Skip to main content

Im sick of all the flat out bullshit being preached about health insurance on dailykos from the frontpage to the diaries. Sick of markos sudden change from committed activist to wouldbe kingmaker. Sick of people who know absolutely Nothing about economics or health insurance spewing mealymouthed drivel about how we should support this bill/bills we havent seen because it/the dont exist yet. Sick of people spouting bullshit about how forcing someone who cant pay car insurance should pay 2% of their income to Aetna/BCBS for a product to be determined later with a premium that can change at the whim of big insurance is "wonderful"

Honestly im sick of it all. I recently quit trucking folks.. and im going back. In the meanwhile i spent the last 6 months working for.. a health insurance company. One of the biggest in the country. And yes i DO happen to see what goes on in the bowels. Now to be fair let me straighten out some misconceptions:

"Insurance companies and their employees are evil"
Just about everyone ive met or worked with in this company.. and because of my job im in contact with a stunning number of them. .are good people. Theyre people who want people to have health insurance.

"PREX is the problem! If we get rid of prex..". Um folks on most policies, in states where the government isnt flat out corrupt pre-x doesnt keep you from getting insurance. On the other hand if youve never had insurance, develop leukemia and sign up the next day expecting the company to pay for any future expenses you're delusional. Insurance is a shared risk pool and if you only want in when you can leech .. take a long walk off a..

Now heres the deal on insurance. 50% of americans could only Ever afford the cheapest , most useless insurance out there. Premiums on the low end from 250 a month for coverage that doesnt cover anything to over 2500 a month for insurance that will probably cover most things. Median for a single, hmo or ppo policy is probably 500ish. How many single moms you think can afford that? How many of the minimum wage employees in this country do you think can afford that? (and a two class system is where we're headed at light speed folks).

But this bill will cut premiums right? Save money? Um no. The latest CBO figures suggest we might cut the deficit by (median) 35b a year. Seriously? Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

Folks the US spent approximately.. wait for it..
$2,509,000,000,000 dollars

And you think this bill will change that? Rather than insurance companies having to worry they'll lose too many customers if they increase rates 50% a year instead of 30%
we will, at the barrel of a gun, require americans to pay the Big Healthcare Tithe.

This is your solution? This is what we should support?

Im sorry but im damned sick of the sycophants. Im damned tired of the ignorant. Im damn tired of good, no great people like Markos deciding whats really important is politics. And that the 67yo fucking woman i had to tell was FUCKED because her medigap premiums doubled in 2010 is just a sad little microtragedy. Im damn tired of telling people "Im sorry your INDIVIDUAL single policy went from 1000 a month to 1400 a month". Im damned tired of telling business owners "IM sorry but you were late on the $20,000 bill for your 18 employees too many times this year we'll need 6 months premiums in advance to cover you now". IM damned tired of telling people who are unemployed because theyre too fucking sick to keep a job that if they dont pay TODAY they'll be cancelled.

Im fucking tired of it and im tired of you unthinking, ignorant political cheerleaders telling people we have to vote for this SHIT for the "parties sake" or because "well nothing is worse" or whatever your nitwit talking points are at the moment.

Folks without single payer.. the first step of which is the public option.. this is nothing but a big handout to corporate health-care-denial corporations and big pharma.

Originally posted to cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:07 PM PST.

Poll

Over the top?

35%32 votes
45%41 votes
16%15 votes
2%2 votes

| 90 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Any Diary (26+ / 0-)

      ... which uses negativity and attacks on others to make certain points is, as you well know, not going to be received well on this blog.

      If you have certain deeply-held beliefs, why not take a positive approach and try to persuade people.  Most people I know react well to gentle persuasion rather than to a hammer-like approach to winning friends.  

      Accentuate the positive, my friend.

      •  Thanks for the post Jekyl (11+ / 0-)

        but honestly.. there are others far better at "leading through persuasion".. far better writers. I had to rant because frankly im burned out on the disinformation and complete bs around this.  The whole issue is baked feet deep in bs.

        The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

        by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:42:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm burned out on this too (10+ / 0-)

          What ever they do they will need to begin fixing it the day after it's passed.

          look for my DK Greenroots diary series Wednesday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

          by FishOutofWater on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:46:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Intellectually, Many People (8+ / 0-)

          ... would agree with you on the substance of the policy issues you raise out of frustration.  Believe me, that sense of frustration is widely shared.

          And, yes, there is a lot of disinformation and propaganda swirling around on Healthcare Reform.  On that, we agree.  The overwhelming number of people here would be on your side when it comes to Single Payer vs something else.  If Congress were just starting afresh on discussing this issue and you conducted a poll, I bet you 70%-80% (or more) would favor Single Payer.  If the Public Option becomes a reality, who is to say we can't eventually get to Single Payer.

          One of these days I'm going to write a long diary on how and why it took Great Britain almost sixty years to get their National Health Service system.  

          Like it or not, progress is incremental in democracies though that shouldn't deter anyone from fighting for their beliefs in a constructive manner.

          •  Welll (7+ / 0-)

            You're waiting on what
            One of these days I'm going to write a long diary on how and why it took Great Britain almost sixty years to get their National Health Service system.  

            the problem with this bill isnt incrementalism. We can all think of 1000 fixes that if the bill contained ONLY that we'd be cheerleading the bill for.

            The problem with this bill is it in effect grants the right to tax at will to private corporations.

            The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

            by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:15:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's a Question of Time (4+ / 0-)

              As it is, in addition to myself writing other diaries and participating in diaries written by others through comments, it takes forever and a major effort to write my weekly diary -- The Week in Editorial Cartoons -- which, of late, I haven't had the time to write but every two to three weeks.

              The power of insurance companies will only decrease over time until the entire Healthcare Reform effort moves the system towards a Single Payer system. Moreover, what you're asking for is structural change when I've always contended that domestic politics, by definition, is irrational.  Policy actions in the domestic sphere are always subject to pressure from this or that interest group, which is far less the case in implementing foreign policy.  Comparatively speaking, international politics (something I know a thing or two about as I studied it for almost a decade) is largely rational.  You can take the most egregious of actions and rationalize them on the international, state, or individual levels, at least on a theoretical level.  

              If you read Harry Reid's letter to Mitch McConnell yesterday, much of the disinformation about this HCR effort has come from the Republican Party.  I think the letter outlines measures to reduce the corrosive influence of the insurance industry.  

              Let's see what the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Reps come up with over the next few weeks when HCR will, one way or the other, emerge in its final form before we condemn it.    

          •  BS. We've already 70 years or so years behind (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cdreid

            most other 'advanced' countries, tens of thousands of Americans are dying each year from lack of insurance, millions are going bankrupt and not only do the Democrats go with small incrementalism, it's incrementalism in the wrong F*cking direction - excuse my inability to put a happyface spin on  it.

            It's incrementalism that let's the 'free market' continue to call the shots and gives them even more power, that doesn't even get the government's toe in the door. It says big money is everything and calls the shots. It continues the erosion of our democracy and middle class. It says a big 'screw you" to the American citizens by the their elected representatives and   that "the lobbyists are our true constituency". It says we will bombard those who critize us with lies, smears, and propaganda nonstop until they stfu and swallow the medicine like good obedient girls and boys.

            Don't let the awful be the enemy of the horrifically bad.

            by virtual0 on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 12:41:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  What's The Fucking Positive (9+ / 0-)

        Of the biggest Democratic ruling majority in a generation giving us the shitty 1994 Republican Party health care plan?

    •  I tipped you, because for the most (5+ / 0-)

      part, you are right.

      But I also support this health care bill.  We have to at start somewhere, and this is a good start.  Why?  Because we move the game from health care as a privilege, to health care as a right, and that is something we cannot pass on.  No doubt will have to revisit HCR in the very near future.

      As for health insurance companies employees, you are completely right.  They are good people working for a living.  Most realize that its the big wigs making 20 million a year while folks with health problems are being pushed of the private insurance rolls.

      Expose the lies. Fight for the truth. Push progressive politics. Save our planet. Health care is a right, not a privilege.

      by lighttheway on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:28:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So put a line in the bill (11+ / 0-)

        that  requires insurance companies to recieve approval by a vote of the full congress each year to recieve an increase as well as increase subsidies and you and i are on the same team.

        Otherwise im baffled as to what will stop them from increasing 30% a year ..

        The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

        by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:43:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  They will raise rates cdreid (0+ / 0-)

          But think about this: when they raise rates most folks will need (and meet the requirement for) a subsidy, right?

          With the govt paying out so much, at that point it becomes truly a budget issuse. (you know where I'm going with this...).  The govt will nit be able to decrease benefits (the people won't go backward once they've gotten used to access to care) and raising premiums will also not be an option. But what will be an option is a Medicare buy in or a public plan.  And because it is strictly and truly a budget issue it can and will be addressed with a simple majority vote.

          Hang on. I feel your frustration.  But if the insurance companies behave the way we know they will and human nature re: entitlements doesn't somehow change from through the course of history, and we can hold the senate, we'll have a PO sooner than later--how soon depends on how quickly greedy the insurance companies are. :)

          Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe. h/t MeteorBlades

          by mdmslle on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 04:54:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So your suggestion (0+ / 0-)

            is that because bighealthcare is going to rip us off SO HARD they'll bankrupt the nation eventually we'll get real reform?
            Honestly.
            Um theyve already done that. THIS is our "big fix". And this big fix is.. turning over the treasury to private corporations..

            The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

            by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 07:37:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  It's A Human Right (3+ / 0-)

        To be fined by the state if you don't buy a product from a private entity?

        To think 'ole Tom Jefferson left that one off the list in the original.

      •  This bill does not make healthcare a right (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cdreid

        no matter how you spin it. It makes healthcare a commodity that noone but the wealthy will truly be able to afford.

        Don't let the awful be the enemy of the horrifically bad.

        by virtual0 on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 12:48:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  i got a little sick halfway thru your spiel (0+ / 0-)

      but everyone's different...carry on

      repent, amarillo! listen up, lubbock! you're next!

      by memofromturner on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:48:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm debating about rec'ing this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      churchylafemme

      On the one hand, I agree with much of what you're saying. Like this...

      Im fucking tired of it and im tired of you unthinking, ignorant political cheerleaders telling people we have to vote for this SHIT for the "parties sake" or because "well nothing is worse" or whatever your nitwit talking points are at the moment.

      Folks without single payer.. the first step of which is the public option.. this is nothing but a big handout to corporate health-care-denial corporations and big pharma.

      But you also stuck in one thing that I kinda had to do a double-take on...

      On the other hand if youve never had insurance, develop leukemia and sign up the next day expecting the company to pay for any future expenses you're delusional. Insurance is a shared risk pool and if you only want in when you can leech .. take a long walk off a..

      The tone of that, esp. the "if you only want in when you can leech", doesn't sound at all like the rest of the diary. I guess my question is, is the "leech" part YOUR opinion, or are you saying that's how the insurance companies look at it? I hope it's the latter.

      "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." -- Noam Chomsky

      by ratmach on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:56:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I meant what i said (0+ / 0-)

        Maybe 1% of the population honestly believes that insurance companies are evil because they have Never had insurance, catch something Expensive , and believe they should be able to sign up today and have their pre-existing condition covered for $$$$$$$$$. The thinking is bizarre. There are no magic money fountains.

        This is how insurance works:
        Everybody pays in. When something goes wrong for one.. the pool pays to aleviate that. Those who dont pay in have no rights.

        Thats why Everyone has to be in the pool. And the most effective model in history is Medicaid. Despite the heelnipping rwtp by some in this thread (not you)

        The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

        by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 07:46:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Please go back to FDL (2+ / 4-)
    Recommended by:
    Wufacta, ajr111240
    Hidden by:
    Larry Bailey, tassojunior, nandssmith, virtual0

    we don't want your kind around here.

  •  Do you have health insurance? (0+ / 0-)

    If health insurance companies are so evil why buy from them and why work for them? Oh wait a minute, it is good enough for you but not for 30 million Americans who need health insurance and want it. How cute.

  •  perhaps campaign finance reform (12+ / 0-)

    is the real target. When politics are competitive, money speaks, unless it is neutered. If capitalistic, representative democracy is discredited, there is the danger of the rise of a Caesar.

  •  I'm sick of you and this shit diary (1+ / 2-)
    Recommended by:
    dadanation
    Hidden by:
    happy camper, nandssmith

    Go away.

  •  Stopped in my tracks here (7+ / 0-)

    Sick of people who know absolutely Nothing about economics or health insurance spewing mealymouthed drivel about how we should support this bill/bills

    Krugman supports the bill. I think he knows something about economics.

    As for the rest of your rant, it reeks of nothing more than blowhardism, condascension and raw invective.

  •  I'm beginning to think that we are so far (13+ / 0-)

    past the point where single-payer was the optimal solution that perhaps nothing short of nationalizing the whole damn health care industry will produce the desired effect: UHC, improved quality, and lower aggregate costs.

    "Dulled conscience, irresponsibility, and ruthless self-interest already reappear. Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster!" FDR - 1937

    by Marie on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:25:54 PM PST

    •  Universal (9+ / 0-)

      access to mediare. Problem solved. 100% coverage for exactly the amount we are currently paying nationally for healthcare.

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:29:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Excuse me but have you looked at the cost (3+ / 0-)

        figures for Medicare?  >$10,000/beneficiary.  That's with government capping of reimbursement rates.  Anyone that has seriously looked at Medicare has to have stumbled on the fact that many beneficiaries struggle to pay their deductibles and co-pays.  The rot in the US health care system is much deeper and wider than any insurance scheme can fix.    

        "Dulled conscience, irresponsibility, and ruthless self-interest already reappear. Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster!" FDR - 1937

        by Marie on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:38:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's 7,000, and that's for the current (7+ / 0-)

          beneficiaries, the most expensive pool in the country.

          'cause you know that you can't change shit by ridin' the fence... The Coup

          by JesseCW on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:48:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And in the meantime, I'm paying (7+ / 0-)

            $1,000 a month to an insurance company for insurance I have never used.

          •  Roughly 45 million beneficiaries (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens

            and costs $450 million/year.  (That's from the Dept of Treasury report.)  That works out to $10,000 each.

            The $7,000 that you're referencing is the per capita cost for health care in the US.  Approximately $2.4 trillion divided by 300 million.  Of course, that per capita figure is a bit misleading because tens of millions are getting little to no care at all.

            "Dulled conscience, irresponsibility, and ruthless self-interest already reappear. Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster!" FDR - 1937

            by Marie on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:20:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think you mean 450 Billion not million? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JesseCW

              And this pool is the oldest and sickest, except for those that the VA treats at a lower cost per capita.
              More than 80% of health care dollars are spent by this 1/8th of the population.

              Giving health care to the other 87% would cost an average of about 2000 per head.  

              Or we can use a rate near Canada's and Britain 4000 per head. That would put health care expenditures at 1.2 Trillion a year.  

              To Goldman Sachs in according to their desires, From us in accordance with the IRS.

              by Bluehawk on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 08:41:08 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  MEdicare (3+ / 0-)

          is by law forbidden to negotiate drug costs. Unlike every insurance company in america. Yet medicare is still multiple times as efficient as the insurance industry. 3% vs 27% overhead????

          If you want magic fluffy clounds .. cant help you. If you want to solve the problem though you simply allow every american access to medicare, remove the caps, and eliminate the big pharma bought law that guarantees them a siphon into the .fed trough.

          The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

          by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:27:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The trade-off: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cdreid, nippersdad

            Private health insurance companies figure that the cost of managing the medical services that their customers request approval for is cheaper than leaving that up to the patients and physicians.  Medicare uses the alternative approach; low administrative costs (that 3% figure is good PR but hasn't been documented) but high claims volume.  If you haven't read it, Atul Gawande in "The Cost Conundrum" covered Medicare in McAllen, TX.  Good reporting but his recommendations are uninspired and pretty much useless.

            If I were looking for a magical solution, the Obama fantasy of HCR is as good as any other.  What I'm sick of is the conflation of health care with health insurance.  UHC can be delivered without health insurance.  The UK does it and so do VA hospitals.  We could do more to improve the aggregate level of health in this country by simply establishing free primary care health clinics sufficient to care for a third to half the population.  Refine the "Healthy SF" program and nobody need be left out.  The kicker is that those two changes would cost no more, and possibly less than the government currently spends on health care for the poor and uninsured.  

            "Dulled conscience, irresponsibility, and ruthless self-interest already reappear. Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster!" FDR - 1937

            by Marie on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:00:00 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Single-payer with price and wage controls, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Marie, 3goldens

      ...only pay standard pricing for salaried staff and penalize fee-for-service, negotiate prices for standard formulary, devices, and supplies...these kinds of integrated, fundamental market controls would start to seriously reduce the percent GDP spent on health care and reform the practice into vocations instead of corporate medicine. Drive pharma, device, and technology R&D investments only from clinical and academic agenda instead of commercial and profits.  

      HR 676 - Health care reform we can believe in - national single-payer NOW.

      by kck on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:33:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good "there" but getting (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kck

        from "here" is the tough part.  Half or more of the providers and hospitals have built their operations around a different model.  Irrational exuberance wasn't limited to the housing market.  Imposing wage and price controls on providers and hospitals that will result in huge number of bankruptcies and closing of those facilities could be a cure worse than the cause.

        The other significant hurdle is funding and allocation.  Let's not kid ourselves, white, middle-class America expects better and not equal treatment with working-class America.    

        "Dulled conscience, irresponsibility, and ruthless self-interest already reappear. Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster!" FDR - 1937

        by Marie on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:23:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If/when we have the will we have a way (0+ / 0-)

          An already successful, road tested, scalable, sustainable, affordable, managable way (it has all of the "...abilities").

          Cheap comfort.

          HR 676 - Health care reform we can believe in - national single-payer NOW.

          by kck on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 08:12:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Let me tell you this (6+ / 0-)

    I am sick of people who judge me. Pre-ex does happen. How I know? Because both my husband and I fing have them. I am sorry that my husband fing lost his job and the insurance that went with it. I am sorry that when he gets a new one that will not get insurance that will cover anything related to what we have. You are telling me that your company would cover a diabetic who developed a ulcer and had to have 160K in surgeries because of it last fall. Your telling me my husband with a stint and 3 other blockages in his heart is going to be covered. I couldn't even get my then 1 year old daughter covered because she grew a benign tumor that had to be removed. I am sick of it. Honestly i don't care how long you have been here because when it comes down to it you are wrong. I am sorry.

    I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

    by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:29:13 PM PST

    •  Wow lets do this (7+ / 0-)

      First: WITH universal single payer/public option you wouldnt even be worried about this. It would not be an issue as you would be covered. People like me WANT you covered. The supporters of "the worlds biggest big healthcare handout"... well if you're a necessary casualty then so be it.

      As to your situation while i empathise...

      A: Cobra?
      b: ARRA ?
      Why arent you on one? Both?

      And yes my insurance company is required to cover you but no if you dropped insurance they wouldnt.. for the first year.. and you would expect a private company to?

      Im sorry for your situation. But you're telling me that you dropped your insurance and when your husband gets a new job that insurance company is supposed to take on the liability? If we had Universal single payer.. this wouldnt be a problem and you'd be talking about how well your doctors took care of you.

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:34:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  When I lost my employer-based insurance... (5+ / 0-)

        ...when I got laid off?  It cost over $300/mo to maintain the level of service.  And in the secondary job I had, I was making $300 every two weeks.  I know people who were on COBRA that were paying $1200/mo.

        If you have $200,000 stowed away, COBRA's freaking great.

        If you make $600 a month, it's a pain in the ass.

        But see, that's the choice some of us had to make.  Pay the car insurance, or Blue Cross?  Put food on table, or Blue Cross?  If Blue Cross is going to take half your menial check--or 3/4ths of it--what do you suppose we will choose?  Blue Cross?  Or going fucking hungry?

        As for "if we had single-payer"; the fact of the matter is, we don't.  "If" isn't going to do anyone any good right now in that predicament.  "If" doesn't solve the problem, and unfortunately the issue is so far past "if", you can't see it in the rearview mirror.

        Everyone is trying to accomplish something big, not realizing that life is made up of little things.

        by vcthree on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:42:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  This bill isnt going to make things better (4+ / 0-)

          Ive seen your situation a hundred times. Your post made it seem as if Pre-x was barring your husband from treatment. It wasnt. Health insurance was. Thats the system the senate bill wants to force every american into at the barrel of a gun. And theres not a damn thing in the bill to stop them from continuing to send rates through the roof.. or to stop them from finding an excuse to deny treatment. And you know that.

          Theres only one solution to yoru problem. The one that works in every CIVILISED nation on earth. Universal national healthcare. Not a tithe to big insurance.

          The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

          by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:50:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  That won't change (4+ / 0-)

          You will still be required to pay for insurance, even when unemployed - one big difference is that you will be fined if you don't.

          Yes, there will be some subsidy for those who make below a certain threshold, but even while on unemployment, you may not end up with an income below that threshold (depending on what they allow you to deduct, when they calculate the subsidy, which I haven't seen spelled out anywhere, so I'm not sure). You may have to spend a percentage of your unemployment on insurance, and the insurance you get will cover the bare minimum, with no limits on co-pays or deductibles, and the insurer can still play games (other than using the "pre-existing condition" excuse) to deny care that you really thought would be covered.

          •  A lot of good that's going to do: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            soms, nandssmith

            Fining people who have $0.0 in bank accounts and can't get UI.  Like yours truly.

            Everyone is trying to accomplish something big, not realizing that life is made up of little things.

            by vcthree on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:59:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  this has been debunked (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            soms

            over and over. I am sorry but this has been debunked, and I am not going to go into talking points again.

            I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

            by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:02:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Please link to the debunking (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              cdreid, churchylafemme

              (not being facetious, I haven't seen it.)

              •  I have seen you around (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                skohayes

                and you have never been facetious. I am sorry if I sounded rude. I am trying to find the opt out if you can't afford it link. But I found this

                fact check

                Assistance with Health Care Costs
                 Premium Assistance Tax Credits
                o Effective 2014, premium assistance tax credits will limit the amount an individual spends on their health care premium for the essential benefits package from two percent at 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) to 9.8 percent of income at 300-400 percent of the FPL. The amount of the credit is tied to the premium of the second-lowest cost (silver) plan in each area.
                 Cost-sharing Reductions
                o Provides credits to reduce the amount of cost-sharing for lower-income individuals. Their annual out-of-pocket limits would be a fraction of the standard amount: one-third for those with income below 200 percent of the FPL, 50 percent for those with income from 200 to 300 percent of the FPL, and two-thirds for those with income from 300 to 400 percent of the FPL.
                 Lower Premiums
                o The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will also require premium rate reviews to track any arbitrary premium increases and crack down on excessive insurance overhead by applying standards to how much insurance companies can spend on non-medical costs, such as bureaucracy and advertising.
                o State-based Exchanges will help eligible individuals and small employers compare and purchase health care coverage at competitive prices online.
                Access to Medicaid Benefits
                 Expansion for Lowest-income Individuals
                o To ensure that low-income individuals and families receive the benefits they need, effective 2014, individuals and families with income at or below 133 percent of poverty ($14,403 for an individual in 2009) will be eligible for Medicaid, regardless of the state in which they live.
                o Individuals and families who are eligible for Medicaid will not have to pay premiums to enroll and are subject to only nominal cost-sharing requirements.

                Q: Republicans say health insurance reform will impose a new tax on Americans. Is that true?
                 Right now, Americans pay a hidden tax over $1,100 because of a flawed and broken system. By requiring everyone to have health insurance, this legislation will combat that tax.
                 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a net tax cut for low and middle income families. In fact, many families will see an increase in wages as employers make more responsible health insurance choices.

                ok here is the waiver referal

                Shared Responsibility: Beginning in 2014, most individuals will be required to maintain minimum essential coverage or pay a penalty of $95 in 2014, $350 in 2015, $750 in 2016 and indexed thereafter; for those under 18, the penalty will be one-half the amount for adults. Exceptions to this requirement are made for religious objectors, those who cannot afford coverage, taxpayers with incomes less than 100 percent FPL, Indian tribe members, those who receive a hardship waiver, individuals not lawfully present, incarcerated individuals, and those not covered for less than three months.

                sorry I was so slow in response. I stink the edit stuff on comments.

                I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

                by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 09:11:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Thank you! (0+ / 0-)

                  I appreciate the info, and I can totally understand the exasperation. People are feeling very tense these days for any number of reasons. :-)

                  Unfortunately, in our family (both parents unemployed, only one eligible for unemployment), we still earn just enough that the proposal would be pretty expensive.

                  50 percent for those with income from 200 to 300 percent of the F[ederal] P[overty] L[evel]

                  Which would be about $1700k/yr (extrapolating to 3.9% of income for 200% of FPL), plus 50% of our out-of-pocket, which if we looked at last year's actual out of pocket payments would be another $4k (though, hopefully next year would be less expensive). And we didn't even have anything particularly expensive happen, just braces and some routine stuff. For a grand total of $5700.

                  That's about 7% of our unemployment "income," from which we still have to pay the same bills we incurred when we had significantly more income.

                  Perhaps if the poverty level were changed to reflect reality, instead of the currently suppressed value, it would be less burdensome - especially for the unemployed middle class. Unfortunately, changes to the calculation of inflation over many decades have forced cost of living adjustments for poverty level calculations to artificially (and obscenely) low levels....

                  •  apply for a hardship waiver (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mataliandy

                    and I got the same issue in that we have only unemployment, until something breaks, dear god let something break.

                    Exceptions to this requirement are made for religious objectors, those who cannot afford coverage, taxpayers with incomes less than 100 percent FPL, Indian tribe members, those who receive a hardship waiver, individuals not lawfully present, incarcerated individuals, and those not covered for less than three months.

                    I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

                    by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 11:52:58 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  OT: I'd like to ask a favor (0+ / 0-)

                      Yesterday, you put a HR on this comment.  The commenter has since apologized (see this thread), and as you can plainly see, has changed the sig line to correct the error.  As such, it's not worth the nearly 100 (peaked at 103) HRs that are sitting on it.

                      We all make mistakes sometimes - I think it's the right thing to do to uprate the comment now.

                      (You don't have any email on your user page, thus the public communication attached to your most recent comment.)

                      Grab all the joy you can. (exmearden, 8/30/09)

                      by Land of Enchantment on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 12:19:14 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

      •  my cobra was 400 dollars a month (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cdreid, soms, nandssmith

        i have 1536 in bills and 1596 coming in. I tell you what you pay the 400 dollars for me.

        I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

        by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:53:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  He's saying your husband still won't get care (8+ / 0-)

      with this bill.

      Insurance companies have a million ways to deny care, and the "pre-existing condition" clause is only one of the mechanisms they use. Eliminating it will just make them switch to using different mechanisms.

      People without "pre-existing conditions" are denied care all the time. Insurance companies are basically big law firms, with an additional staff that is paid to prevent money from going out the door using multiple-choice decision-tree computer programs, coded to ensure the maximum possible carrion to vulture ratio. Vultures, after all, prefer to be well fed.

      In for-profit "un-surance," profit-seeking will always have higher priority than customer health. For-profit companies are legally required to put their fiduciary duty to their shareholders before any other considerations. If you are not a shareholder, your value to the insurer is only as a cash-infusion-pump. There is a reason they call paying for care "medical loss."

      •  You know there is a saying (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soms

        bird in the hand over 2 in the bush. Guess what, IT ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. No matter how right it is. How much we scream, yell, and jump up and down. I AM SORRY BUT IT IS A GROWN UP WORLD, and in a grown up world the right doesn't always ride into the sun set. I will take what I get and push for more. I will push every day, but I know right now I will take the jumping off point. If your thinking that the only way to get what you want is what you have shown through this diary then you are unrealistic.

        I don't care what you do in your beds, just keep your hand out of my pocket.

        by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:58:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  BTW mom (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bluehawk

      It is extremely likely that your husbands future group insurance wont have Pre-x on it. Thats the norm actually.

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:19:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  So things are so freaking horrible right now (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms, the mom in the middle

    that the best thing we can do is sink the Senate bill in hopes that somehow that gets us closer to the liberal Shangri La of single payer...  Maybe if the Repubs are lucky we'll settle for the Public Option?  Because it's so obvious that if only single payer were put to a senate vote it would easily pass and be the law of the land right?

    Snap out of it.  Things are horrible with the current system and if we don't take the Senate bill and some basic fixes don't fool yourself into thinking single payer or the public option is just around the corner.  We'll be stuck right where we are for at least the next decade before Democrats try to fix it again.

    The notion that people who can't afford car insurance will be forced to buy Aetna insurance is complete bunk.  Under the Senate plan, anyone who can't afford car insurance will be subsidized.  I don't like the thought of tax dollars bailing out your boss... but it's a step forward compared to the current system of them jacking up rates and only insuring healthy people.  

    I am the neo-con nightmare, I am a liberal with the facts.

    by bhfrik on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:33:15 PM PST

    •  My post is 100% accurate. (6+ / 0-)

      Get your information from the CBO rather than DK and you'll discover that. Under the senate bill there will be subsidies (which will come from taxes btw).. but those covered will be in general required by law to pay 2% to 8% of their income.

      Whereas the senate bill wont stop rate increases, wont stop a race to the bottom. It is nothing but a legally mandated tithe to big isnurance.

      As for shangrila .. you're opposed to liberal shangrilas like Medicare, Medicade, Unemployment compensation, workers comp, the right to unionise, civil rights? Should we have accepted "compromises" on those too? Maybe if in alabama we had compromised and accepted "black only buses" in exchange for abandoning the civil rights laws?

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:38:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I didn't say I was opposed to singlepayer (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cdreid, soms

        I'm just grounded in reality enough to realize that we are not going to get closer to it by destroying the current bill.  Seriously... do you think if we help Republicans take the bill down right now that the next step is single payer/public option/medicare for all or anything that makes sense?  

        But nice try, trying to make me anti civil rights, union, unemployment blah blah blah.  Using your approach Social Security would never have come into existence. Liberals would have sunk the initial bill because it was incremental and didn't cover everybody.  Civil rights would never have gotten off the ground for liberals demanding complete victory from the very beginning rather than doing what we could get done as we proceeded.  

        If the solution is single payer (and I think we all agree on that)  how do we get there?  I don't see giving the radical right a victory on this as a step in the right (correct) direction.

        I am the neo-con nightmare, I am a liberal with the facts.

        by bhfrik on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:49:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  There are subsidies in this bill (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cdreid, hoolia, jaywillie, mike101, soms

    and we begin to regulate the health insurance companies, and start to reward results not procedures.

    I have decided to support the bill because I thought that when the economy collapsed people would have egged the Rethugs.

    Did not happen and people still take them seriously. Big wake up call for me.

    So.....I concluded that big health corporations must be reckoned with, they are that powerful. So we (try) to phase them out, and (try) to care for as many people as we can.

    Of course I may be wrong, but the default position is not the "status-quo" the default position is it will continue to get much worse before it gets better if we do nothing.

    I cannot do that to people, so I would rather err on the side of change than err on the side of a degrading status quo.

    It is our money they want, so let's not give it to them. - Mean Mr. Mustard

    by Mean Mr Mustard on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:36:02 PM PST

  •  Life, a pre-existing condition (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, Abra Crabcakeya

    "If religion is the opiate of the masses, then fundamentalism is the amphetamine." Miz Vittitow

    by MillieNeon on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:39:43 PM PST

  •  Meteor Blades (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms

    This man's diary was one big ad hom - can I HR the tip jar?

    Diarist - I'll be damned if I spend time "refuting" anything you say. Not worth it.

  •  heh (6+ / 0-)

    Sick of people who know absolutely Nothing about economics or health insurance spewing mealymouthed drivel about how we should support this bill/bills we havent seen because it/the dont exist yet.

    And you are an expert because:

    Honestly im sick of it all. I recently quit trucking folks.. and im going back. In the meanwhile i spent the last 6 months working for.. a health insurance company

    With those credentials everyone else just needs to shut the fuck up so we can listen to you.

    Still a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest

    by Mike S on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:42:45 PM PST

    •  You know (0+ / 0-)

      the economics of the bill is complete bullshit and any economist who supports it as systemic is an idiot. But nice rejoinder at least it has intellect behind it.

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:10:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Like this idiot? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes, soms

        So what’s the reality of the proposed reform? Compared with the Platonic ideal of reform, Obamacare comes up short. If the votes were there, I would much prefer to see Medicare for all.

        For a real piece of passable legislation, however, it looks very good. It wouldn’t transform our health care system; in fact, Americans whose jobs come with health coverage would see little effect. But it would make a huge difference to the less fortunate among us, even as it would do more to control costs than anything we’ve done before.

        This is a reasonable, responsible plan. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

        Still a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest

        by Mike S on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:15:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ya and we'll (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Bluehawk

          shit the 30% a year increases out of our asses.
          I mean hell that would only be 450 billion next year.. and another 600 billion in 2012.. and 800 billion in 2013. And hell while we're at it lets toss in a pony.

          The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

          by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:22:12 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe you should read the op/ed. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            skohayes, soms, the mom in the middle

            The second myth is that the proposed reform does nothing to control costs. To support this claim, critics point to reports by the Medicare actuary, who predicts that total national health spending would be slightly higher in 2019 with reform than without it.

            Even if this prediction were correct, it points to a pretty good bargain. The actuary’s assessment of the Senate bill, for example, finds that it would raise total health care spending by less than 1 percent, while extending coverage to 34 million Americans who would otherwise be uninsured. That’s a large expansion in coverage at an essentially trivial cost.

            And it gets better as we go further into the future: the Congressional Budget Office has just concluded, in a new report, that the arithmetic of reform will look better in its second decade than it did in its first.

            Furthermore, there’s good reason to believe that all such estimates are too pessimistic. There are many cost-saving efforts in the proposed reform, but nobody knows how well any one of these efforts will work. And as a result, official estimates don’t give the plan much credit for any of them. What the actuary and the budget office do is a bit like looking at an oil company’s prospecting efforts, concluding that any individual test hole it drills will probably come up dry, and predicting as a consequence that the company won’t find any oil at all — when the odds are, in fact, that some of the test holes will pan out, and produce big payoffs. Realistically, health reform is likely to do much better at controlling costs than any of the official projections suggest.

            But I do like the way you don't mention the fact that a Nobel Prize winning economisy supports the bill when you said:

            Sick of people who know absolutely Nothing about economics or health insurance ...

            and:

            any economist who supports it as systemic is an idiot.

            The pony thing is beyond cliche, but then the vitriol in the diary is more of a tantrum than anything.

            Still a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest

            by Mike S on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:41:01 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I posted links (0+ / 0-)

              to actual studies .. from the census bureau.

              You post talking head driverl..

              The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

              by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 07:33:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  "Talking head drivel." (0+ / 0-)

                Once again you ignore your very own claim that no economist supports the bill. I showed a Nobel Award winning one and you call it "talking head drivel."

                Your diary was a tantrum. Your response shows why.

                But at least you are an expert. 6 months is just like having a PHD.

                Still a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest

                by Mike S on Mon Mar 15, 2010 at 12:18:22 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  I'm tired of piece of shit asshole genetic waste (4+ / 0-)

    like you telling poor people things like this:

    if you only want in when you can leech .. take a long walk off a..

    That's what I'm sick of.

    •  If you dont want to pay in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mataliandy, nandssmith

      to the medical cost pool you dont deserve medical care. Thats why every american should be forced to pay into the pool. And it is Immoral to force americans to pay corporations a percentage of their pay. Therefore logically the solution is single payer.

      Now if you dont think anyone should have to pay anything and then when they get sick they can agree to pay a cfew hundred a month and santa will pay any amount the thing that just happened to them costs..

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:53:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're a sociopath (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soms, ratmach, Remsicle

        If you dont want to pay in to the medical cost pool you dont deserve medical care.

        •  That, and the "leech" comment... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Remsicle

          ... don't fit at ALL someone who claims to want single-payer so we don't have to subsidize the bloodsucking insurance industry (which much of the rest of the diary DOES seem to be saying).

          "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." -- Noam Chomsky

          by ratmach on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:17:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You want a handout (0+ / 0-)

          you want the rest of us to pay for you.. but you dont want to pay into the pool? Who's the sociopath.

          Universal single payer requires all of us to pay in.
          Id try speaking more slowly but if you dont get it . .. just wow.

          The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

          by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 07:59:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I guess I just got the answer to my... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soms, Remsicle

        ... earlier question to you re. why you added the "leech" comment. Your answer to Jimsted...

        If you dont want to pay in to the medical cost pool you dont deserve medical care.

        ... says it all. Don't know how you can sound like you have some compassion in other parts of your diary, and yet make THAT statement.

        "DIE LEECH!"

        Any rightwinger would be proud.

        "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." -- Noam Chomsky

        by ratmach on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:14:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You obviously are incapable of (0+ / 0-)

          independant thought.

          This is how all insurance works including medicare.

          People pay into the pool. Those who pay in are covered and protected from certain risks. Those who dont are not.

          If you dont comprehend that i cant help you.

          The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

          by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 08:00:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Years ago, my Dad had insurance through... (0+ / 0-)

            ... Blue Cross Blue Shield. He could BARELY afford it, and that was depite having a relatively "cheap" policy with a large deductible, and that didn't cover certain things. Then he found out he was sick and would need better coverage before treatments would be covered. BCBS said sure, he could upgrade his policy... for a price. He couldn't do that... and so he couldn't get treatment... and so within a year, HE DIED.

            Whether this bill will change this kind of thing, I don't know.

            But what I DO know is this: Your earlier statement implying that only people who "never had insurance" think taht insurance companies are evil is disgusting. I don't care if you've worked for one of those bloodsucking companies your entire life. The fact is, if you DON'T see that they ARE evil, you've blinded yourself to reality. The people in those companies who make the kind of decision that was made in my Dad's case are nothing short of murderers. And if I could have gotten my hands on the person responsible, I would likely have wound up in prison.

            (I've tried to be nice here. I had to rewrite this a couple times so as not to say anything more harsh.)

            "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." -- Noam Chomsky

            by ratmach on Mon Mar 15, 2010 at 06:12:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I hear you, cdreid. (8+ / 0-)

    I, like many kossacks, ultimately have decided to support this bill, knowing full well the major harm it does in a number of policy metrics.  I support it simply because, with the expansion of medicaid, the closing of the donut hole and the establishment of more primary care clinics, it likely will save a few thousand lives each year.  I support it because, with a President bound and determined to torpedo a Public Option or expanded Medicare from day one, it is clearly the best we can accomplish in the near term.

    But, I hear your frustration.  I hear your anger.  And I share your disdain for all those kossacks who willfully ignore the harm this bill will do in terms of slapping a bandaid on, and perpetuating the system of, SELLING health care access for profit.  The very concept is obscene.  I certainly don't begrudge the health care PROVIDER making a decent living, any more than I object to fire fighters or policemen earning a good wage, but perpetuating a system wherein the less you cover, the more you earn for your shareholders IS fucking obscene.  I'm pinching my nose and swallowing this bill for the sake of the lives that will be saved.

    And, to all you ignorant jackasses who jump into every health insurance reform diary pointing the way to FDL or RedState, I say fuck off.

    I am proud to report that when the invitation was issued to attack the one House progressive who actually kept his promise, I declined.

    by WisePiper on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:54:57 PM PST

  •  Fuckin' A! (11+ / 0-)

    The dipshits, dumbshits, fuckwits, halfwits, nonutz, fuckwads, scumsuckers, dickfors, dildos, asswipes, asshats, assholes, jackasses, motherfuckers, cocksuckers, dickwads, fuckheads, shitheads, dickheads, assfaces, prickpullers, tittytwisters, jackoffs, jagoffs, beatoffs, shitforbrains, scrotumlickers, crotchsniffers, cockbreaths, shitfucks, fuckshits, and dicknoses can bite me.

    My Jim Bunning is inflamed so I have been forced to use that toilet paper with the lanolin in it.

    by Bob Johnson on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 05:59:04 PM PST

  •  and im sick of diaries (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kalmoth, soms, the mom in the middle

    bitching about the front page diaries.  

    Love is the force for saving all animal life- humans included.

    by GlowNZ on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:31:19 PM PST

  •  What, not sick of bozos? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kalmoth, soms

    No rec list for you.

    Your US Senator gets a salary of $176,000, and a pension. He might not share your concern over health insurance costs and coverage.

    by Inland on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:47:00 PM PST

  •  hey cd (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cdreid

    tell us how you really feel!


    Thx for a look,
    at the inner workings of the beast.

    I'd be sick of saying NO, like that, all the time too.

    Were playing with lives here,
    it's not academic, for far too many.

    Too bad they waited so long --
    to "get serious" about it.

    A day late, and a dollar short!

    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act -- George Orwell

    by jamess on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:03:33 PM PST

  •  meh n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms
  •  state single payers 1st step to single payer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cdreid

    and that damn ERISA needs a waiver provision (sooner than 2017) or we're f**ked.

  •  maybe next time (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes

    you decide to pen a rant such as this diary you might actually not be as dismissive of those who brought along some facts to counter your opinion piece here.

    would that be asking too much?

    on several occassions in the comments, folks actually cited and blockquoted documentation that runs contrary to the tone and point of this diaruy.

    your diary is pretty silent in countering the links, which of course does little to help clear up the debate here.

    fwiw, there was a good deal of exasperation in your diary that i share, that i agreed with.  

    but i gotta tell you -- this comment:

    If you dont want to pay in
    to the medical cost pool you dont deserve medical care.

    is simply unacceptable.  if what you intended by it was to generate dome kind of heated or lengthy exchange (you know, inflammatory for inflammatory's sake) well, clearly no one really took the bait.

    that is a good sign.

    _

    There is a certain charm in the purity of irrelevance. But the more relevant you get, the more real you have to get. (Barney Frank)

    by dadanation on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 12:34:34 AM PST

    •  Its shocking i keep having to explain this (0+ / 0-)

      honestly do people really not get it? Are you/they that dense? By youre writing id gues not but damn.

      Theres no magic money tree. No fountain of eternal coin.

      Those who pay in are protected from risk. That simple. That is how all forms of insurance work.
      That is why universal single payer is the only way to curb costs or reform healthcare. the ONLY way.  What you suggest is that noone is required to pay in at all. And then when they get sick they can sign up and we'll pay for their bills out of thegiant faerie trough of neverending gold.

      The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

      by cdreid on Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 08:05:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i am as far from dense (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ratmach

        as you are far from being even remotely engaged in an honest discussion here.

        i made mention of both my agreement with much of your diary as well as how i took exception to the  manner in which you did (or more accurately did NOT) bother to stay in line with the facts.  you wrote a rant and when your perceptions of the bill were factually challenged, your responses were lacking.  lacking both substance and appreciation.

        that being said, i took particular umbrage your comment about people deserving exactly what they get if they can't "pay in." i found your response as dickensian and heartless as i could even imagine.

        but still not e that i had yet made any suggestion about ANYTHING.  yet somehow you decided to read well into what i never said and never wrote to deduce my opposition to universal health care.

        how?

        you can cut the sarcastic tone and you can curb the cheap shots if what you want is an actual dialog.

        until such time, i am hard-pressed to figure out any compelling reason to stay engaged here when i am fairly certain that you'll either drop a few more cheap shots at me or not even bother to read what i wrote.

        _

        There is a certain charm in the purity of irrelevance. But the more relevant you get, the more real you have to get. (Barney Frank)

        by dadanation on Mon Mar 15, 2010 at 12:38:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site