population during end-of-life care.

That said, I'd like to see a public option modeled after Medicare. I never understood the irrational fear of an optional service modeled after our successful Medicare system. A little competition never hurt anyone.

2/4/2011 4:57:58 PM

Quote :

"That said, I'd like to see a public option modeled after Medicare. I never understood the irrational fear of an optional service modeled after our successful Medicare system. A little competition never hurt anyone."

I really, really hope that this entire statement was meant to be taken as a joke.

We should aim to tear down the botched health care system that has been handed to us, and certainly, we can learn lessons from Medicare. The day government got involved in subsidizing health care is the day we were sentenced to skyrocketing premiums and health care costs. As you point out, insurance companies made record earnings (makes perfect sense), but that means nothing if you don't look at their profit margin. The system can't be reformed. No legislation can make prices go back down, unless it repeals previous laws.

2/4/2011 5:09:37 PM

funny that this guy extolls how great Medicare is, when it is part of the reason prices have skyrocketed. A public option that had to actually compete might be one thing, but what we would get is one that just undercut competitors by not having to come even close to paying the same. The real solution is to get away from the insurance model for all but catastrophic medical events

2/4/2011 5:17:54 PM

^, ^^
Ideologues, spouting more ideological bullshit and misinformation. But I would love to hear all about how Medicare caused healthcare costs to explode. Please explain this one to me.

2/4/2011 6:22:52 PM

Any kind of third payer system is going to drive up costs, because the patient (and the doctor) are disconnected from the true cost of treatment. When medicare pays 80% or 100% of treatment, and the doctor knows this, where is the incentive to cut costs? There is no incentive, because everyone involved knows that someone will foot the bill. It's the same reason that expanding accessibility to student loans causes tuition to go up for everyone. The intentions might be good, but when you don't understand (and don't care to understand) free market principles, you'll find that the long term consequences are worse than the short term benefits.

2/4/2011 6:35:59 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to see a public option modeled after Medicare. I never understood the irrational fear of an optional service modeled after our successful Medicare system. A little competition never hurt anyone."

I really hope that this statement was meant to be taken seriously, and not as a joke.

Quote :

"The day government got involved in subsidizing health care is the day we were sentenced to skyrocketing premiums and health care costs."

So there was no crisis in healthcare costs prior to the enactment of Medicare?

2/4/2011 8:36:58 PM

Sure, there will always be a crisis, and there will always be people that insist government intervention is the solution. However, your solution ended up creating a circumstance much worse than the original problem (an unsustainable SS/Medicare system that can't be fixed neatly), and while you may guided be compassion, those that you sought to protect have now become the most vulnerable, as they have no means to provide for themselves should the government teat suddenly become unavailable or inadequate.

2/4/2011 9:03:27 PM

Quote :

"they have no means to provide for themselves should the government teat suddenly become unavailable or inadequate"

They didn't before it was around, so how would it be different?

2/4/2011 9:18:19 PM

A couple of reasons. Now, a culture of dependency has been formed - these people have been told that they didn't need to prepare, because a government program would forever been in place that protects them. There's no easier way to create and maintain a loyal constituency.

Also, the cost of insurance and health care today are massively inflated due to third party payers. The doctors and hospitals will charge as much as they are allowed to charge, because it'll be paid for. That can only result in higher prices across the board. Hardly anyone, senior or non-senior, can afford to pay hospital bills without insurance. That's not how it should be, and should signal to you that there's a major, structural flaw.

[Edited on February 4, 2011 at 9:30 PM. Reason : ]

2/4/2011 9:29:47 PM

Why do you always pretend like you are answering my questions when you are really just saying some shit you wanted to say. The culture of dependence is irrelevant. Suppose there's a prisoner locked in a cell. If you give him food, he will become dependent on your food, if you don't give him food, he'll just starve earlier.

2/4/2011 9:43:29 PM

but you are assuming that they are little more than prisoners in a cell. and that's a hell of an assumption

Quote :

"But I would love to hear all about how Medicare caused healthcare costs to explode. Please explain this one to me."

Well, it's not just Medicare; it's medicare AND insurance combined. Neither of them pays full price, which necessitates that the price be raised to compensate for this. destroyer also perfectly points out the insulation from payment that also causes a problem. Seriously, dude, look at your EOB one day. Note how the doc charges 200 bux but gets paid 20 by you and 20 by the insurer. Is he really happy to only get 20% of what he asked? No, he knew he would only get 20% of what he asked for, so he asked for quintuple of what he wanted to make sure he got it.

2/5/2011 9:30:29 PM