Joel Pett for November 02, 2010

Unfortunately, the funt is right. It is securing their votes. It may be quite a shock to some people when the GOP takes over, protects the military/industrial complex giants like Halliburton Blackwater, etc., keeps taxes for the wealthiest at the lowest they’ve been in what? a century? protects their wealthy and influential contributors, and then cuts social security benefits, Medicare payments, college loans, and anything and everything that helps the middle class that has been losing ground in this country for three decades.

Think the tea partiers will eliminate the very generous congressional pension and benefit systems for themselves? Don’t hold your breath. “Gimme some of that!”

C’mon, Harley: Just this once, actually read the previous (non-Chinese-spam) post before posting your drivel.

“A bill that has already caused countless people to lose their health care”

Liar?

“…or be denied the chance to get it them selves(sic)”

Harley, the spineless Democrats already gave up the public option to the gutless Republicans who even then voted for the insurance companies instead of their uninsured constituents. What more do you want?

jack, the major cost to healthcare in this country is the insurance industry. Making it portable might help in that right now most people have virtually no choice. Obama proposed a national insurance plan – NOT socialized medicine, as many idiots claimed – that would be a nonprofit competitor and would take on people that the for-profit companies wouldn’t. That would help a lot, but he couldn’t get it. Thanks, indeed, in part to the Democrats, who were too wimpy to fight the GOP. But the blame is not equal. When the plan that was actually implemented was RomneyCare (And I know - I live in Massachusetts!), a GOP plan, and they still fought it, you have to think that the GOP really doesn’t want to discuss healthcare at all…

I question how we can’t afford healthcare but can afford to monitor every single pregnancy (even those started by rape) to make sure it comes to term – before kicking those women off of healthcare because providing healthcare to someone who can’t afford it is her own fault. Don’t have a miscarriage in the shower, ladies, you might come under investigation.

Oh, and we someone have the money to ferret out and monitor the private communications of our soldiers to determine if they’re gay or not so that the money spent to train them can be lost by kicking them out, while stripping them of their hard-earned compensation.

I also find it interesting how we can afford to run all over the world shooting people and blowing up and rebuilding towns, but cannot look after our own people.

I also wonder how $4 trillion in tax cuts is acceptable and where people plan on finding $4 trillion in savings to counteract it without cutting plans for veterans, college students, seniors, citizens, or otherwise AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT cut our deficit. I look forward to seeing this financial magic.

Go Republicans. Personal responsibility. Smaller government.

By the way, why’d it take so long to remove Pell Grants from the domain of the banks anyway? They lend taxpayer money at no personal risk and reap the profits. That was a waste, and we’re supposed to go back to that?

^ Only the “Go Republicans … ” line was sarcasm, and it was sarcasm in that it’s what Republicans SAY they’re for, BUT the policies they endorse are anything but. So you should take that issue up with them, and not me. The rest of that, even the shower line, are actual citations of implemented or proposed GOP policy. And that was without even mentioning the police hunts for gay people (courtesy of Montana’s GOP).

As for the Keynes thing, again, who’s coming up with the $4 trillion it takes to make up for all of those tax breaks? This isn’t a “liberal” estimate, this is hard facts from the CBO. It is why Obama’s projected deficit is higher than Bush’s, because the CBO’s projection under Bush included the EXPIRATION of all of the Bush tax cuts. We now know that is NOT going to happen. So where will this $4 trillion come from, in addition to actually scratching the deficit?

Oh, and Obama has reduced the Federal Deficit already. http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/tg911.htm

“What is the difference between a National Health Care Plan and Socialized medicine”

We already have that. It’s called Medicare and Veterans’ Healthcare.

HQ, oh great one, if Insurance plans are so unprofitable, please explain these to me: http://sickforprofit.com/ceos/

And let’s keep in mind that “profit margins” occur AFTER payouts.

So if your company makes $1 Billion, and one person gets paid $990 Million, well then yes, your “profit” is only $10 million, assuming no other payouts.

Cash for Clunkers

Republicans cashing in… http://politifact.com/virginia/statements/2010/oct/29/democratic-congressional-campaign-committee/dccc-says-scott-rigells-car-dealership-made-over-4/

But the Republican candidate seeking Sutton’s congressional seat – Brecksville auto dealer Tom Ganley – says the program was a clunker even though government records show it helped his dealerships sell 934 cars worth $20.6 million. http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/sep/24/tom-ganley/car-dealer-tom-ganley-changes-directions-auto-sale/

Loopholes? No. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/22/sean-hannity/hannity-claims-loophole-cash-clunkers-program-woul/

There’s little debate that the Cash for Clunkers program gave a serious jolt to the car industry in the third quarter and contributed significantly to the GDP bump. In a statement before the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, J. Steven Landefeld, director of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, said consumer spending on durable goods — which increased by 22.3 percent — was driven by motor vehicle purchases and that Cash for Clunkers “accounted for most of this increase.” But not all of it. Landefeld noted that “real spending on other durable goods, nondurable goods and services also increased in the third quarter,” he said. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/nov/03/rush-limbaugh/rush-limbaugh-said-bump-gdp-due-cash-clunkers-and-/

So if by “can’t handle” you mean because “it was far more successful than they expected it to be” then maybe.

^ Okay, so comparing a grocery store which bases its revenue on selling a bunch of goods against an industry whose revenue is based on taking in premiums and not paying out claims. Want to try that one again? Cause I mean honestly, I could pull up the revenue and compensation of a Defense Contractor. It still doesn’t detract from the point of HOW an insurance company GETS its revenue.

So let us review: which industry makes its revenue by either hoping people don’t get sick, or kicking them to the curb if they get sick? It’s a basic fact. It’s not a grocery store.

Interesting how some people trust insurance companies more than the government.

^^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)

Medicare’s strong performance in consumer satisfaction, access to care, and other areas suggests that many adults under age 65 would choose a public health insurance option if it were offered as part of health reform http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/cf-emb050809.php

In their report, Davis and coauthors find that elderly Medicare beneficiaries are more likely than enrollees in employer-sponsored plans to rate their health insurance as excellent (32% vs. 20%) and less likely to report negative experiences with their insurance plans (43% vs. 61%). Medicare beneficiaries are also less likely than those with private insurance to go without needed care owing to costs (18% vs. 22%). The survey also finds that elderly Medicare beneficiaries are more likely to report being very satisfied with the care they received compared with those with private insurance (62% vs. 51%). http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2002/Oct/Medicare-vs–Private-Insurance–Rhetoric-and-Reality.aspx (And that one’s from 2002, articles say that gap has widened)

Okay, let’s take it head on. The National Health Service in Britain costs HALF of what healthcare does here, and gets higher ratings despite the complaints and limitations. This is true socialized medicine: the government funds medical school, pays the doctors and nurses, and builds the healthcare centers. As a result, doctors may be paid less in absolute terms, but don’t have to spend half of it on malpractice insurance premiums and another quarter paying off their student loans. They also have a better ratio of doctors and nurses to patients than we do, and a far better percentage of general practitioners, since a lot of US doctors become specialists instead because they are paid better by insurance companies. And it is still entirely possible to pick your own doctor in the UK and pay for it, so it’s hardly the fascist structure some of you seem to think. In fact, you could do exactly what we do in the US: pay twice as much for a doctor of your choice. The Canadian single-payer system gets even higher ratings than the NHS. The profitability of insurance companies as stated has nothing to do with my point, harley. When you insert an entire industry between the doctor and the patient, of course it costs more! Whether it is profitable or not. Though in fact, insurance companies are very, very profitable. Ask their stockholders. Or better yet, check out some of the tallest buildings in most American cities…Boston’s two tallest? The John Hancock Tower and the Prudential Center. Gee. Interestingly, they also use more consultants than any other industry. Why? Because they can afford it. Some Catholic hospitals have self-insured, and this intrigues me, but frankly you could get better effects through larger coverage. By the way, the Catholic Healthcare Association (not exactly a left-wing liberal organization) has said clearly that the insurance industry is the biggest barrier to effective healthcare for all Americans.

motive, good post. People who work in healthcare, I mean the providers of healthcare, have been saying that for a long, long time. Doctors have told me that it may take a real crisis in the quality of medical care before it can change. But in some areas, that crisis has already happened. Just not to enough people, I guess.

“Truth is the Obama Plan works with Insurance companies gives them 30 million more customers that are supersized by the U.S. Taxpayer so insurance companies are more in the pocket of the left then the right”

Big business in the pocket of the left? Or representatives elected with insurance money (or just without a spine) in the pocket of B.B?

Gee, I wonder why insurance companies were so interested in backing Democrats when they were poised to take power and healthcare reform was a major issue. Must be because of an ideological enlightenment.

Pavlov, I agree. We must tax the wealthy more, and the entitlements do not suck up as much money as does the military.

The Affordable Care Act is working. No one argues that America’s health-care system is an utter mess, and the Affordable Care Act takes a step to make it less of an utter mess.

Harley, your citations are from BLOGS. Blogs are not factual. Blogs are you and your friends agreeing with one another. Try facts.

Thanks for your sensible remark, Magus, and congratulations on keeping Deval Patrick for four more years. I hope that he is better for this term. Here, in Tennessee, we had a dreadful gubernatorial choice, and the richer guy won, but the state is getting increasingly conservative politically as Nashville becomes increasingly less conservative. As a born Bay Stater, I like Nashville more but Tennessee (except for how beautiful the eastern half is) less.

Brian cook is right on every count. Smart man he is!