News Health Care Reform - almost a done deal? DONE

[Nebula815]

You've been paying for social security and medicare for years! Why complain about socialism now?

Social Security and Medicare are FAILING and they were passed with bipartisan support and had wide popular support. They are fine programs in what they do but awful in terms of HOW they try to do it.

But a society has to take care of its elderly, its mentally and physically-handicapped, etc...however this healthcare bill is a whole different story.

What about the fire department, the police force, the military, veteran care programs, public school systems, et cetera? Where is the uproar regarding these socialistic concepts?

There is a lot of outrage over aspects of the public school system.

HOWEVER

Most of these programs are at most local and state level. We do not have a national police force. We do not have a national firefighting service. We do not have a national public education system, it is still mostly at the local and state level.

The military is not a socialist program. You try to dismantle a government agency. Good luck. Now see how easy it is to cut military spending. As long as there isn't some massive threat, it can be curtailed fairly easily.

I'm not saying I agree with the recent reform to health care, but it's silly to reject something just because it is congruent with socialistic concepts. Do people honestly think that this nation is fully capitalistic?

Healthcare is not a public service that should provided by government IMO, however if one does believe this, then at most, it should be provided at the local and state level.

 

[Nebula815]

The GOP could have gotten some impressive concessions. Instead, they demanded to win all the marbles, and lost all the marbles.

If someone serves you a plate of crap, and promises to put some whipped cream on it, maybe a few cherries, well it's still a pile of crap

Now you may disagree with the Republicans that it is a pile of crap, but as far as the GOP is concerned, it's a pile of crap, and you cannot really have "compromise" on something you view as a pile of crap.

It would be like the GOP seeking to ban abortion, and trying to give "concessions" to the Democrats. It doesn't matter what concessions they offer, the Democrat would never agree to that. There is no compromise there.

You applaud Ted Kennedy for standing by his principles, well in this case so did the GOP.

 

[turbo]

If someone serves you a plate of crap, and promises to put some whipped cream on it, maybe a few cherries, well it's still a pile of crap

Now you may disagree with the Republicans that it is a pile of crap, but as far as the GOP is concerned, it's a pile of crap, and you cannot really have "compromise" on something you view as a pile of crap.

It would be like the GOP seeking to ban abortion, and trying to give "concessions" to the Democrats. It doesn't matter what concessions they offer, the Democrat would never agree to that. There is no compromise there.

You applaud Ted Kennedy for standing by his principles, well in this case so did the GOP.

You miss the point entirely. The Republicans could have have had a bill that they could be proud of. Instead, they refused to participate for the last 14 months, lost (in the sense of having the Dem's bill passed) and have abandoned their constituents in the process. There are no real conservatives left in the GOP - only cynical neo-cons bought with lobby-money. It is very difficult for Democrats to agree on anything because some of them at least try to vote on principle. No such problem in the GOP. Just say NO, never compromise or negotiate, and then claim that you were "shut out" of the process.

 

[Dembadon]

Social Security and Medicare are FAILING and they were passed with bipartisan support and had wide popular support. They are fine programs in what they do but awful in terms of HOW they try to do it.

But a society has to take care of its elderly, its mentally and physically-handicapped, etc...however this healthcare bill is a whole different story.



There is a lot of outrage over aspects of the public school system.

HOWEVER

Most of these programs are at most local and state level. We do not have a national police force. We do not have a national firefighting service. We do not have a national public education system, it is still mostly at the local and state level.

The military is not a socialist program. You try to dismantle a government agency. Good luck. Now see how easy it is to cut military spending. As long as there isn't some massive threat, it can be curtailed fairly easily.



Healthcare is not a public service that should provided by government IMO, however if one does believe this, then at most, it should be provided at the local and state level.

Whether or not they are regulated at the state level is irrelevant; they are still socialistic.

Also, I asked for examples of outrage regarding these programs due to them being socialistic, not because there are implementation issues.

 

[turbo]

Whether or not they are regulated at the state level is irrelevant; they are still socialistic.

Also, I asked for examples of outrage regarding these programs due to them being socialistic, not because there are implementation issues.

Really. Nobody complains that Maine is Communist or Marxist (tea-bagger complaints) because >50% of our property tax bills go to support public education. Last time I looked, law-enforcement, fire-protection, and other "socialist" enterprises were pretty widely supported, too. Where is the "outrage" and the refusal to pay for the services, and the refusal of delivery of services? Even the biggest apocalyptic nut-case the at I know would not demand that the local fire department not try to save his house if it was on fire.

 

[WhoWee]

Ok, let's review:

I said: The social security trust fund has a 2.5 trillion dollar reserve.

You respond by pointing out that they had a net loss in profit for this year

Do you see how those statements are completely unrelated?

Actually, what they have is an IOU - read my post.

 

[WhoWee]

You miss the point entirely. The Republicans could have have had a bill that they could be proud of. Instead, they refused to participate for the last 14 months, lost (in the sense of having the Dem's bill passed) and have abandoned their constituents in the process. There are no real conservatives left in the GOP - only cynical neo-cons bought with lobby-money. It is very difficult for Democrats to agree on anything because some of them at least try to vote on principle. No such problem in the GOP. Just say NO, never compromise or negotiate, and then claim that you were "shut out" of the process.

And now the Liberals own it - let the chips fall...

 

[turbo]

And now the Liberals own it - let the chips fall...

Not just liberals. Independents who feel that corporations are a bit too free with denials and recissions. If your property insurance carrier got an alert that your house was on fire, and called you and canceled your coverage, only agreeing to pay part of the claim that might have been due before the whole place was destroyed, you would be outraged and demanding heads on pikes. Health insurance companies do this every day. Come down with a cancer that might be expensive to treat? You are dropped like a hot potato, and you are so financially disadvantaged that you have no way to fight them.

Get a clue. If your house catches on fire, and your insurance company gets wind of it and abruptly cancels their contract with you, you would be livid. The same thing happens every single day when people get sick. That fastest way to make money is to refuse to pay claims. Pure profit.

 

[Char. Limit]

Of course the military is socialist!
Socialism isn't about inability to tear down a government agency or the military... That's not what defines a socialist agency.

 

[MotoH]

Recall the Red Army. They were pretty BA. Communists too!

 

[lisab]

David Frum has a very thoughtful blog that is ostensibly about the health care bill, but ends up diagnosing a big problem the Republicans have:

When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours.

http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo"

 

[WhoWee]

Not just liberals. Independents who feel that corporations are a bit too free with denials and recissions. If your property insurance carrier got an alert that your house was on fire, and called you and canceled your coverage, only agreeing to pay part of the claim that might have been due before the whole place was destroyed, you would be outraged and demanding heads on pikes. Health insurance companies do this every day. Come down with a cancer that might be expensive to treat? You are dropped like a hot potato, and you are so financially disadvantaged that you have no way to fight them.

Get a clue. If your house catches on fire, and your insurance company gets wind of it and abruptly cancels their contract with you, you would be livid. The same thing happens every single day when people get sick. That fastest way to make money is to refuse to pay claims. Pure profit.

The Liberals own the legislation.

 

[turbo]

David Frum has a very thoughtful blog that is ostensibly about the health care bill, but ends up diagnosing a big problem the Republicans have:



http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo"

Picked it up earlier, Lisa. He's spot-on. I hope enough idiots get purged in the next few election cycles so that actual conservatives might work up into the party. I'd like to have a rational choice at election day. I was so damned Republican for Goldwater and Reagan (1st time) that my father wanted to disown me. After Reagan's first term (during, actually) I swore off both of the major parties. They will get nothing from me. Even if I was really fired up about a national candidate, whatever I could afford to contribute would be an election-campaign non-event.

 

[Nebula815]

Whether or not they are regulated at the state level is irrelevant; they are still socialistic.

Also, I asked for examples of outrage regarding these programs due to them being socialistic, not because there are implementation issues.

No one is saying EVERY service must be private-sector. But MOST should be. We should NOT have a 50/50 split.

And being local and state government is a lot different from the national level. With national, it gives the national government a lot more power, the power becomes far more centralized.

You like your local and state police, don't you? Now how would you respond if the government decided to create a United States National Police Force? No more local police, no more state police. Now all police officers are under the federal government. Sounds rather dictator-like to me.

Services that are better provided by government, we keep them decentralized and local and state level for a reason. Only ones that absolutely must be centralized, like the military, do we let the national government control (and even that has its own state-level National Guard units for defense of the homeland).

 

[Nebula815]

...teabaggers...

turbo-1, it is fine to disagree and have opinions, but please (BTW this is meant politely, not any command) stop referring to tea party people as teabaggers, that is like calling Iraq War protesters anti-American.

During the Bush years, dissent was the highest form of patriotism. You were a redneck blinded idiot if you just blindly supported Bush. Yet now with Obama, it's like we're all just supposed to hold hands and if anyone DARES organize protests against his big leftwing agenda, they are nothing but racist, redneck teabaggers.

Also how are you a fan of Goldwater but support Obama (talk about two opposities!)

 

[Char. Limit]

turbo-1, it is fine to disagree and have opinions, but please stop referring to tea party people as teabaggers, that is like calling Iraq War protesters anti-American.

During the Bush years, dissent was the highest form of patriotism. You were a redneck blinded idiot if you just blindly supported Bush. Yet now with Obama, it's like we're all just supposed to hold hands and if anyone DARES organize protests against his big leftwing agenda, they are nothing but racist, redneck teabaggers.

Also how are you a fan of Goldwater but support Obama (talk about two opposities!)

This is how the left-wing thought... and they were right... from their perspective. To the right-wing perspective, the patriots are the ones organizing protests against Obama, and the traitors were the ones organizing protests against Bush.

And since both terms are subjective, both sides are right... from their perspective.

I sound like a complete idiot, don't I?

 

[Nebula815]

This is how the left-wing thought... and they were right... from their perspective. To the right-wing perspective, the patriots are the ones organizing protests against Obama, and the traitors were the ones organizing protests against Bush.

Intelligent right-wingers may have disagreed with protestors, but in no way regarded them as traitors. Yes you will have a few whackjobs in every group, there were some truly anti-American nutjobs among some of those war protesters as well, did not make all the war protestors anti-American or anything.

I would think the Obama-supporting Left would more have the attitude of, "We respect they're right to organize and protest, but we disagree with their claims for XXX reasons."

Instead, they have been called everything from teabaggers to Nazis by Democrats.

I sound like a complete idiot, don't I?

Nope.

 

[Brian_C]

Obama forgot to tell the ignorant masses that his "reforms" will result in higher premiums for middle class Americans as insurance companies absorb the costs of covering millions of previously uninsured people. There is a reason that insurance companies drop people with pre-existing conditions. This stuff is enormously expensive, and that expense will be passed along to everyone else. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Brian_C]

The liberal "FDL Action" website has written a pretty damning indictment of the health care bill. They note that this legislation will not prevent medical bankruptcies, and will impose major costs on families making as little as $66,000/year.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/fact-sheet-the-truth-about-the-health-care-bill/

This stuff isn't right-wing propaganda. There are very serious problems with ObamaCare.

 

[Gokul43201]

Obama forgot to tell the ignorant masses that his "reforms" will result in higher premiums for middle class Americans as insurance companies absorb the costs of covering millions of previously uninsured people.

Do you have a reliable independent study supporting that assertion (and how many "middle class Americans" are you talking about: 100 or 100 million)? The last CBO analysis on premiums, from Nov 30, says that most people will see a decrease in costs. I don't believe they've redone that analysis more recently.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-care-reform-does-not-increase-premiums-and-/

www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-Premiums.pdf

 

[WhoWee]

Do you have a reliable independent study supporting that assertion (and how many "middle class Americans" are you talking about: 100 or 100 million)? The last CBO analysis on premiums, from Nov 30, says that most people will see a decrease in costs. I don't believe they've redone that analysis more recently.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-care-reform-does-not-increase-premiums-and-/

www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-Premiums.pdf

If anyone pays less, it will be because YOUR taxes subsidized them. Premiums will increae otherwise due to mandated coverage of (high risk) pre-existing conditions and removal of maximum lifetime payouts. The costs to the insurance companies WILL INCREASE - SO WILL PREMIUMS.

 

[MotoH]

Gokul, where do you think this money will come from? Us middle class citizens will get raped through the nose in the coming years.

4-6 years of taxes before we see any benefits? Just another way for the government to try and make money under the guise of health care.

 

[drankin]

So, now that 30 million more people have insurance, does this mean there will be more patients or just that their medical bills will be paid by everyone else?

If both, aren't we going to need another 500,000-1,000,000 more doctors and supporting staff?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Interesting bit of information about the popularity of this bill. While 59% of those surveyed last weekend opposed the bill, 13% said it is because the bill isn't liberal enough. Those people will mostly fall in line, which means that over 50% of the country supports the bill in principle, with 13% saying it should have gone farther.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/22/rel5a.pdf

In fact, if we assume that all liberals who wanted more will ultimately support the progress made, that puts the approval of the bill at 52%, which is about the same number that Obama saw in the 2008 election - 53%. 5% are undecided. It is likely that they will also support this with time as the truth begins to sink in.

The popularity of this will continue to rise for many months as the gloom and doom predictions prove to be nonsense. Obama should also take a good bump in the polls. Former President Clinton predicts that he will see a 10 point rise in his approval rating.

 

[MotoH]

Wow Ivan. You really twisted those poll results to try and strengthen your point.

Oppose: 59%

Oppose because it is too liberal: 43%

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Note also that the Dow went up yesterday. No doom and gloom.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Wow Ivan. You really twisted those poll results to try and strengthen your point.

Oppose: 59%

Oppose because it is too liberal: 43%

No, 39% support the bill, while 13% thought it didn't go far enough. That makes 52%.

 

[humanino]

Wow Ivan. You really twisted those poll results to try and strengthen your point.

Oppose: 59%

Oppose because it is too liberal: 43%

There was no twist. The number is displayed on the same page, sic :
Oppose, not liberal enough 13%

 

[turbo]

Also, once people realize that the sky hasn't fallen, and they see some of the more immediate benefits of the legislation, approval will rise.

There are a lot of healthy people with no insurance that would like insurance. Their entry into the market will reduce the experience rates for their pools, which should decrease costs, as long as the insurance companies don't gouge. Getting them early preventative care will reduce the chances for non-covered care for more serious conditions, too, further reducing costs. Hospitals don't provide "free" care to uninsured individuals. They raise the costs of all care so that people with insurance pay for the "free" care.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Senator McConnell [R] stood before the chamber and declared that most Americans are dumbfounded today by the passage of this bill.

Clearly that is a lie.