By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Using "reconciliation" for healthcare

TheRealMafoo on 25 February 2010
NinjaguyDan said:

Breitbart is nothing more than a corporate propogandist and a political vandal.

You're being used to advance a corporatist agenda.

I always hate this argument. If Obama said everyone from Texas should be executed, and some right wing site like this showed the video, we should disregard what Obama said just because of the source?

This is not an opt ed piece, it's video, with sound bites that were not taken out of context. What's to debate about the content?



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 25 February 2010
SciFiBoy said:
Kasz216 said:
SciFiBoy said:

I think I get it, youre saying that even if people are in favour of socialised healthcare, the current bill proposal wont work for them?

you need to elaborate on that a bit more, what is wrong with this bill from the POV of someone who wants socialised healthcare?

Indeed.  Most people in the country want healthcare reform... most do not want this bill... in fact most want Congress to start entirely over... this is why the Republicans have been pushing the "Lets start over" and "lets have cameras in the negotiations like you originally wanted" cards.   The reconciliation isn't to stop republicans even though that's how it's spun... it's being used to twist the arm of moderate democrats who wouldn't of passed the thing even with a philibuster proof senate... a lot of unions aren't even for it... and they're usually pro universal healthcare. 

 

I could go into a big list rattling off reasons why people are against it... but I think the easier way to explain it is vs the UK plan which you are familiar with.

In the UK plan, the government negotiates with it's union of doctors what it pays for.

In the US plan, the government will give vouchers and tax breaks to people to pay their premiums.

It's setting up a big buerocracy that isn't really going to have the power to change anything.

We're going to create a giant health exchange... which will be the equivlent to one of those websites auto insurance companies have... but ours is going to cost BILLIONS.


This is something people could just do for themselves mind you, get quotes from multiple insurance companies... but we're going to create an exchange to do it for billions of dollars... for got knows why.  It's this that is being banked on to be the be all and end all of lowering prices and increasing coverage... and it's something that people could already do themsleves with little effort.

 

The bill is a few very good ideas wrapped around a couple DISASTEROUS ideas without enough price controls... and spending that is entirely unnessisary... instead relying on hope that prices will drop without changing anything to force prices to drop.

okay, thank you, now I understand much better, I can understand why people wouldnt like that, is that what Obama originally wanted to do? or is it something people have forced him into?

Little of both.

The original plan was going to include a public option which would be government run insurance.

This would allow negotations, but because the number of people who joined would be unknown... probably wouldn't of accomplished much.

I mean, non profit health insurance is just as expensive as for profit health insurance in the US... which says something about how healthcare works.  Chances are the government plan would end up as a middle of the road plan for everybody... unless it was everyone paying the same price... in which case it'd probably end up really expensive since healthy people would never take the government option.

 

The only way to socialize healthcare is a full out "We're taking control of all the healthcare up to this level" event.  Anything else isn't going to provide the right price controls to get it done in a socialized system.

You either need to take control of everyones healthcare for one unifed government plan... or instead of socializing it, put in price controls.



Kasz216 on 25 February 2010
NinjaguyDan said:
halogamer1989 said:
hey ninja while your at it look up the following: Blue Dog Coalition and legislative ping-pong. The GOP and the "evil corporate boogie monster" have done very little. In fact, most have been supporting the h.c. reform deal, AMA and pharma in particular.

The GOP supports the current Senate HCR bill for the same reason most people oppose it, because of the individual mandate without a reasonable public option.  With the inclusion of a nonprofit public plan, the approval of HCR goes over 60% on average.

In democratic states.  Not on average... also a poll commisioned by leftwing groups.

With fun wording like this in some state

"Which do you think should be a higher priority for congressional Democrats right now – working in a bipartisan way with Republicans in Congress or fighting for policies that will benefit working families, even if those policies can only be passed with Democratic votes?"

May as well ask "Should we oppose republicans in making sure sick people can't be healthy!"

The public option isn't any better.

 

You either need to put in mechanisms to make healthcare cost less... or just socialize the whole damn thing.   Either plan with or without the public option wouldn't do a lick of good and just cost money.

 



NinjaguyDan on 25 February 2010

@Kasz216: How many of those states have a Republican governor?



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK

Kasz216 on 25 February 2010
NinjaguyDan said:
@Kasz216: How many of those states have a Republican governor?

What's the difference.  It's in states that voted democrat recently and were polled with loaded questions.

 

I mean would you trust a republican poll that asked "Should republicans oppose Obama if it means saving America from another great depression."


Additionally, people always support broad ideas more then they do reality.  Just because more people perfer a public option plan doesn't mean they support this specific public option plan etc.

 

If you go to the full source... I think it'd be illuminating for you.



Around the Network
NinjaguyDan on 25 February 2010
Kasz216 said:
NinjaguyDan said:
@Kasz216: How many of those states have a Republican governor?

What's the difference.  It's in states that voted democrat recently and were polled with loaded questions.

 

I mean would you trust a republican poll that asked "Should republicans oppose Obama if it means saving America from another great depression."


Additionally, people always support broad ideas more then they do reality.  Just because more people perfer a public option plan doesn't mean they support this specific public option plan etc.

 

If you go to the full source... I think it'd be illuminating for you.

If you make a claim, it would be nice of you to back it up with proof instead of non sequiturs.



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK

Kasz216 on 25 February 2010
NinjaguyDan said:
Kasz216 said:
NinjaguyDan said:
@Kasz216: How many of those states have a Republican governor?

What's the difference.  It's in states that voted democrat recently and were polled with loaded questions.

 

I mean would you trust a republican poll that asked "Should republicans oppose Obama if it means saving America from another great depression."


Additionally, people always support broad ideas more then they do reality.  Just because more people perfer a public option plan doesn't mean they support this specific public option plan etc.

 

If you go to the full source... I think it'd be illuminating for you.

If you make a claim, it would be nice of you to back it up with proof instead of non sequiturs.

So, you want me to post a link... to something that is linked in your own link.

...ok.

http://act.boldprogressives.org/cms/sign/poll_national_20100220/%3C/p%3E%3Cp%3E

It's not like I actually looked for the source.  I just clicked the source in the blog, which in turn lead to it's source.

A few of the questions sound like the questions the democrats send you in their fake surveys to get you to donate money... not that the republicans don't do it too.  I get a laugh out of both of them and promptly throw them out. 



Kasz216 on 25 February 2010

I mean... one question is... and I quote...

"What comes closer to the lesson you think Democrats should learn from the recent Senate election in Massachusetts, where the seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy was won by a Republican: "Voters want Democrats to slow down and try to do less." OR, "Voters are upset about the slow pace of change - and will hold Democrats accountable if they refuse to use their power to fight special interests on behalf of regular people."

It doesn't take someone with a degree that involves making questions like this to realize how unbelievably bias some of these questions are. 



adriane23 on 25 February 2010
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Alright, this was 25% substantive discussion and 75% complaining, repetition, and sound bites. Oh well Obama, at least you tried.....

To pass something around 75% of America is against.

Using your calculation, lets say 75% of Americans (The ones that don't care) have decent health insurance and 25% (The ones that care) don't have insurance. That's a lot of people without insurance because a small percentage of alot is still alot. If the 25% that don't have insurance develop a chronic disease/ailment that is too expensive to pay for treatment out of pocket, they go to the ER when their medical condition gets life threatening. They now have a medical bill that they can't afford and is much higher than what it would've been if they had health insurance to pay a portion of the cost to treat their initial symptoms before they progressed. The unpaid medical bills create a burden on the hospital and the hospital is forced to increase fees and cut back on care and labor, ultimately decreasing the quality of healthcare for anyone that isn't wealthy.

A) It's not my calculation. It's poll numbers. B) It doesn't break down like that. Most of those people are actually against a bill that forces them to get healthcare or pay giant fines believe it or not.

A) My bad, let me re-phrase it then, "to use the calculation you posted on here."

 

B) You mean to say most of those people are against a bill they THINK forces them to get healthcare or pay giant fines....

Your missing the point... many of the 75% who don't care... are actually poor people who see the Obama plan for what it is... a bad plan that will make things worse. The people supporting it are mostly people who have NO IDEA what being poor is or what being without health insurance is about. It's beng pushed by well meaning ignorant people who are proposing a plan that will only make things worse for everybody across the board.

Do they really? I grew up poor and excluding the people I work with, 90% of the people I know are under the national poverty level. I don't know anyone that's poor and disagrees with healthcare reform. My uncle has to skip Chemo treatments because he can't always afford the doctor visit because he has shitty health insurance. Most of my coworkers are upper middle class and the majority of them diagree with healthcare reform.

Disagrees with THIS healthcare reform.  Not healthcare reform... this plan... which is a very poor one... and guess what I know poor people too... informed poor people know less who've studied the issue.

Let me ask you something... how many pages of the 1017 page proposal have you read?

You didn't even know that people are forced to have healthcare under this bill.  How many people do you know that don't have healthcare say they can't afford healthcare?

I know a lot... people who don't even go with medicare because they can't afford the very minimal payments and who try to support children on a part time 9 dollar an hour job.

Awesome, I'm glad you know poor people that study the issue.

I have no idea how many pages I actuially read, but I read through quite a bit of what was posted on the Whitehouse.gov site (thanks Mafoo for pasting something I've already read). This is by no means a perfect bill, but it's not as detrimental to our country as some people think.

Yes, I do know that people above the tax filing level have to pay a progressive fee and I also know they can exempt themselves from that fee (though I don't know how an exemption will be determined) which is not that much if you consider the provisions provided to them by the bill.

Me too. And raising kids that get sick will cost a lot less if they have affordable health insurance.

 

Now then, if you'll excuse me it's time for some Heavy Rain......



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Kasz216 on 25 February 2010
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Kasz216 said:
adriane23 said:
Alright, this was 25% substantive discussion and 75% complaining, repetition, and sound bites. Oh well Obama, at least you tried.....

To pass something around 75% of America is against.

Using your calculation, lets say 75% of Americans (The ones that don't care) have decent health insurance and 25% (The ones that care) don't have insurance. That's a lot of people without insurance because a small percentage of alot is still alot. If the 25% that don't have insurance develop a chronic disease/ailment that is too expensive to pay for treatment out of pocket, they go to the ER when their medical condition gets life threatening. They now have a medical bill that they can't afford and is much higher than what it would've been if they had health insurance to pay a portion of the cost to treat their initial symptoms before they progressed. The unpaid medical bills create a burden on the hospital and the hospital is forced to increase fees and cut back on care and labor, ultimately decreasing the quality of healthcare for anyone that isn't wealthy.

A) It's not my calculation. It's poll numbers. B) It doesn't break down like that. Most of those people are actually against a bill that forces them to get healthcare or pay giant fines believe it or not.

A) My bad, let me re-phrase it then, "to use the calculation you posted on here."

 

B) You mean to say most of those people are against a bill they THINK forces them to get healthcare or pay giant fines....

Your missing the point... many of the 75% who don't care... are actually poor people who see the Obama plan for what it is... a bad plan that will make things worse. The people supporting it are mostly people who have NO IDEA what being poor is or what being without health insurance is about. It's beng pushed by well meaning ignorant people who are proposing a plan that will only make things worse for everybody across the board.

Do they really? I grew up poor and excluding the people I work with, 90% of the people I know are under the national poverty level. I don't know anyone that's poor and disagrees with healthcare reform. My uncle has to skip Chemo treatments because he can't always afford the doctor visit because he has shitty health insurance. Most of my coworkers are upper middle class and the majority of them diagree with healthcare reform.

Disagrees with THIS healthcare reform.  Not healthcare reform... this plan... which is a very poor one... and guess what I know poor people too... informed poor people know less who've studied the issue.

Let me ask you something... how many pages of the 1017 page proposal have you read?

You didn't even know that people are forced to have healthcare under this bill.  How many people do you know that don't have healthcare say they can't afford healthcare?

I know a lot... people who don't even go with medicare because they can't afford the very minimal payments and who try to support children on a part time 9 dollar an hour job.

Awesome, I'm glad you know poor people that study the issue.

I have no idea how many pages I actuially read, but I read through quite a bit of what was posted on the Whitehouse.gov site (thanks Mafoo for pasting something I've already read). This is by no means a perfect bill, but it's not as detrimental to our country as some people think.

Yes, I do know that people above the tax filing level have to pay a progressive fee and I also know they can exempt themselves from that fee (though I don't know how an exemption will be determined) which is not that much if you consider the provisions provided to them by the bill.

Me too. And raising kids that get sick will cost a lot less if they have affordable health insurance.

 

Now then, if you'll excuse me it's time for some Heavy Rain......

Unless you know... paying the insurance costs you the money you need to give them a semblence of proper nutrition... or keep up with your rent.

These aren't people with little money... they're people with negative money who's shit is about to get repossessed.  Medicare has small fees that people have to pay.

 

Also, someone who is only making 9 dollars an hour probably already qualfies for medicare... this bill does nothing for them but force them to spend money they don't want to spend.