Comments on: I don’t actually recall having any debate

By: I don’t actually recall having any debate « The United States of Jamerica

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:35:45 +0000

[...] I don’t actually recall having any debate 2009 November 16 tags: health care reform by Jamelle (Originally posted at the League of Ordinary Gentlemen) [...]

By: Kyle

Kyle — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:25:32 +0000

Isn’t it possible that you’re overstating your case a little bit. I mean, sure the GOP is distorting facts but considering the widely varying number of the uninsured in this country or the it’s not a tax only a penalty levied exactly like a tax it’s not as though Democrats’ collective hands are entirely clean. Admittedly, they’re less bloody.

More to the point, sure even if we were to find grand agreement between the parties on the number of and plight of the uninsured. There would still be a debate between Democrats demanding to unleash the power of the federal ~~purse~~ government to help people ~~in 2013~~ right now and Republicans calling this ill-timed generational theft.

It’s entirely possible that one could agree on the necessity of reform and problems of our current system but fear that this will only make corporate/special interests more powerful, support the severely flawed model of employer-provided coverage we have, and amounts to fiscal imprudence. With that view, in the long run, it would make things worse. However, that view is indistinguishable from, healthcare will be worse because it will involve Marxist death panels.

If so, the major flaw in the poll – as cited by Jaybird – is not that it exists or imperfectly gives us a picture of where the American people are but that the vagueness of better and worse can only give us an imperfect picture of anxiety and confidence.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:15:47 +0000

Do you not also worry about why it has to be one bill? Why not have a bill related to the interstate sale of health insurance? Then maybe a bill related to tort reform? Another related to perverse tax incentives?

The only reason we really have bills this size, is because the party in power approaches this issue with the answer of government control (Republicans do the same). It is easier to expand that control, and strongarm advocates of certain concession into voting for a bill ten times the necessary size. If they refuse you can call them baby killers, and racist, and shills for the rich who are against reform based on one amendment or another of that bill.

Americans in general need a more visceral negative reaction to the statement “Congress passed the 2000 page health care bill today.”

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:54:37 +0000

Statutes modify the United States Code. IIRC, the code is divided into topical sections. I think you can wipe and replace.

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:51:32 +0000

Funny, the contract of my insurance plan is 43 pages long.

By: ThatPirateGuy

ThatPirateGuy — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:41:56 +0000

In Nevada the number one reason people don’t vaccinate their children is cost. I learned that while I was at the amazing meeting this july. We had a fund raiser to help correct that problem. I invite you to look into the problem and if you have a few spare dollars you can donate at http://www.nvhealthcenters.org/donations.cfm.

By: E.D. Kain

E.D. Kain — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:41:04 +0000

Fun.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:45:27 +0000

Co-pays can be a good thing. They can stop people from coming in and wasting the doctor’s time. My wife saw it all the time when she worked for a peds practice that took a lot of SCHIP cases. They had folks that wanted to bring their kid/s in almost every week and could cause Uncle Sugar was paying for it. They also had a good looking black male doctor and many single mommies liked to bring their kids into him all the time. The unintended consequence of making the visit free was to have folks abuse it b/c they didn’t have to pay for it. Welcome to the real world.

By: Jaybird

Jaybird — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:43:27 +0000

If the difference of the co-pay is what keeps more than 1% of the people out there who have to this point avoided vaccinations from getting one, I’d be shocked.

Not Claude Raines “shocked shocked” either, but shocked.

By: ThatPirateGuy

ThatPirateGuy — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:35:42 +0000

You mean like my premiums. I see your point and I see where you are coming from. I just wanted to make sure that the bill says what I thought it said.
The problem with the co-pays is that they encourage people to wait or not get preventive care. Which as most of us in the healthcare debate know is NOT guaranteed to lower costs. On the other hand it does improve health. Anything we can do to lower the rate of un-vaccinated people is a huge win for society and the individuals involved.