Health Care Reform Debate-Megathread

[thespianphryne]

Throw it out and start over. It's a blowjob to the insurance companies. The exact OPPOSITE of what was supposed to go down.



[....]

Henh. Henh. Henh.

[mikekerr3]

If piece of shitcare doesn't pass they won't be any health care. It will be 93 all over again. Then in 10 to 15 years we will be back to this point again.

This country for some reason can't handle radical changes in policy. Baby Steps is the only way.

Take this health care to prove that it isn't the end of the world. Then reform it at a later date.

That only works if you consider this bill a baby-step forward not backward, It does nothing to contain costs, It allows insurance companies to gouge those with pere-existing conditions, I allows the insurance companies to continue to ignore Anti-trust laws. I is a step forward for the insurance companies but looks to be a step backward for everyone else.

[Fenris]

Throw it out and start over. It's a blowjob to the insurance companies. The exact OPPOSITE of what was supposed to go down.



It'll only get "reformed" in favor of the insurance companies.

That's pretty cynical, 'Dox. If the insurance companies have that much control, then what hope is there to pass any health care reform at all? Won't it just happen again if we start over?

Or, maybe the question is: is hcr worth doing if it's necessary to pay out to the insurance industry in the process? Because I'm cynical enough to admit that, politics being what it is, that is surely going to be a part of it.


õ
(Why am I debating this? I should be kind of happy with all this!)

[Paradox]

Eh, it's what I want to happen, not what I think will happen. Yeah, nothing of any substance will happen without massive lobbyist reform and massive campaign reform. I thought maybe, maybe this ONCE we could get congress to behave in the best interests of the people rather than corporations, but it's more likely not to happen.

Scratch a cynic, you'll find a disappointed idealist underneath.

[mikekerr3]

Well if this bill fails and you do get the health care you want. I will be very very surprised.

If the bill passes and i get the health care I want, I would be shocked silly, I many ways this is worse than nothing.

[mikekerr3]

It'd be unlikely, but it's important to not support spending for spending's sake. That's irresponsible and doesn't benefit anyone. The mandate is ridiculous as well. The point is the Dems don't deserve a victory if they cant deliver. The age of appeasement is over. Running the black guy out and expecting liberal dems to fall in lockstep with their Kenyan messiah no longer works. Give us what we want or you lose your career, period.

Kenyan messiah? , He is American and nobody sane doubts that, the one that are same and spout ignorant BS like that are just liars with an agenda. I hope for you sake that that was being stupid for entertainments sake and are mocking the brain-dead birthers

And for the those totally ignorant of even basic law, even if he was born in Kenya (though his birth certification has been reviewed and he was born in Hawaii) he would still hav been a US citizen from birth since his mother was a US citizen.

[o1pickleboy]

That only works if you consider this bill a baby-step forward not backward, It does nothing to contain costs, It allows insurance companies to gouge those with pere-existing conditions, I allows the insurance companies to continue to ignore Anti-trust laws. I is a step forward for the insurance companies but looks to be a step backward for everyone else.

For low income people it looks like a step forward too.


Here is a question if your choices were to deal with shitcare for 2 to 4 years to get real health care or no health care change at all what would you choose?

[Danvh3]

Here is a question if your choices were to deal with shitcare for 2 to 4 years to get real health care or no health care change at all what would you choose?

I have no healthcare now, so I'd go with the shit-care. Anything's better than nothing.

[Dorsai]

Passing any of the proposed health care bills will be killing the golden goose. As a country, we can't afford this.

Before spending money on this, that "fraud and abuse" that keeps being bandied about should be addressed. They should also address tort reform and competition across state lines for buying insurace. Throw out the deal with pharmacutical companies and import drugs from Canada and we are talking real money and real savings. This should be done before the taxpayers are asked to spend another dime.

Adding people to an already bankrupt system that is paid for with borrowed money and staffed by the same people that brought us the DMV and Post Office (state and federal) seems very foolish. To do this in a recession and 10%+ unemployment seems an exercise in insanity. But if the goal is to kill hiring, shrink the labor force, or move more jobs overseas, this is probably a good way to go about it.

[Nick Soapdish]

Passing any of the proposed health care bills will be killing the golden goose. As a country, we can't afford this.

Before spending money on this, that "fraud and abuse" that keeps being bandied about should be addressed. They should also address tort reform and competition across state lines for buying insurace. Throw out the deal with pharmacutical companies and import drugs from Canada and we are talking real money and real savings. This should be done before the taxpayers are asked to spend another dime.

Adding people to an already bankrupt system that is paid for with borrowed money and staffed by the same people that brought us the DMV and Post Office (state and federal) seems very foolish. To do this in a recession and 10%+ unemployment seems an exercise in insanity. But if the goal is to kill hiring, shrink the labor force, or move more jobs overseas, this is probably a good way to go about it.

Both of those first two points are in the bill (although probably not adequately in the first case).

I absolutely agree on the importing of drugs, but unfortunately the Democrats aren't unanimous on that and with absolute opposition from the Republicans, it won't happen in the Senate bill. I'm hoping that it makes it into reconciliation. (It is in the House version, right?)

And we aren't adding anybody to the system (unless you're referring to the insurance companies, but they aren't bankrupt). The public option got killed as well as the idea of expanding Medicare.

But it's funny that you should mention the US Post Office. UPS and Fed Ex routinely use them to ship packages for them because it's cheaper than doing it themselves. The US Post Office has to deliver everywhere, not just places that are convenient. And the Post Office still makes a profit (or was up until about three years ago).

[carabas]

Kenyan messiah

I initially read that as Keynesian messiah, which made only marginally more sense...

[Dorsai]

We will have to disagree on how much fraud and abuse as well as tort reform are addressed. It is woefully inadequate. But more importantly, it should be done before any new money is spent. Not in the same bill that spends the money.

I would like to think that the expansion of medicare has been killed but there is still the Manager's Amendment that will be coming out that will have the compromises. Granted, I can't say its in but we can't say its out. All of this is happening behind closed doors.

The level of service you get with those government instutions is the problem. Long lines, poor customer service, bureacratic regulations, and poor management is not the way to go with 1/5th of our economy. And as far as profit goes...

Post Office Losses Reach 4.7B For Year (August 5, 2009)

Even if they were profitable three years ago, what have we seen to make us think this will change?

[the4thpip]

Remember "Support the troops"?

Republican Senators are filibustering the Defense Appropriation bill - which they claim to support - in the hope that they can slow down Senate proceedings enough that there won't be time to pass the Health care bill before Christmas.

Interim arrangements to continue funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan run out in the next few days - but so what, there's partisan points to score.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...s=rss_politics

Republicans were for the troops before they were against them.

[Titan76]

Before spending money on this, that "fraud and abuse" that keeps being bandied about should be addressed. They should also address tort reform and competition across state lines for buying insurace.

While tort reform is needed, its not something that is driving up health-care cost and is not one of the main things that needs to be address to bring health-care cost down at the movement.

http://washingtonindependent.com/555...lth-care-costs

Although damage award caps could slightly limit the future growth of liability insurance premiums – about 6 to 13 percent over time, says Mello, “it tends to be oversold as a solution and it’s pretty unfair to patients.”

Annual jury awards and legal settlements involving doctors amounts to “a drop in the bucket” in a country that spends $2.3 trillion annually on health care, Amitabh Chandra, another Harvard University economist, recently told Bloomberg News. Chandra estimated the cost of jury awards at about $12 per person in the U.S., or about $3.6 billion. Insurer WellPoint Inc. has also said that liability awards are not what’s driving premiums.

And a 2004 report by the Congressional Budget Office said medical malpractice makes up only 2 percent of U.S. health spending. Even “significant reductions” would do little to curb health-care expenses, it concluded.

A study by Bloomberg also found that the proportion of medical malpractice verdicts among the top jury awards in the U.S. declined over the last 20 years. “Of the top 25 awards so far this year, only one was a malpractice case.” Moreover, at least 30 states now cap damages in medical lawsuits.

The experience of Texas in capping damage awards is a good example. Contrary to Perry’s claims, a recent analysis by Atul Gawande in the New Yorker found that while Texas tort reforms led to a cap on pain-and-suffering awards at two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, which led to a dramatic decline in lawsuits, McAllen, Texas is one of the most expensive health care markets in the country. In 2006, “Medicare spent fifteen thousand dollars per person enrolled in McAllen, he finds, which is almost twice the national average — although the average town resident earns only $12,000 a year. “Medicare spends three thousand dollars more per person here than the average person earns.”

Adding people to an already bankrupt system that is paid for with borrowed money and staffed by the same people that brought us the DMV and Post Office (state and federal) seems very foolish. To do this in a recession and 10%+ unemployment seems an exercise in insanity. But if the goal is to kill hiring, shrink the labor force, or move more jobs overseas, this is probably a good way to go about it.

No, it needs to be address now because right now health-care cost keeps eating up GDP. In 10 years medicare and medicaid are going to be broke and that means a lot of people who rely on them are going to find themselves without any health insurance. It should have been address a long time ago but we do everything in this country at the last minute.

And the people at my DMV and Post Office are pretty good, never had any problems.

[mikekerr3]

For low income people it looks like a step forward too.


Here is a question if your choices were to deal with shitcare for 2 to 4 years to get real health care or no health care change at all what would you choose?

If those were the option I would chose shit-care, But I don't think that Obama will grow ball magically in a year or two. Since the democratic party is spitting on so much of it's own base now just to please two senators, i don't think they will have the votes to do much after 2010, because there is know way in hell i or many others will vote for bumbling cowardly hypocrites like those running the democratic party now, On election day I'll just stay home for the first time in over 30 years