Rug Burn Junky on 23/3/2010 at 00:30
Quote Posted by Muzman
FDL are pretty far from libertarian ranters
In fact, they're exactly the opposite, they're approaching the fringe on the left (though, as is usually the case, they're a lot more intellectually honest about their reasoning, even if I don't always agree). They make several good points in there, and there are a TON of flaws with this bill, but the battles that they want to fight were politically lost months ago. That, and they're slightly hyperbolic ("the high risk pool will run out of money in 2011!")., They're also ignoring the downward pressure placed on health care costs due to the limitations on the insurance industry, which is complex, to be sure, but it's there.
The option now would be to accept what was on the table, or wait another 10-15 years and try again. The current situation has gone uncorrected for long enough that that simply isn't an option. At this point, it's irresponsible to oppose the bill just because you think it doesn't fix enough - doing nothing fixes even less than that.
But their criticisms are exactly why this bill is being entirely overblown, especially by those on the right. It's really a moderate, compromise bill, and doesn't really substantively change that much. It corrects at the edges, where certain practices have gotten severely out of whack, and it sets forth minimum levels of service that the industry needs to provide. But it doesn't fix everything, and doesn't take on much other than the insurance companies themselves.
Epos Nix on 23/3/2010 at 00:36
Quote:
I've noticed it's really hard for foreign types to make sense of this one way or another, or maybe it's just me, but anyway... Here when they do this kind of thing it's a rearrangement of taxes, offsets, medicare funding, switching some services from public to private etc. It took a while to grasp that the feds there are hamstrung because there's almost nothing to rearrange with yet and the current system is so entrenched. It'd be a bumpy ride without massive idealogical opposition.
We in America have a two-party power system at play vying for control of the country. On the one hand is the government and on the other is mega-corporation interests. I believe this to be a design unique to America even if America won't admit such a power structure exists. But this bill is proof positive that the two-party system exists and works to give each other reach arounds at the expense of the average American.
Obama may have had good intentions when he first proposed a universal health care package; unfortunately for us, the version of the bill voted into law today does not resemble his original design for such a package whatsoever.
Tocky on 23/3/2010 at 00:43
Imagine if you will the megabucks Republicans will rake in from insurance companies now that thier stacked supreme court has ruled corporations are people too. They will fight health care with a tenacity unbelievable using dirty tricks like state nullification as if the civil war didn't settle that issue. They will sit back while insurance billions made from coverage denial hire ever more radio and TV demagouges to spout fear mongering vitriol using the well worn "liberal" and "socialists" to steer the simple poor because the wealthy don't want a pittance more to go to those simple easily led poor. It will be quite a show. A well funded one.
Unlike the previous "independent" I will vote democrat across the board the next election. I have voted for republican Roger Wicker for over twenty years. I can't in good conscience do so any longer. Teabag yourself you ignorant teaparty rabble rousers.
Fafhrd on 23/3/2010 at 01:02
Ezra Klein wrote a (
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/jane_hamshers_10_reaons_to_kil.html#more) pretty good piece deconstructing that Fire Dog Lake chart. While FDL has some good points (the drug patent thing, especially), the good massively outweighs the bad in this bill, and a good portion of the bad won't apply to the vast majority of people.
It's not a universal bill, and I'm pretty annoyed that there's no proper public option, but it's still pretty good.
Vae on 23/3/2010 at 01:05
Keep in mind Ezra Klein is a left-wing partisan.
I, like most Americans want health care reform that actually works...that is why most Americans oppose ObamaCare.
The FDL fact sheet does an excellent job in outlining 18 significant points of the bill. It is pragmatic and non-partisan, and these myth-busting facts need to be seen in order to ascertain the difference between useless partisan banter and objective analysis of mechanical reality.
Number 4 is one of the key points that illustrates government intrusion...without real benefit.
"
MYTH4. The bill will make health care affordable for middle class Americans.FACTThe bill will impose a financial hardship on middle class Americans who will be forced to buy a product that they can't afford to use.
A family of four making $66,370 will be forced to pay $5,243 per year for insurance. After basic necessities, this leaves them with $8,307 in discretionary income — out of which they would have to cover clothing, credit card and other debt, child care and education costs, in addition to $5,882 in annual out-of-pocket medical expenses for which families will be responsible."
This is one of the many reasons why (
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/virginia-first-state-to-pass-health-care-freedom-act-38-states-lining-up-against-obamacare-86418607.html) 38 States are Lining Up Against ObamaCare.
Just because you are against ObamaCare, doesn't mean that you are a right-wing partisan. The truth is that this bill was pushed through for political purposes by the left, even though it is fundamentally flawed.
Personally, I am sick and tired of partisans from both the left and right abusing powers given to them at the expense of the people of America. Partisanship needs to take a back seat so we can
really work out issues constructively and effectively.
CCCToad on 23/3/2010 at 01:20
Quote Posted by SD
The CBO says $138bn off the deficit over the first decade, $1.2tn over the second.
BUT THEY WOULD SAY THAT THE FILTHY COMMIES :mad:
Thanks, I'll look it up. Not that the CBO is the most unbiased source when it comes to these things, but its a much better source than Fox News Hysteria.
Since we're bashing Fox News at the moment, I might as well hop on the bandwagon.
Inline Image:
http://failads.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/fox-news-sucks.jpgI think that Fox News is one of the main reasons stupid, easily rebutted talking points are so prevalent among the Right. Thanks to Fox, conservatives act and think every bit as dumb as the crowd that believed Bush was the second coming of Hitler.
Fafhrd on 23/3/2010 at 01:40
How many families of four making $66,370 a year don't have health coverage through their employers (and have to pay $40,000 a year for their basic necessities (and what is meant by 'basic necessities?' Apparently clothing, credit card debt, child care, and education are all coming out of the $8k of discretionary income. $40,000 a year for rent and utilities seems a little extreme))? And the bill requires employers to offer health coverage anyway...
Sure, you can play with the numbers to create a situation where the cost of buying a health care plan independently will be just outside the 8% of their total income range that qualifies them for the subsidies, but how many people actually fall in to those fairly narrow parameters in reality? And is it not better to be able to give coverage to the millions more who don't fall within that range?
Epos Nix on 23/3/2010 at 02:04
Quote:
And is it not better to be able to give coverage to the millions more who don't fall within that range?
What is being given? From everything I can tell, those millions who don't have coverage are merely being forced to acquire it or be fined. This isn't Canada's system we're talking about here...
karmaKGB on 23/3/2010 at 02:07
Quote Posted by Vae
Keep in mind Vae is a right-wing partisan.
There. Fixed it for ya.
