I’m probably opening a can of comment flaming worms, here, but I’m interested to see how WTC readers feel about healthcare reform. I know we don’t have a huge number of Republican or conservative readers but I’m sure you all have varying opinions regardless.
I personally believe that passage of the bill was a step in the right direction – especially the fact that providers can no longer bump people based on pre-existing conditions. I think it’s a shame that the public option was removed but I think there’s a good chance that we’ll see a separate bill on that issue in the near future.
Step in the right direction. At this rate you’ll catch up to the rest of the world by next century.
I’m Canadian, but I’ve been following it’s progress for a while now.
I’ve come to the conclusion that bipartisanship is a lost cause. Most Republicans and some Democrats are too busy protecting their own asses to pass any good legislation. Too many lobbyists, corporations have too much say, etc. The Democrats should have written up a bill and passed it with their super majority. Public option and everything. Cry about it, Repubs.
The healthcare bill is weak and not even close to what your country needs, but it will still be lauded as a massive victory.
Perhaps if the US media paid attention to the thousands of injured/disabled servicemen and women returning from the vastly more expensive wars who will now have some protection and support from the system that sent them there, public and political support would change.
But we watch indestructible heroes winning Vietnam single handedly instead and the everyday folk are as always forgotten. So much so that the everyday folk are as blinded to the situation as anyone. I recall a televised massive demo against the bill being carried out by the very people who will benefit from it and that are suffering because they don’t have it.
Even God facepalmed that one.
Still, even a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.
I look forward to not having to suffer just because my boss does not offer insurance. My last trip to the hospital cost $66,000 and I only make 25,000 a year. So I have spent the last 5 years getting sued by every doctor, specialist, intern, and janitor that walked in my room for 5 minutes.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, the pursuit of Happiness, Retirement, and Health Insurance.”
And there is bipartisanship in Washington and the US…34 Dems voted against the bill with Reps and 73% of Americans said Congress should start over or scrap health care reform altogether. Both were blatantly ignored and demonized by Mr. Obama and Dem leaders.
The debate isn’t over yet…. Republicans could very well run on a “repeal health care” platform in the next elections. Not to mention the Senate still has to approve of the changes the House voted on, which will be a quagmire in and of itself.
My (utterly worthless) two cents: I think it’s a good thing, I was just uncomfortable with the size of the bill. I’m a well-educated, generally politically saavy person, and I long since lost track of what was in the thing.
Slowly going the way of socialism. Mediocre health care for everyone. 75% of current doctors retiring. Tax will raise dramatically. Wonderful idea for this universal health care. The republicans bailout the auto industry; fail. The republicans and the democrats bailout the banks, money stolen; fail. And now the government is going to run health care? I’m pretty fucking terrified.
I’m on your side Mr. Pink, a great step in the right direction, but a damn shame the public option couldn’t be included. The most ridiculous part of the whole debate is the things that the republican congressmen are saying. The death of freedom? The beginning of a socialist state? Last time I checked, the police, fire department, hospitals, road maintenance, and public school are all socialist institutions.
I forgot the most important socialist institution our country already has: the military. Our country was originally built on a militia of self funded soldiers. Taxing people to pay for a military is socialist, just like the other things I mentioned in my previous post.
What’s really going to be interesting to watch is this challenge to the Constitutionality of the bill, specifically the portion that mandates health care coverage. The argument being (as I understand it): can the government really force someone to purchase something from a private company, as in making it a law that you have to buy health care from an insurance company?
I’m not a legal scholar, but that sounds like a sticky proposition to me.
here is the MSNBC poll
http://politics.polls.newsvine.com/_question/2010/03/21/4048693-the-house-has-passed-an-historic-health-care-overhaul-are-you-excited-or-angry?GT1=43001
out of about 450,000 people that voted 73% is opposed to the bill in some way. Now there might be some confounding effects, but if this is any indication of the rest of the country democracy has failed.
This is a good thing though it’s far from perfect. As others have said, a step in the right direction.
The fact that the American government spends almost a trillion dollars waging war in the Middle East yet does not provide free healthcare to its citizens – like every other civilised country in the world does – is disgusting.
Amendment 28 of The Constitution of the United States:
Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States .
They exempted themselves from this bill. Not legal.
SirPrize, Congress already has socialized medicine.
http://public-healthcare-issues.suite101.com/article.cfm/health_care_for_the_us_congress
The only persons that will benefit from the healthcare bill will be the 12 million illegal aliens in this country who will still get free medical care and not have to pay one penny. The IRS will not bother them when they have no insurance nor will they be penalized for it but as for all the peons making just above minimum wage the government will hit us hard if we don’t have insurance. As for all the jokers who voted for this bill let the elections this year decide how we all feel about them as they loose their jobs. Congress voted themselves exempt from social security and now the health care bill. It’s good enough for us but not them.
Okay, I’m about to wall-of-text us here.
I think something needs to be done about the… well, I guess “current” isn’t really applicable… but the system of health care where every health care company is trying to confuse people by offering this deductible, that limit, and all sorts of twisted legal language that I generally only bemoan on tax day or when I’m shopping for insurance.
However, I don’t think the current legislation/direction was the right way to go at all. It has to do with the simple fact that I don’t trust the government to provide me with services past a military for the federal, and police forces for the county/states. As far as I’m concerned, that’s what government should be limited to: protecting us from people trying to hurt or kill us. They aren’t managing the money they get currently, what makes us think they’ll manage the money they get for health care?
As far as a public option goes… I would disagree strongly. Not because I don’t think people should have health care, but because, again, I don’t trust the government to manage the money they get that’s supposed to be allocated to health care. I look at what the government has done to Social Security over the years, and when you think of what that really is (a public retirement option), I think it’s insane to think they’ll handle a public health care option any more responsibly.
One of the big problems, I think, is the lack of simple, understandable language for not just this, but all, bills and laws. I have an undergraduate degree (admittedly in computer graphics, but still, I had to take as much English as every other non-English major), and the language in the bill confuses me and leaves me doubting what the bill will *actually* do. This is, I believe, intentional, as this leaves room for politicians to lie, on both sides, about what the bill will do (keep in mind, I mean this for just about every bill passing through congress nowadays)
Now, from what I do understand of the overall plan of the health care solution proposed by the democratic party: It’s not going to work like they say it is. Simple economic theory pretty much proves this. Say, for instance, we bring in a public option. Okay, while this seems good, in reality, it is going to drive most competition out of business, due to the fact that no other business can compete with the government, who can operate at a loss but pay the rest back from taxes for a while.
Now, the argument remains “What if the government doesn’t undercut the other insurance companies?” Well, then, what’s the point of government offering insurance, if it’s not “more affordable” than the privately available health care solutions?
I think the real problem with health care and insurance is in the language. As I hinted at before, shopping for health insurance is a nightmare if you’re not sure what you’re doing, and even if you are it can be daunting. But what do we do to fix that? For this, I look into my realm of expertise: computers.
In the early days of computers, nothing worked with anything else, unless they were made by the same company. Then, people made standards. We have the standards for internet connections, wireless standards, hardware standards, and suddenly, with a few exceptions, everything plays nice.
I think this is the solution: a standard, modular health insurance policy that companies can sell, and compete with. The policy should be very simple, to the lines of “You pay us (our asking price) per (time period), and all doctor visits and non-elective surgeries will be paid for in full by us.” with options for dental, optical,etc for extra. And let corporate competition drive the prices down.
Anyway, back on the topic: I think the intent is good. Their hearts are in the right place. I think alot of what this bill does can be considered good (end to rescission, for instance), but I don’t think the overall plan of the democrats is going to work. However, I also don’t think that the republicans have brought much to the table.
I think that politics, as a whole, has become too much of an exercise in pandering to special interests and panhandling for votes, and that in this, the will of the people has been forgotten. Yes, they may think it’s the best thing for us, but really, it’s not up to the government to try and make us do what’s best for us, it’s up to the government to preserve our freedom to pursue what we think is best for us. Nothing more, nothing less.
As far as I know, which, admittedly, is not as much as most of you probably do, having followed this from the Netherlands, the original proposal about the public option was actually to implement such a standard, wasn’t it? The government option was supposed to be a cheap, very very basic form of insurance, with the insurance companies competing for basically all other coverage. To me, from a country with very social health care, this seems like a good idea.
To be honest, the whole thing looks to me like misinformation from the insurance companies and the republicans has deceived more half the country into believing that reforming the insurance companies is a bad thing. How is it a bad thing to want to make sure that people get basic health services? Sure, exclusions for illegal immigrants and controversial issues such as abortion or euthanasia can be provided for and are provided for in the bill. What’s the problem?
To me, it looks like the problem is that the insurance companies are afraid they won’t be able to take 35% of the people’s money and distribute it amongst themselves and their stockholders as “profits”. Insurance companies are supposed to be about the insured, not about profit.
Ah well, that’s my 2c anyway.
Oh, one last question: Can someone explain to me what exactly is so bad about socializing health care? Sure, I get the whole make money for yourself stuff, but putting people over their heads in debt for something that should be a basic human right isn’t the way to go to ensure a healthy society, is it? I don’t mean to offend anyone, but I don’t understand why those who fight this so strongly lack the basic human compassion to care about the welfare of others. Why not take the best parts of socialism and capitalism and meld them together into one new ideal system in which everyone is taken care of on a very basic level?
Sorry for the long post
The problem with the socialized health care in most places is that it leads to a situation where people are on waiting lists for vital operations due to shortages for doctors. Becoming a doctor isn’t a cheap proposition. You have your undergraduate degree, med school, internship, then years of training either as a specialist or for general practice…. 10+ years of schooling, which ends up with a student loan debt tally in the hundreds of thousands…
And the new plans want to limit what doctors get paid for their services to numbers that, after taxes, student loans, and various insurances that have to be paid in order to practice (not to mention the costs if the doctor has opened his own practice), seem pithy by comparison. Contrary to popular belief, most doctors aren’t super-rich. The salaries look high on paper, but they also have a high overhead. That said, however, most doctors *do* do well for themselves, but the price limits the government wants to impose will force a lot of doctors out of business.
As it stood, we had one of the best health care systems in the world, and many people from socialized health care nations would come here and pay out-of-pocket in order to get treatment.
And it’s not a lack of compassion that makes us against socialized medicine. Quite the opposite for me personally, I think that socialized health care will lead to an overall decline in the quality of health care that America receives. Thumbs up to you if you like your socialized plan, that’s cool, but my personal preference is to not have 35% of my check go to taxes when I’m making 20k in a good year (and if 35% seems a lot, I get docked about 25% overall before the new bill, between state, federal, social security and medicare taxes. I’m guesstimating 10% more for health care, not a huge leap by far IMO)
As for forcing people to pay into a cheap system… I can’t afford health care now, I couldn’t afford it if it were 1/10 of the price, I am living paycheck-to-paycheck. What could possibly possess the government to think I can pay either their premiums or their fines if I don’t get health care? (And inb4 “stop paying for internet!”, I don’t. Even if it was, I work from home currently, freelancing. I’d be in worse financial shape without my internet.)
Either way, you’re paying out the ass
Either you pay a slight increase in taxes, or you buy stupid expensive private healthcare
I made this thread sticky and intend to leave it that way for a while. There’s a lot of articulate thought in these comments. I’m pleasantly surprised. I want to see this continue for a bit.
Also, I found this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1914020220100319
It summarizes things nicely.
This country was founded on a handful of eloquent documents that have stood the test of time. Now we have a health care bill that is 2400 pages long. Leads me to believe there’s more in it that health care legislation. Nancy Pelosi said that we have to pass the bill so we can find out what’s in it. ??? Obviously, this was passed due to pressure and bribes from the administration and not because of what’s in it. If they wanted to pass a bill that would provide health coverage for everyone, that could easily be done and not many people have a problem with that. The problem is, there is no reform in this health care reform.
I also want to know how we’re going to pay for it. They want single payer based on the Medicare system but Medicare goes bankrupt in 2017. What happens then? Obama criticized Bush for adding Medicare Part D prescription coverage for seniors as not being fiscally responsible. So what would you call adding another entitlement program?
I think a lot of people will benefit from this bill while we use a shit ton of money. I just hope that the cost of helping people who need medical coverage is ruining our already broken economy.
Nothing bothers me more than when someone says “free” health care…nothing, I repeat nothing, is free.
The number of insured Americans is projected to go from 83% to 94%. It also helps insurance companies, drug companies, and trial lawyers, as nothing was done to actually control health care costs or reform malpractice liability, but rather just a shift of who pays for them…so they’re just getting more customers and more opportunities to sue. The losers are the already insured (increased premiums), doctors (lower reimbursements), the “wealthy” (increased taxes), and consumers (who do you think will pay for employers’ increased costs to provide mandatory insurance?).
The bill benefits 11% of Americans and the “evil” corporations it was supposed to fix, while everyone else will see greater rises in their health care costs.
And for the first time in history, American citizens will have to pay just to breath. The Democrats have effectively put a tax on life.
@BlackSheep
Look at the bright side, if the Democrats figured out how to tax breathing, maybe they can figure out how to tax the sun and make solar energy profitable.
A conservative is a man who believes that nothing should be done for the first time.
“but a damn shame the public option couldn’t be included” i take it you mean a referendum yes?
oh that cookie is a good one, we ALWAYS (never) have referendums, especially over E.U. laws which Brussels make up for the fun of it.
If this is your version of our N.H.S. system then its open to widespread abuse as well. We actually get people from european countires come to the U.K. for “holidays” – mysteriously get ill with long term pre-illness and then they get treated by the NHS….then bugger off back the their own country.
The only grace is that the E.U. is supposed to be one state now so its only a matter of time before the person is tracked down, but this cost millions to find the people and basically the Govt. give up.
I dont see this as a step to socialism for the U.S. i see it as a major country coming into line with the other “states” of the E.U. so that “they” can push the “one government” agenda forward. Yeah im talking new world Order but huge things like this dont happen for no reason. if your health system was working just dandy then why change it?
Looks like Obamas strings are being pulled – but then what president actually ran the country?!!?!!?
Open your eyes to more of these huge changes coming guys, we get them all the time and theres fuck all you can do about it.
IT…is coming
D.
I’m from Germany, we’ve public health-care-system here, thank god.
If I get sick, it costs me 10,- € (12$) to visit a doctor.
If I have to go to hospital for several weeks, it costs me … 10 €.
You will get used to it, and then you’ll wonder how you could ever live without one.
Im pro whatever pisses off John Boner and Sarah Palin. So yes its a good thing. And the misspelling was intentional.
For those bitching and moaning about illegals, they won’t be included.
But, it’s either they’re insured, and have to pay the premiums, or they go to the ER and get it all for free. Which is better?
You really didn’t want to go there with this- but since you asked, it is a good thing, but only a beach head– what’s sad is you have Fox pushing out total bs night and day and any number of the people watching it take it as gospel and look no further for their info– that is until they are standing by a loved one’s hospital bed and hearing stories from the nurse about how the insurance companies could cut off care when they felt like it.
The point, damn it, is the this legislation IS good for business: how many workers are now flat on their back with a chronic condition when it could have been caught with preventative care?
How many of them had to go bankrupt courtesy of that condition?
Guess who’s ALREADY PICKING UP THE FUCKING TAB AS IT IS??? how you ask- try unemployment, medicare and more- all now paid courtesy of the US taxpayer and small businesses.
This legislation represents deficit reduction because when you factor in keeping people healthy enough to be in the work force, they further represent people who would actually PAY TAXES, which is rather tough to do, flat on your ass and bankrupt.
As for all the polling bs- take a look at them today- they’ve already shifted favorably post-passage of the legislation and will likely continue to do so as a country with a seventh grade reading level and an addiction to a network hell bent for leather on destroying this country start to actually realize this is beneficial to them.
As for the Republicans, how they can seriously bitch about deficit reduction on the scale the GAO (again, fuckers, a non-partisan agency) is predicting is beyond me. The reason I like Republicans is they usually get after socialized crap when it gets too far and act as a reasonable balance to good intentions gone too far– but come the fuck on– you’re going to fight deficit REDUCTION??
And I love their crap about repealing it-”Yes, that’s right, we just knew you the voter would be so much happier getting a letter from the insurance company that they were cutting off your benefits and leaving you to die- what? You’ve been faithfully paying your premiums? Fuck you whiner- take it like an American and watch some more Fox!”
Allow me to further celebrate the freedoms of my country by closing saying Sarah Palin is a fucking tard. The death panels were already up and running you goddam idiot from Alaska.
And Joe Biden was right: this IS a big fucking deal.
Thank you.