« A Unified Theory of Blue Doggism | Main | "So at the end of the conversation ... with Sergeant Crowley, there was discussion about he and I and Professor Gates having a beer here in the White House. We don't know if that's scheduled yet ..." »

July 24, 2009


How do you close sombody else's html tags?
Militarily surprise attacks and strikes before the opposition can organize are known as good tactics, espcially, when the other side has the bigger guns (the louder mouths and the more influemntial 'news' outlets) ;-)
And isn't politics war by other means?*

*updated Clausewitz (Michel Foucault but independently by others too)

And in this case, we're talking about a bill whose major provisions don't even kick in until after the next Presidential election! Arguing that THIS has to be passed in a hurry is worse than absurd.

So, suppose the bill were to pass today, Brett. Given the nature of the topic of discussion, how much time do you suppose should be given to implement its provisions, to ensure that they're done correctly? Two years? A year? Six months? A week? Two days? Ballpark this for me, will you?

If the provisions kicked in more quickly than three years from now, you'd be complaining even more about the bill, because all you're doing here is concern trolling.

Brett: There are ALWAYS arguments for delay. After 50 years, those arguments are not arguments in good faith, those are arguments to prevent something from EVER happening. The delay now has NOTHING to do with the public "getting wind of what's in it", it's about creating time and space for Republicans to LIE about what's in the bill.

And, as proved by you and the Republicans in Congress, the opponents ARE mobilized. The reason to hurry is to prevent the opponents from constantly dragging it out to try and kill the bill, which is what the Republicans have SAID they're trying to do. That's their explicit goal. And yours, I suspect, given that you've said nothing about what you WOULD support, and have fought the very idea of any health care reform in every post.

You are pretending to be worried about high ideals to try and cover for killing the idea.

Thanks for nothing, Mr. Farber, and for that refresher on what YOU think is called a distinction that bears no difference.

I suppose you thought that was extraordinarily clever.

Except that with our supposedly current cruddy plan under the Greed Lords of the Insurance Scammers in the HR departments, they MIGHT try and tell you the news, but you can STILL go outside their little system and opt out--and go with no insurance to something outside their darling systems while working at Salt Mine Inc. or Boo Boo Burger.

You can also add to, subtract, and customize from those plans or others, in most plans I've encountered.

It's called The Market, the bane of the Left, and a counterintuitive concept from time immemorial to Washington DC planners and busybodies.

Ehealth insurance on the Net has some handy links these days, BTW.

NOW: It's so good to know of course that the Nanny State has made sure that THAT door is closed as well. Bless them, and I know they mean well. But then on the other hand, you know the tales of the best laid plans of mice and men.

I guess when it comes to the actuary tables of some bureacrats in the Beltway, this forbidden zone and lack of choice will make some management and numbers-cruncher all the more simple.

THAT might be the case, yes.

But the problem currently is not availability of health care, it is the COST.

I notice also that no one here really had an answer about the 10 million NON-citizens who'll now siphon benefits and thus money from the system as well.

Dare I even bring up a term called "crowd out", or for that matter the requisite rationing that occurs whenever you don't add doctors (availabiilty of product, etc.) to the bustling and increasing roles of forced attendees (moving from 250 million covered to 300 million plus)?

Hmmm. Maybe not. That might pop a perineal cavity...

" people without health insurance will go on not being able to treated save what you can get at the ER, and be charged thousands of dollars for that privilege.

That's part of the very problem:

One can argue there should be some kind of system in place that handles this, yes. And the truly indigent should get some kind of care. Indeed, millions who're eligible for Medicare are not part of the system, and if we truly care about the cost factor of ERs we can take a gander, say, at Grady Memorial in Atlanta, which is at the breaking point at trying to care for the 33% of its patients who're not even citizens.

I'd say that's an issue that needs addressing. Unfortunately, most politicians of both stripes are utter cowards and see the tradeoff here in future clientele for the perpetual poorhouse as being in the positive side of thinks, even if not keeping hospitals in the black.

The other problem here since all the way back to the days when FDR locked up wage increases and companies offered "health coverage" to employees, is that the market rates for doctors were set by insurance companies. Good, bad, or indifferent regarding service and ease of use, if you're concerned about price, then we need to either get rid of them all, or have the end customer pare down their services.

Trying to pay it all requires a coverage that in itself is outrageously expensive.

Perfect for a nation of hypochondriacs like America, where every bodily disorientation, however brief, sends us running to the doctor.

When I last bought a car I cleary don't recall realistically expecting the car insurance to cover gasoline, new tires, CD repair, transmission repair, a new DVD player installation free of charge, and a windshield replacement.

Sorry gang. We cannot and should not attempt it all. Going out of pocket sounds brutal but would hold costs down by magnitudes and the good doctor will have to settle for a station wagon and a 4500 square foot home rather than 600K a year and an estate with ponies and Porsche Carreras, no matter the tiresomeness of his bills and education.

ER visits can be handled by what is called "catastrophic insurance", which covers exactly what it says and not check up on ingrown toenails and acne, or little sis's abortion so she can fit into her prom dress.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad