The Good Fight

You guys should stop complaining cuz one the health care we have now isnt as good as it was supposed to be. also the law has just been signed give it a try u guys are too hard on democrats they went to college and we voted for most of these people.so if u want to say u have the right to choose tell that to ur congress men or state official. as for obama people are just tryin to make it look like america made a mistake he has done things to help us and we had a full 8 years of a terrible president and i will be so as happy as ever when a obama fixes bush's mistakes. You can find full medical coverage at the lowest price from http://bit.ly/chE6zp . obama has to put up with the world judging his every move and trying to fix the mess we are in we are lucky anyone wants to be our president. STOP COMPLAINING AND GIVE HIM A BREAK. i wanna see one of yall do what he has done. some people are just so ignorant.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

And since when has gument ever been able to do what the private sector can do for less and more efficiently!
TY most people have seen your obama for the lie that he is. 6 of GWB 8 years were good, obama's 2007 congress is what "messed" everything up...

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Anyone who believes that there is efficiency in the private sector, especially in health care, has never really worked in the private sector. Or in health care.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Doctor Marcia Angell a teaching Professor of Medicine at Harvard University, the first woman editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and member of Physcians for a National Healthcare (PNHP) does not share the optimism expressed by the advocates of the "Public Option". To be specific Angell is on record as saying "any measure short of a Single Payer System is little more than Piece Meal Tinkering". That includes Obamacare Tyshawn.

Physcian Researchers within PNHP have found that mixed Public/Private Systems are doomed to failure. In such arrangements they have found the Public part of the system turns into a Dumping Ground for those of little means resulting in substandard care. While the Private part of the system gets to skim the cream of healthy participants. The scheme is nothing more than a set-up for disaster.

SINGLE PAYER NOW

Bob Marston

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Counting my 32% increase this year, I now pay more than the couple on Medicare.
And that's with a $5000 deductable!
Like Will, single, 60.
But even with a single pay system I think if you want more you could pay more and get it.
Money always talks.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Mat - How about an example of where gument is better than the private sector...

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

If by 'better' you mean 'turns larger profits' you probably have him screddawg.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

First off, guy, having other people pay for your healthcare is exactly what the current system is. Exactly. Not slightly, not just a bit. Exactly. You, and several thousand other people, send money to a company that then divvies up that money as needed to whomever goes to the doctor. If you don't go to the doctor, then you have just contributed money to someone else's bills.

Wow. That sounds like...no! It can't be! It isn't!

If you go to the doctor a lot, and other people in your plan don't then they have paid for your bills. See how that works?

The only difference between a public, single-payer, government run health care plan and the current system is that it would remove the profits from the system. That means that more people would get coverage. After all, you surely don't believe that insurance companies don't play funny games with you in order to keep from paying out. Right? After all, according to the logic of the free market, it is in a private insurance company's best interests to pay out as little as possible. That's what deductibles and copays are for: not to encourage people to think about overusing health care but to keep them from using it at all, unless they absolutely have to.

Five of the largest insurance companies posted profits of $12.2 billion dollars in 2009. Where is the bonus that we as a society received from that money? If that is the profit, then why are those same companies boosting premiums again this year?

The problem isn't that health care is expensive, the problem is that health care even exists inside the sphere or private, for profit enterprise which, by definition, seeks to maximize profit at any and all acceptable cost - even when people die (as long as the payouts from lawsuits don't cut into the profit margin *too* much).

Now, having said all of that I certainly understand the apprehension from a lot of people about allowing government to run anything. After all, the government does seem to be unable to do much of anything these days. That is in no small part due to a systematic dismantling and crippling of the functions of government of the last four decades by both Democratic and Republican policy makers. Both sides have equally and gleefully subcontracted out essential government functions (which, in turn, have been sub-sub-sub contracted out, resulting in sub-sub-sub-sub par returns) in the interests of forming a corporatist state that serves the people only in that it relieves them of the burden of living well.

From the repeal of Glass-Steagall to the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 on through the privatization of the US Military under G.W. Bush, this country has essentially been sold off to the highest bidder. And I don't think anyone can argue that this has been a good thing.

Almost every single policy and advancement that brought this nation out of recession and then out of a post-war shock in the fifties and sixties (and, let's be honest, every single thing that has allowed those of you over the age of fifty to post about how comfortable an existence you have and don't want to give up) has been reversed, neutered, and nullified by a new kind of mindset that teaches us that the power of the corporation is a Biblical Truth and that government is a (barely) necessary evil.

The result is a class of privileged people who dare to look down on the young, the poor, and the weak and say "Got mine. Fuck you." Especially when they got it from the exact same system of government run institutions they now want to destroy. It's reprehensible.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

My favorite is the people who say that those without health insurance who can't pay can go to the emergency room.

And just who do they think eventually DOES pay for that?

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Besides the people who still cling to the "America has the best health care in the world" lie, my second favorite is the people who say that those without health insurance who can't pay can go to the emergency room.

And just who do they think eventually DOES pay for that?

But back to the "best in the world" fantasy: we pay twice as much as other developed countries per capita per year for health care, have ridiculously unimpressive longevity and infant mortality, and the very states where opposition to health care reform is the loudest are the worst in terms of health care quality and accessibility. The Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook, The Commonwealth Fund, and United Health Foundation's "America's Health Rankings" attest to what I've just said.

But as long as the United Health and Wellpoint CEOs are among the highest paid executives in the country, those who perpetuate the lie will continue to do so. And millions of Americans will go on thinking, "Hey, they must be doing something right. No socialism for me!" It'd be funny were it not so sad.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

"After all, the government does seem to be unable to do much of anything these days. That is in no small part due to a systematic dismantling and crippling of the functions of government of the last four decades by both Democratic and Republican policy makers."
I think this is the answer any time market fanatics start arguing that government can't do anything right. Of course it can't-republicans and 'new' democrats (essentially, also republicans) have set about to dismantle the functions of government. It's circular logic.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Mr. Moredock,

You wrote, "Next year it will be introduced in the House and the Senate and we may have a public option before the 2012 election."

I guess you have your head buried in the sand and don't see the changing political tides. A public option being jammed through both houses of Congress might be possible if you still have a "speaker" Pelosi and a "majority leader" Reid. I wouldn't bet the farm (or even your health care premium) on that proposition. Still, I admire your optimism.

We should know whether that is reality or fantasy in 98 more days.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

I kind of like that, Guy, a choice of single payer plans with various deductibles.
HSA, by the way , stands for Heath Savings Account. You put money in, deduct it from your income, and spend it only on health related items.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

MAt,

Your response to Guy is essentially correct.

"First off, guy, having other people pay for your health care is exactly what the current system is. Exactly. Not slightly, not just a bit. Exactly. You, and several thousand other people, send money to a company that then divvies up that money as needed to whomever goes to the doctor. If you don't go to the doctor, then you have just contributed money to someone else's bills."

MAt, you have put your finger on the crux of the health care (and every other) problem with the phrase "having other people pay for your........"

Let's fill in the blank with that powerful observation.

Having other people pay for your:

1. Retirement (SSI)

2. Food (EBT, WIC)

3. Shelter (Public Housing, Section 8, 202)

4. Cellular Phone Service (SafeLink Wireless)

5. Digital TV Converters ($40 FCC coupons)

6. Electric Bills (LIHEAP)

7. Every other government service if you pay no taxes.

It's true that private insurance companies must decide who gets treatment and ultimately make choices that conform with their budget requirements. But a public option will only replace private sector bean counters denying treatment with public sector bean counters denying treatment.

In either case, there will always be horror stories about loved ones who were denied treatment or suffered poorer quality of life because someone else (government or private sector) would not pay!

I contend that the number of "horror stories" will go up with a public option, which is essentially a last/final/only option in the absence of robust competition.

Will anyone feel better hearing the word NO from a bureaucrat instead of a business man? At least with the insurance companies, we can choose which crooks we're dealing with. A public option will put an end to private insurance companies overnight, and when the gubment is the only game in town, who do you complain to then?

A real private sector model would look like this:

You need to have a broken arm fixed. You find a doctor and agree on a price. The doctor fixes your arm. You pay him for the service and supplies necessary to do the job. Just like taking your pet to the vet, or your car to the mechanic.

Let's say you don't have the money to pay the doctor, the veterinarian or the mechanic. You should look for ones who will barter with you. Cut their grass, paint their house, shingle their roof - whatever.

If you happen to be so unskilled as to be totally useless, then you must rely on the charity of others. Fabian Socialists believe that the habitually useless should get used to evaluating whether their contributions to society warrant their continued existence. A public option gets us one step closer to codifying that tenet via regulation and bureaucracy.

Another issue that many folks overlook when bitching about the costs of health care is the level of technology available to save lives. Everybody wants the "gold plan", which should cover every possible test, procedure and regimen known to modern medicine, but they don't want to pay for it.

Who doesn't want to fly first class and pay for coach?

What I do know is this:

Private sector businesses do provide higher quality products at lower prices than any government bureaucracy ever possibly can.

Who wants a government designed and produced Mac or iPad? How about a government designed and produced television (think Orwellian telescreens)?

It's all been tried before.

The Soviet Union produced everything from toothpaste to toilet paper for its citizens. The quality was poor, the quantity was few, and the costs (to its society) were great. Talk to new American citizens from former Soviet Bloc countries about any government provided (fill in the blank) item or service. It was all inferior to what we now take for granted.

Free societies have millions of salespeople trying to market the excesses of production (think outlet malls).

Socialist societies have millions of clerks rationing the shortages (think lines for bread, meat, vodka and yes, health care).

Above all, THINK!

; )

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Thanks for bringing to our attention that Europeon countries are rationing bread, meat, vodka and health care. I did not know that.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

"7. Every other government service if you pay no taxes."
Who are these people who pay no taxes? Unless in your mind the only tax that exists in America is the federal income tax.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

So, I guess that's one area where the government does better than private industry, huh?

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

No private sector could take care of criminals for less...

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

FCB,

You're welcome. Some people find it hard to believe.

Meat & Bread:

Reuters in October of 2009 reports:

"Countries like Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are struggling to feed their populations." "Rationing is common."

Vodka:

From ABC reports in 2007:

At the village of Krasnoe, only 65 kilometres south of Moscow, resident Valentino Tranunyia (phonetic) explains her lucky escape from poisoned liquor.

"I decided to throw it away," she says. "I poured it out on the ground and the stones began to sizzle."

She was nearly a victim of an epidemic of alcohol poisoning that has swept across Russia. They've been poisoned largely by home brew vodka laced with industrial alcohol - detergents, antifreeze, window cleaners and medicines.

In the city of Pskov in Russia's northwest, the victim count has reached the hundreds. Officials have declared a state of emergency.

Many blame the poisonings on a shortage of legitimate vodka caused by a new registration policy for alcohol products. It led to barren shelves in the alcohol sections of most supermarkets. Ironically, the new policy was designed to bring down the number of alcohol-related deaths.

Law makers have suggested that the state should take over the production of alcohol in Russia. They argue that would guarantee the quality of vodka and save people from drinking toxic substitutes. It would also bring in billions to the Government's coffers.

Health care:

Britain's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is the rationing board which provides the "death panel" decisions about who gets treatments.

Here's an article detailing what drugs and treatments are being rationed in our cousins single payer system:

http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:S…

I know it's hard for some folks to believe that shortages are common in socialist societies, but they seem to be the rule, rather than the exception to the rule.

Of course, the radicals will tell you that the reason the rest of the world has shortages is because 350 million Americans are consuming the bulk of the planets resources, and the leftovers won't take care of the other 6 billion people!

Yes, that must be the explanation.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Clearly, without the pestilence of socialism, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan would be economic powerhouses on the scale of, say, the US or China.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike