|
The entire healthcare debate was framed incorrectly to begin with. What meaningful legislation could ever get passed on healthcare if Americans are loving retarded? Both our private and public spending per capita are ahead of our socialist counterparts.
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Job Truniht posted:The entire healthcare debate was framed incorrectly to begin with. What meaningful legislation could ever get passed on healthcare if Americans are loving retarded? Both our private and public spending per capita are ahead of our socialist counterparts. But but but Team Blue really really wanted to reform why would they not frame the debate in a sensible way?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:But but but Team Blue really really wanted to reform why would they not frame the debate in a sensible way? Do you sincerely think there aren't some people in congress that wish to have sensible, effective reform(and not things like bullshit tort reform psuedo-improvements) or is this just in the general sense due to their minimal proportions of the total legislative body?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Reading the liveposting of Biden being Diamond Joe is hilarious guys. Was he literally on drugs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
What was everyone's favorite moment from today's swearing in? Mine was the Col. telling Biden he supports his Presidential aspirations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Quote of the night, "Hey, welcome to the new USSR." ~ Representative Ted Yoho, upon hearing that John Boehner was kicking defectors off committees.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:So Harry Reid made a video today, broken face and all. Haha how does that video have 29 upvotes and 208 downvotes, but no comments. Are people just seeing a nasty injury, downvoting and fleeing? I think it's actually pretty cool that he's just tweeting and making videos and not hiding the extent of his injuries, regardless of what you think of Reid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Do you sincerely think there aren't some people in congress that wish to have sensible, effective reform(and not things like bullshit tort reform psuedo-improvements) or is this just in the general sense due to their minimal proportions of the total legislative body? Plenty of folks are vocal about wanting actual good reform not a blowjob for the insurance and pharma industries, but they are actively marginalized or blocked by the mainstream Dems, which is why I make fun of Team Blue cheerleaders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Kinda disappointed we didn't get more entertainment here. Bombastic Fox News/talk radio speeches, insane rhetoric, apocalyptic press releases, etc. Oh well. I am enjoying the #tcot freakout at Eric son of eric and Rush over not pushing more to beat Boehner, and their responses. Gosh its almost like they just whip you people into an insane frenzy for money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Plenty of folks are vocal about wanting actual good reform not a blowjob for the insurance and pharma industries, but they are actively marginalized or blocked by the mainstream Dems, which is why I make fun of Team Blue cheerleaders. No true reformer would ever compromise!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Bernie had at least 50 folks in the house behind expanding Medicare to everyone, i'd bet 25-50% of those honestly would support it and weren't doing it PR. Maybe that's too idealistic of me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:No true reformer would ever compromise! No you see if we start from a compromise position we will never have to compromise again!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Bernie had at least 50 folks in the house behind expanding Medicare to everyone, i'd bet 25-50% of those honestly would support it and weren't doing it PR. Too bad it didn't even face a vote. Thanks, Obama.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:No you see if we start from a compromise position we will never have to compromise again! Got it, so the critical mistake of the Dems was not including nationalization of the healthcare system as part of their initial proposal!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
I am literally shocked that this isn't drudge's banner today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Please tell me there are videos of Cheney shmoozing up families.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Got it, so the critical mistake of the Dems was not including nationalization of the healthcare system as part of their initial proposal! Got it, there were only two possible options, full communism or the Sensible Democratic Plan. This is a fun game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Got it, so the critical mistake of the Dems was not including nationalization of the healthcare system as part of their initial proposal!  You do realize that negotiation 101 is starting from the opposite end (do not read the nationalize of healthcare as being the opposite end) and working to the middle, not starting at the middle and working towards your opponents goals right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:
You see single paper would never have passed which is why it was never brought up, and neither was the compromise position of a public option. No use wasting time on those, we need to move directly to the compromise of a compromise because that's how real men negotiate. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Meanwhile, in the World's Greatest Deliberative Body... edit: goddam, every butthole in that room is clenched to 11
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
If people are actually interested in learning about the cost drivers in health care and what can be done about them, I suggest the research of Dr. David Belk The frontpage of his website https://www.truecostofhealthcare.org has been taken down, but you can get to much of it by using subpages, like this http://www.truecostofhealthcare.org/introduction He did a long series at Huffington Post that can be found here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/search.php/?q=david+belk&s_it=header_form_v1 Here is a video of him presenting on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcLXzWeherI And for kicks and giggles he did an AMA in 2013 about it that you can find here: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1sbwz8/i_am_david_belk_im_a_doctor_who_has_spent_years/ and here is an LA Times investigation backing up his findings http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-medical-prices-20120527,0,4627745.story Short version is there is no silver bullet to get costs down, and worrying about single payer vs public option is missing huge swaths of very important nuance about access and costs. Fried Chicken fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:You see single paper would never have passed which is why it was never brought up, and neither was the compromise position of a public option. No use wasting time on those, we need to move directly to the compromise of a compromise because that's how real men negotiate. Can you explain what you mean by "brought up"? Because they were both talked about, and this is starting to feel like one of Paul Krugman's zombie ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Skeevy Mcgee posted:Please tell me there are videos of Cheney shmoozing up families. Due to national security concerns and his issues with children's laughter Dick Cheney never interacted with the families of senators. Joementum posted:Quote of the night, "Hey, welcome to the new USSR." ~ Representative Ted Yoho, upon hearing that John Boehner was kicking defectors off committees. Free speech 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Bernie had at least 50 folks in the house behind expanding Medicare to everyone, i'd bet 25-50% of those honestly would support it and weren't doing it PR. You'll notice that 50 is significantly less than 218. You should also remember that there was absolutely no way a public option could get sixty votes in the Senate, much less universal medicare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
Family Values posted:Can you explain what you mean by "brought up"? Because they were both talked about, and this is starting to feel like one of Paul Krugman's zombie ideas. Wait are we rewriting history to say that single payer was on the table, or are you honestly thinking that I'm saying nobody ever talked about single payer, because if so LOL
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:You'll notice that 50 is significantly less than 218. You should also remember that there was absolutely no way a public option could get sixty votes in the Senate, much less universal medicare. No poo poo sherlock, I never said it could pass, he asked if anybody at all wanted what I would consider decent reform. Like, I quoted the post in question. We're at the point where the Democrats are just dropping talking points in I guess? edit: Looks like I didn't quote the post!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Forgive me if this is a bit too small-fry for this thread, but I'm thoroughly enjoying this little spat a local politician is having. The Frederick News-Post wrote an article about some rather boilerplate petty bickering between members of the Frederick County, MD city council. One of the councilmen mentioned was Kirby Delauter (R-District 5). Kirby Delauter was not pleased with being mentioned, and said as much. In fact, he told the paper he would sue them if they ever mentioned him again for any reason without his permission. As you can imagine, the newspaper, and specifically the reporter involved, took exception to being told they're not allowed to speak out of turn:  The newspaper's editorial staff responded in the most beautiful, appropriate way imaginable. Check the first letter of each paragraph
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Wait are we rewriting history to say that single payer was on the table, or are you honestly thinking that I'm saying nobody ever talked about single payer, because if so LOL No I'm saying the public option was seriously on the table.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:No poo poo sherlock, I never said it could pass, he asked if anybody at all wanted what I would consider decent reform. My main issue is that you keep bitching about how the ACA sucks, despite a lot of evidence that it doesn't and a separate bunch of evidence that it would have been difficult, perhaps impossible for it to have been any better given the composition of Congress at the time. Family Values, that depends. Do you believe Joe Lieberman would have voted for cloture on Single Payer? Some progressives wanted it really hard, but I don't think it was ever in a position to feasibly pass
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:You'll notice that 50 is significantly less than 218. You should also remember that there was absolutely no way a public option could get sixty votes in the Senate, much less universal medicare. Actually there was a week there where it was proposed that the eligibility age for Medicare be lowered 5 years every 10 years as part of a compromise, and it looked like that was going to break the logjam (being able to go back and tell seniors you increased their Medicare was a big hit). Except after about 3 days of it moving forward faster than anything else in that long slog had Joe Lieberman absolutely lost his poo poo and threatened to kill the whole thing if that provision got in. The reason he was so adamant against it? Because the idea was proposed by a Connecticut professor and democrat activist who had backed Ned Lamont in 2006. Pure, no poo poo out in the open spite was what sunk that idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
Kirby Delauter blows goats. I have proof.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:The entire healthcare debate was framed incorrectly to begin with. What meaningful legislation could ever get passed on healthcare if Americans are loving retarded? Both our private and public spending per capita are ahead of our socialist counterparts. Well, you see, when it comes to healthcare it's a GOOD thing to be way more expensive and way less efficient and, you know, humane, than the rest of the world because otherwise how will people in the medical industry make any money? I had to go to the emergency room over Christmas because I had trouble breathing due to an allergy attack. I got a chest X-ray and 3 albuterol nebulizer breathing treatments. Got the bill today. It's very nearly FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS. Makes perfect free market sense that I would pay the equivalent of ten iPads for three doses of a common, fifty-year old medicine I can buy for less than a loving dollar a dose at Wal-mart and an X-ray! Look how much freedom that is!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Family Values, that depends. Do you believe Joe Lieberman would have voted for cloture on Single Payer? Some progressives wanted it really hard, but I don't think it was ever in a position to feasibly pass I'm not talking about single payer, I'm talking about the public option, which Zeitgueist conflated. And that was my point, actually. It was seriously proposed but it could not get enough votes, and so it was traded for something else (I forget what exactly). But some people want to keep insisting that I was torpedoed by Obama and never given a chance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:If people are actually interested in learning about the cost drivers in health care and what can be done about them, I suggest the research of Dr. David Belk The front page of truecostofhealthcare.org still works for me. I recall skimming it before and remember it making some salient points. I do know one of the things that gets missed (sorta) in the whole healthcare/insurance debate is how much we end up paying for a very small subset of the healthcare consumer 'market'. Pills and procedures that are targeted for certain conditions that have an absurd cost relative to their benefit to the patient, y'know?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
JonathonSpectre posted:Well, you see, when it comes to healthcare it's a GOOD thing to be way more expensive and way less efficient and, you know, humane, than the rest of the world because otherwise how will people in the medical industry make any money? Man, if you value your sanity don't ever look into the cost of industrial molecular and enzyme synthesis. Actual production costs for most medicines are less than a penny per dose, it is amortization and markups that dive the cost, not what it takes to actually make the stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
JonathonSpectre posted:Got the bill today. It's very nearly FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS. If it's any consolation, it's actually cheaper to get your entire genome sequenced by a lab than it cost for you to get an x-ray and $2 worth of medicine. Oh, sorry that doesn't help at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Mo0 posted:Forgive me if this is a bit too small-fry for this thread, but I'm thoroughly enjoying this little spat a local politician is having. That might be just about the funniest editorial I've ever read. What kind of ignorant dispshit is this guy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
The elected kind. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Incidentally to the topic, I heard a NPR story this morning about... Montana, I wanna say? The state legislature is GOP controlled, and they'd been blocking accepting Medicaid expansion up to now. The 'compromise' that's being floated is expanding Medicaid coverage and eligibility for 'certain groups' (the legislator they had on rattled off single moms, poor disabled people, etc. etc.) but that single adults who were 'healthy' needed 'encouragement to go out and get a job and buy insurance off the exchange!'  I suppose people get the government they deserve.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Family Values posted:No I'm saying the public option was seriously on the table. It was dropped right quick for AHIP support if I remember correctly, in even while it was still being discussed. It was compromised before discussions even got going. I don't believe it was ever seriously being considered. Rygar201 posted:My main issue is that you keep bitching about how the ACA sucks, despite a lot of evidence that it doesn't No, you're talking about evidence that it's better than, and significantly so, than doing nothing. Which is trivially and obviously true. There are many, many different things which could have been done that are better than what we had, so this is a very low bar to cross. I'm saying it's both a lovely law, and one that's better than what we had. For profit-mandatory insurance with some ridiculous exchange model is purestraim American capitalism panacea bullshit. We don't need single payer, you can get good healthcare through subsidies, regulations, and non-profits. That's how Germany does it. A kick in the knee is better than a kick in the balls but it's no blowjob. quote:and a separate bunch of evidence that it would have been difficult, perhaps impossible for it to have been any better given the composition of Congress at the time. No, you're talking about evidence that certain specific things were killed. I don't think you're going to find any evidence that legislators totally wanted a better a law but somehow magically found the precise equilibrium point that would pass through the magic of the Free Congress. My argument is the majority of mainstream dems wanted to pass a law that made some improvement, enough so they could say they reformed, but weren't as concerned with getting a good law out there, or fighting tooth and nail for meaningful reforms. Some were, but they're the minority because money talks and you don't into congress by being a good and caring person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:47
|
|