Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
32 online now:
AZPaul3, caffeine, jar, JoeT, PaulK, ringo, WookieeB (7 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,850 Year: 16,886/19,786 Month: 1,011/2,598 Week: 257/251 Day: 28/58 Hour: 2/12


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Health care reform almost at the finish line... correction: it's finished
Taq
Member
Posts: 8011
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 136 of 174 (551664)
03-23-2010 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by hooah212002
03-23-2010 2:03 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
Hopefully. Except that, as I mentioned above, idiots up top in Wisconsin are fighting tooth and nail to not have to acknowledge the bill.

Someone on an MSNBC show (wish I could remember who) made a really good point. The opposition to this bill isn't really based on specific policy issues. It is much more basic than that. It would appear that the majority of those who oppose this bill fundamentally disagree with the idea that government is responsible for the well being of its citizens. The passage of this bill sets a precedent for government involvement in the well being of its citizens. No bill that involved government in health insurance, much less health care, would have moved past the Republicans.

Republicans do not see any role for government in getting people access to health care. The only role for government that they see is to remove already existing regulations which is why they wanted to allow health insurance companies to be able to sell insurance across state lines. They claim that this will "lower costs by increasing competition". What it really does is allow all of the nations health insurance companies to move to the state with the fewest consumer protections and the biggest profit thereby removing regulations that have been provided to protect consumers. That's their big idea for health insurance reform, create a way for health insurance companies to get around regulations.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by hooah212002, posted 03-23-2010 2:03 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Apothecus, posted 03-23-2010 4:06 PM Taq has not yet responded
 Message 140 by Taz, posted 03-23-2010 6:00 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Apothecus
Member (Idle past 669 days)
Posts: 275
From: CA USA
Joined: 01-05-2010


Message 137 of 174 (551665)
03-23-2010 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Taq
03-23-2010 3:41 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
Hey Taq.

What it really does is allow all of the nations health insurance companies to move to the state with the fewest consumer protections and the biggest profit thereby removing regulations that have been provided to protect consumers. That's their big idea for health insurance reform, create a way for health insurance companies to get around regulations.

And see where banking deregulation got us? All roads led to Delaware, and after years of corporate excess and individual greed, we got a major recession (depression in 30s lingo) and almost double digit unemployment. As much as I'd like to believe that grown-up executives can be trusted to handle insurance and health care responsibly, history tells us otherwise.

Regulation would be wise, prudent, and practical. IMO.

Have a good one.


"My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. J.B.S Haldane 1892-1964

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Taq, posted 03-23-2010 3:41 PM Taq has not yet responded

    
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1360 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 138 of 174 (551669)
03-23-2010 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Rahvin
03-23-2010 2:00 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
It's set at 4x the poverty level, which comes out to (I believe) around $44,000.

The poverty level is dependent on the # of people in the family:

1 $10,830
2 14,570
3 18,310
4 22,050
5 25,790
6 29,530
7 33,270
8 37,010

So for a family of 4, 4X the poverty level is $88,200. For a family of 6 it is $118,200. Anyone under this limit would get tax credit for federal mandated health insurance.


“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous.” - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Rahvin, posted 03-23-2010 2:00 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Rahvin, posted 03-23-2010 5:05 PM DevilsAdvocate has not yet responded

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 139 of 174 (551671)
03-23-2010 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by DevilsAdvocate
03-23-2010 5:03 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
That's not so bad at all. And you get Medicare if you make below 133% of poverty.

EDIT - Holy crap - I'm just a hair above 4x the poverty level for a family of 2. If my girlfriend and I got married, we'd almost qualify for a subsidy!

Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-23-2010 5:03 PM DevilsAdvocate has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1550 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 140 of 174 (551682)
03-23-2010 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Taq
03-23-2010 3:41 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
Sounds like something either Rachel Maddow or Keith Oberman would say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Taq, posted 03-23-2010 3:41 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16104
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 141 of 174 (551710)
03-23-2010 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Flyer75
03-23-2010 10:38 AM


I can see I'm totally in the minority here but think about this: the government has now mandated that we, as free citizens, are REQUIRED to purchase a product from the government or be penalized! In America! Seriously??

No. The bit where you went wrong was where you said "from the government".

It is mandated that we pay the government for our police, our army, our navy, our firemen, our roads, our schools, our border control, and pretty much everything else that is considered a general public good.

But conservatives have got their filthy claws so deeply in the national back that apparently the nearest thing that we can do to health care reform involves mandating that we should pay, not the government, but private for-profit companies for our health care.

Yes, this is America. It's the only country so enslaved by conservative ideology that this sort of thing is even imaginable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Flyer75, posted 03-23-2010 10:38 AM Flyer75 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by dronestar, posted 03-24-2010 10:32 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
dronestar
Member (Idle past 598 days)
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(1)
Message 142 of 174 (551805)
03-24-2010 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Dr Adequate
03-23-2010 9:41 PM


It's the only country so enslaved by conservative ideology that this sort of thing is even imaginable.

Spot on Dr Adequate, spot on. Here's a few other equally insightful quotes I came across:

The final health care vision is the brainchild of the monopoly corporations who dominate health care in America. Their power will remain untouched.

http://www.zcommunications.org/...-care-bill-by-shamus-cooke

A power elite that organizes the state on corporatist principles and values, and that consummates the marriage between corporations and the state is called, fascism. As it stand snow, it is clear that corporate interests will prevail whatever the outcome of the political theater is.

http://www.zcommunications.org/...chine-by-mike-epitropoulos


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-23-2010 9:41 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5805
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 143 of 174 (551836)
03-24-2010 1:17 PM


Specific concerns
My concerns about the Health Care Reform Bill are as follows:

1. The pricetag: The 1st 10 years of the projection has a pricetag of 1 trillion dollars. That is an additional trillion dollars to the already staggering national debt.

2. Another Social Security?: Will this be similar to the flop of Social Security? Just like it was promised in Social Security, you could "opt" to buy in to the program. The problem is that Social Security is essentially run on IOU's. There is supposed to be a separate fund, but there isn't. As soon as the government receives the funds, they spend it with the assurance that the next generation will continue to make money to keep the system alive.

What ended up happening is that it didn't have enough people opting in to the program to subsidize it. It then became a compulsory tax for all working Americans to pay in to, whether you see a dime of it or not. It is a broken system if it will be bankrupt by the time you ever get to the age in where you could use it.

3. Bait and Swtich: The bill states that if you like your insurance provider, you can stay with them. Isn't the inevitiability for companies, which pay out the ass for insurance for their employees, to dump their workers on to the very limited "public option" plan? They say, no, by law companies have to provide you with insurance. The plan would be off-limits to the millions of Americans who get their insurance from employers. The limitation, of course, is meant to prevent the government taking away business from the private sector which, like it or not, the government is completely reliant on. With so few people using the plan, how will it lower health care costs or compete against insurance providers that very cheap insurance?

What then is the point? The only conclusion I can come up with is that it is designed for taxpayers to pay for people who don't work, either by design or circumstance. And even then, the "public option" is so limited (a few thousand dollars a year!), it hardly makes it much of an option anyhow. I just received a bill for an emergency room visit for my daughter that cost over $7,000. Of course, my insurance is picking up the tab, but imagine if I had this highly touted public option? She couldn't get sick for the rest of the year.

4. Threatening other programs: The bill, having to be payed for somehow, threatens other programs in the process. For instance, the "Tricare for Life" program, (which pays for retired military medical benefits) is now seriously effected. This bill only means one thing. Either taxes are going to skyrocket or it has to gut other programs in order to pay for it. Either way this is a big problem.

There are even more issues of great concern over the bill, but this is the meat and potato's.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by Taq, posted 03-24-2010 2:22 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 8011
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 144 of 174 (551848)
03-24-2010 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by Hyroglyphx
03-24-2010 1:17 PM


Re: Specific concerns
1. The pricetag: The 1st 10 years of the projection has a pricetag of 1 trillion dollars. That is an additional trillion dollars to the already staggering national debt.

"The nonpartisan budget office told lawmakers that the health bill set for a vote this weekend would cut the deficit by $130 billion over the next decade, and $1.2 trillion in the second decade of the plan’s implementation."

http://news.firedoglake.com/...osts-940b-lowers-deficit-130b

2. Another Social Security?

Nope, it's health insurance. The people paying into it this year are also this years beneficiaries. It is not a system where workers pay in to pay the people who retired. Tax revenue is used immediately to subsidize that years subsidies for premiums.

Bait and Swtich: The bill states that if you like your insurance provider, you can stay with them. Isn't the inevitiability for companies, which pay out the ass for insurance for their employees, to dump their workers on to the very limited "public option" plan?

Before the bill passed you had no say in which provider your employer went with. Nothing has changed. They could just as easily shift to a very limited private insurance plan as well. The only difference now is that companies with 50 or more employees will now be required to provide insurance to their employees, including part time workers (pro-rated for the number of hours they work). The "keep the insurance you have" only applies to those who pay 100% of their insurance premiums, or the employer. Also, nothing is stopping you from purchasing supplemental insurance to make up for any perceived gaps in the public option. However, since there is no public option yet perhaps you should wait until there is one before judging it.

What then is the point? The only conclusion I can come up with is that it is designed for taxpayers to pay for people who don't work, either by design or circumstance.

If you currently pay for insurance you are already paying for health coverage for these individuals. Hospitals have steadily increased the prices they charge insurance companies to cover the bills left by those without insurance. It is estimated that the average person pays out $1,000 per year in their premiums just to cover the cost of unpaid medical bills. Also, the uninsured typically go to the emergency room where they can not be denied health care because they lack insurance. Trips to the emergency room can cost 5-10 times more than a trip to the local doc-in-the-box. By subsidizing insurance for the poor you actually reduce the amount of money you need to spend to cover unpaid doctors bills.

Unless you are willing to deny emergency care to the uninsured you are going to have to pay for their care somehow. It would seem to me that the first fix is to allow them access to primary care to avoid unneeded trips to the emergency room.

And even then, the "public option" is so limited (a few thousand dollars a year!), it hardly makes it much of an option anyhow.

What public option? The only hint at any sort of public option in this bill is to make the same insurance plan that congressman get available on the exchanges. While this plan is a non-profit cooperative, it is not a government run plan. Also, I highly doubt that congressmen (and congresswomen) have bad coverage.

Threatening other programs: The bill, having to be payed for somehow, threatens other programs in the process. For instance, the "Tricare for Life" program, (which pays for retired military medical benefits) is now seriously effected. This bill only means one thing. Either taxes are going to skyrocket or it has to gut other programs in order to pay for it. Either way this is a big problem.

I'm not picking on you, but I have always found it ironic when Republicans wail about the evils of socialized medicine and then in the very next breath berate Democrats for threatening Medicare WHICH IS SOCIALIZED MEDICINE.

But I do agree with you on this one. As my parents' generation hits retirement age (the baby boomers) it is going to create a huge burden on both SS and Medicare. We are going to have to make some very tough choices, be it raising the minimum age or increasing taxes. People my age (mid 30's) assume that SS will not be there when they retire. It's kind of sad to say, but you have to be pragmatic about it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-24-2010 1:17 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 80 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 145 of 174 (551902)
03-25-2010 5:21 AM


Not so fast......
"After hours of trying to find a way to block this, they (Republicans) found two relatively minor provisions that are violations of Senate procedure which means we're going to have to send it back to the House," Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, told AFP.

Late nights in Washington, the right decided to actually read the bill. .....AFTER it's passed.


"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Others—for example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein—considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan

"Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu


    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 146 of 174 (551903)
03-25-2010 5:57 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by hooah212002
03-23-2010 1:50 PM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
hooah212002 writes:

If that's the case and I can't get assistance (I make 45k/yr) and premiums don't go down......I'm still fucked.


Wait.... You make about 45,000 dollars a year and can't afford insurance? That's about twice as much as I make. I'm insured. There's something seriously wrong here...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by hooah212002, posted 03-23-2010 1:50 PM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by hooah212002, posted 03-25-2010 7:45 AM Huntard has not yet responded

    
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 80 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 147 of 174 (551915)
03-25-2010 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Huntard
03-25-2010 5:57 AM


Re: Somethign a bit more personal.
300 bucks a month for me and my son. That's not including ANY doctor visits, prescriptions, deductible, co-pay, etc. And that's only ONE of my kids. Luckily, my other son is covered by badgercare with my girlfriend. Oh, and those are NON-smokers rates. I can only imagine how much they go up when I tell 'em I smoke and have asthma (stupid, I know. sshhh).

Now factor in my car payment/insurance, my girlfriends car payment/insurance, rent, cable/internet, cell phone, food, etc....yea, I can't afford another bill. Especially one that I rarely use since I hardly ever go to the hospital, nor do I take the kids to the hospital except for emergencies.


"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Others—for example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein—considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan

"Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Huntard, posted 03-25-2010 5:57 AM Huntard has not yet responded

    
Taz
Member (Idle past 1550 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 148 of 174 (555852)
04-15-2010 4:45 PM


I now have irrefutable proof that:

(1) the tea party is nothing but an excuse for racism to surface in this country

(2) most supporters of the tea party movement are white Americans (probably racist, too) and

(3) the anti-Obama crowd will wait for Obama's position to be declared on any issue and then take the opposite position even if their new position goes directly against their previously held position.

The space program! Tea partiers are crying bloody murder over the cancelation of the constellation program and the $200 million a month check to keep maintain the shuttle fleet. Before Obama said anything about this, these same people were crying bloody murder that the space program was a waste of tax money and all that crap.

Now that Obama has begun encouraging the privatization of some of the space program, these same people are crying bloody murder.

I am now a believer in the claim that people can be born a hypocrite.


Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Taq, posted 04-15-2010 4:59 PM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 150 by hooah212002, posted 04-16-2010 12:12 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8011
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 149 of 174 (555855)
04-15-2010 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by Taz
04-15-2010 4:45 PM


(1) the tea party is nothing but an excuse for racism to surface in this country

It's not quite that simple. A better term may be "White Anxiety", a reflection of the fact that whites are becoming less and less powerful as minorities become a larger percentage of the population. IIRC, by 2050 whites will not make up a majority of the country anymore. I sense that many in the Tea Party movement fear that minorities will try to exact revenge on whites for perceived wrong doings in the past.

(3) the anti-Obama crowd will wait for Obama's position to be declared on any issue and then take the opposite position even if their new position goes directly against their previously held position.

I agree. The tea party movement really isn't for anything. They are anti-Democrat. It reminds me of the video Olberman played a while back. Someone got to the stage and asked for a show of hands for people making under $200,000 a year. Most of the crowd raised their hand. He then explained that Obama had just lowered their taxes, which he did. They booed him. This isn't about lower taxes. This is about fear of progress.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Taz, posted 04-15-2010 4:45 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 80 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 150 of 174 (555879)
04-16-2010 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by Taz
04-15-2010 4:45 PM


(2) most supporters of the tea party movement are white Americans

white, OLDER Americans, who use MEDICARE and SOCIAL security.

I work with a tea-bagger supporter. He thinks palin would be a-ok as prez because "she has more experience than Obama". his response to the health care issue is "fuck you, I don't give a crap if YOU get sick and die. YOU need to save for your OWN retirement". So I asked him: "how much do you have saved up?".

His response: "nothing, but that's my fault." So, at least he is honest in that he just hates people.

Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.


"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Others—for example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein—considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan

"Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu


This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Taz, posted 04-15-2010 4:45 PM Taz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Taq, posted 04-16-2010 9:32 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019