Skip to main content

View Diary: GOPer fund-raiser email has best arguments against HCR (86 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They're easily rebuttable objections, mostly (8+ / 0-)
    1. Yep, you're not allowed to minimize expenses by socializing your medical care onto the rest of us.  What if you said you wanted to minimize expenses by not installing sprinklers?  Same deal.
    1. That's why we have the current death spiral--viable insurance requires a varied pool of insured.  Keep in mind that all young and healthy people become old and not so healthy, so there's justice for all in a broad pool.
    1. The putative right to purchase junk insurance is outweighed by society's right not to be stuck with your health care once the junk aspect come into play, as it would if you got expensively sick.
    1. This is a foolish objection, since it's not rational to prefer a policy that fails to cover preventive care...unless you don't plan to have preventive care, which frankly is a form of self-abuse that it's within the legitimate scope of

    government to control.

    5. I think this objection is valid; I'd cut it back to 21.  Adulthood is adulthood, period.

    1. I don't understand this objection, honestly.  Insurance inherently covers a range of situations you don't expect to get into, or that you absolutely won't get into.  If the objection is the spreading of risk, that gets us back to #2.

    I'll stop now and pick up in a minute.

    Enrich your life with adverbs!

    by Rich in PA on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 07:15:31 PM PDT

    •  Think it over and get back. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jeff in nyc, doinaheckuvanutjob

      We get responses in good order, I'll put it in the pipeline to the campaign teams and state orgs.

      Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + Pro-Life Christians

      =EQ=

      The GOPer Base

      by vets74 on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 07:19:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  OK, let's continue (8+ / 0-)
      1. I don't understand this point (I mean I'm not well informed about it), but on first glance it sounds like if you want a bronze plan, you can have one...it's just not as tarnished and cheap a bronze plan as our Republican friend wants.
      1. I understand--you'd like to save money by offering an inferior plan.  That's precisely what the reform seeks to prevent--this isn't a bug, it's a defining element of the reform.  Stating this as an objection is, if not exactly depraved, at least a fundamental tone-deafness to why there's a constituency for health care reform.
      1. Um, yeah...if you want to claim a competitive advantage against other employers by spending less on your employees' health care and therefore immiserating them and socializing their care onto the government, we're going to make sure you don't do that much as we make sure you don't dump toxic waste or hire 12-year-old workers, etc.  I don't understand what the objection is, except that you want a race to the bottom in employee compensation.  
      1. I'm not sure what the current cap is--I know it's $5k for child care--but I'm not wedded to any specific figure.  I will say, however, that with a proper health insurance regime there should be less need for flexible health care accounts of this sort.
      1. I'm not really the one to comment on this because I think the fetishization of the doctor-patient relationship is stupid and destructive; it's a myth created by the AMA to wall doctors off from any accountability.  But I think that many people who do value the sanctity (blah blah blah) can rebut this point just fine.

      Time for a break...

      Enrich your life with adverbs!

      by Rich in PA on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 07:24:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks, Rich. (0+ / 0-)

        We got months.

        Clean up the HCR defense by 4th of July -- the GOPers get cut off at the knees.

        Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + Pro-Life Christians

        =EQ=

        The GOPer Base

        by vets74 on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 07:28:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Let's keep going (9+ / 0-)
        1. Read Atul Gawande's New York article about health care in McAllen, Texas.  Doctor-owned hospitals have unsalvageable conflicts of interest that produce inferior patient care and increased cost.  That's as certain as gravity, and there are no counterexamples.  The only reason the pre-2010 ones are grandfathered-in is the Takings Clause--they'd have to be compensated.
        1. Given the previous point, this is so completely sensible and obvious that it doesn't need to be defended.
        1. Insurance is a regulated industry.  There are many unregulated industries for people who prefer to operate in that kind of setting.
        1. This objection is the dogmatic objection to all taxation.  In this specific case, though, I think most Kossacks would trade away this taxation regime for drug reimportation.  The reason for the tax is to recoup excess profits caused by abusive differential pricing of the same product in the US vs elsewhere.
        1. See above.  We'll trade the tax for free reimportation of medical devices.
        1. Since we're seeing the same trope over and over, this time I'll skip to that last line.  With all due respect, are you nuts?  If there's one thing we've learned in recent years, it's that CEOs of health insurance companies have a very clear idea of what's the best way to spend their profits, and it's on themselves!  
        1. It's almost beyond belief that in 2010 someone's planning to campaign on the wisdom of corporate boards in how they compensate CEOs.  I wish you luck, because you're going to need it.
        1. This is, generically, higher taxes on the wealthy.  It's a core principle of our side of the political spectrum because we believe that government underwrites the conditions of private accumulation.  We also believe that government rather than charity should be the mediator of extreme disparities of wealth vs. poverty.  If someone would rather make less money to avoid the demons of taxation, they're welcome to that choice.  Of course, this never happens.
        1. That's a lot less than the hotel occupancy tax in my county.  What's your point?

        And so we end, not with a bang but a whimper.

        Enrich your life with adverbs!

        by Rich in PA on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 07:37:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thank you, man (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vets74

          I'm going to print this and keep it handy. It helps.

          "Take the victory and keep on marching"

          by SeattleProgressive on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 09:45:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  All these statements about what a company pays (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vets74

          aren't in the bill. There is no apportionment.

          These are figures over ten ears.

          Reason isn't important. Emotion is.

          "You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." - Rabbi Tarfon

          by samddobermann on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 05:01:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You know right-off which figures are ten-year... (0+ / 0-)

            totals ???

            I'm up for editing a full-blown counterattack on these arguments.

            Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + Pro-Life Christians

            =EQ=

            The GOPer Base

            by vets74 on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 11:14:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'll work on it. Also, since the employer mandate (0+ / 0-)

              excludes small firms (up to 15 IIRC) there will be no requirement for start up businesses to pay for anything. And the person starting a new business will be able to get insurance which they usually can't now. And they can know their employees will have insurance as they grow. And as a business it will be cheaper to provide it when it will be in the exchange at big group rates.

              In fact the availability to get insurance easily will lead to an upsurge in small business formation since, now, willing entrepreneurs are job locked into place.

              The bozo who wrote these just was surfing for phrases that could be used to sow fear. What a surprise.

              "You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." - Rabbi Tarfon

              by samddobermann on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 01:35:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Easy rebuttal to 11 (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        samddobermann, vets74, Rich in PA

        You mean, like insurance companies do now?

        Basically, their argument boils down to that it's better for someone in the market whose main purpose demontrably is to reduce the amount of money that company spends on you than it is for someone in government to potentially try to control the amount of money spent on you.

    •  You may think 5 is valid but it is very popular, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      samddobermann, vets74, skohayes

      kids just do not graduate from college at 21 like they used to and try getting a job in this economy.

      Raising the age limit is a big winner, I hope the Repubs run against HCR because that will play right to the Dems strengths.

    •  we have this too (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      samddobermann, joshc123, vets74
      1. I think this objection is valid; I'd cut it back to 21.  Adulthood is adulthood, period.

      with a limit of 25, but, only if dependant is a student.
      "Adulthood is adulthood" sounds great but can you really argue that a kid in college with on-and-off part-time jobs, accumulating student loan debts is truly capable to obtain coverage on his/her own?

      "It takes two to lie. One to lie, one to hear it." Homer Simpson

      by Euroliberal on Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 11:20:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  21 vs. 26 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        vets74

        I think this higher age limit is a subsidy to better-off families--it's regressive.  And if the reform overall doesn't make it possible for 21-26 year olds to get more affordable insurance, what's the point?  To me the higher age limit advertises the defects of the reform--it's saying that some adults are hopeless except through the largesse of their parents.

        Enrich your life with adverbs!

        by Rich in PA on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:09:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  graduate school. even Medical school! (0+ / 0-)

        "You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." - Rabbi Tarfon

        by samddobermann on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 01:37:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  They can't afford it, students in college, grad (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vets74

      school even Med school.

      "You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." - Rabbi Tarfon

      by samddobermann on Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:58:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (56)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Media (18)
  • Elections (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Labor (17)
  • Education (17)
  • GOP (16)
  • Law (16)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Economy (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site