dreamflower (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
dreamflower) wrote2009-08-11 02:28 pm
dreamflower) wrote2009-08-11 02:28 pm
Entry tags:
Common sense, courtesy and the healthcare issue
I am well aware that there are many of my friends who may disagree with me over this issue, so I am putting it behind a cut. If you don't think you can read it without getting upset with me, then pass on by.
One of the main reasons that I was a supporter of President Obama in the last election was his staunch support of health care reform. My husband is a nurse, who has worked in health care in one way or another since he was 15, and started as a dishwasher in a nursing home, later becoming an orderly (back when they were still called that), an LPN and then an RN. He knows how badly such reform is needed.
So do I. As a child growing up, I was a military brat, a dependent back in the day when that meant something: namely free top-notch medical care. When I turned 21, and found out the cost of medical care for the average person, I was shocked.
But for the first 30 years of our marriage, we were lucky. We had excellent insurance plans through my husband's job, with reasonable deductibles, affordable co-pays, prescription coverage, and vision and dental coverage. Then we had another job change, and there was a gap between our coverage of one job and the beginning of the next job. That's what COBRA is for, right? It was $800.00 a month!
We couldn't have afforded it if my husband had not waived his sign-on bonus at the new job and had it applied to the COBRA instead.
Then fast-forward to another job change. This one did not have very good insurance, but it seemed that it might get better later on, and there were other reasons he needed to take the job. But guess what? Once he took the job, he was told he could not get into the new insurance plan because of our pre-existing conditions! And we could not do COBRA--the price on that had gone up from a year before and was now $1700.00 a month! We managed to struggle through a year with NO insurance before they allowed us to pick it up. But it's a lousy policy with a ridiculously high deductible and it only covers generic drugs. So, our $400.00 a month drugstore bill is not going to be ameliorated in any way by the new policy.
It's about time someone showed a little common sense over the health care issue. The screaming and hollering from people who ask questions and then fail to listen to the answers when they are given, is giving me a headache.
The anti-healthcare people are just rude. I've seen the clips of the town hall meetings, as someone will repeatedly scream a totally ludicrous question over and over at the beleaguered representative without stopping to draw breath or wait for an answer if it does come. When they do answer, IF they are heard, they are called liars.
These people are strident and unpleasant. Do they honestly think that a lack of common courtesy is going to accomplish anything? Or that they will convince anyone who does not already share their views?
I got the following from![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
claudia603's LJ, and think it deserves to be shared.
Dingell: Reform health care based on facts
Citizens deserve full, fair debate so bill can save medical system
U.S. Rep. John Dingell
Town hall meetings continue a democratic tradition that goes back more than 2,500 years. In ancient Athens, they held "Ecclesia" or gatherings to discuss and decide civic matters. Great movements have been born from these gatherings of individuals with different ideas working to forge consensus.
Last Thursday, I held two town hall meetings in Romulus to discuss a matter of the utmost importance -- health care reform. The large turnout made me very happy. I want to hear from opponents and supporters of the legislation.
More important, I need to hear people's specific concerns and the changes they want. In fact, my desire to hear from my constituents is so strong that while only one town hall was planned, I actually added the second that evening to hear from as many people as possible. That is what makes better legislation. I strongly believe the vast majority of the people in that room had legitimate concerns and questions. Sadly, they were denied the opportunity because some refused to let others speak and were only there to disrupt.
I want to hear from my constituents, but also explain that by lowering costs, improving quality and giving more choices to Americans, we can save both our health care system and economy.
The impending collapse of our health care system is one of the most important questions facing our nation, and full, free and fair debate is urgently needed. Here are the facts. The bill would:
• End the practice of denying insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
• Not allow termination of insurance if you become seriously ill.
• Preclude exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses, deductibles or co-pays.
• End annual or lifetime caps on coverage.
• Provide guaranteed oral, hearing and vision care for kids.
• Allow people to keep their doctor and their plan if they wish, while also creating more choices of insurance plans.
• Eliminate lifetime limits on health insurance coverage.
Unfortunately, the fiction about this bill is getting more attention that the facts. This bill will not do the following:
• Will not lead to employers discontinuing health care coverage in favor of government coverage. Based on an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 3200 will actually increase the number of people who get health insurance coverage through an employer compared with current law.
• Will not create an undue burden for small businesses. According to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, 96 percent of small businesses will pay no additional fees under the bill. In fact, small businesses will benefit from tax credits to empower them to provide health insurance for their employees. Small businesses are now paying 18 percent more than big businesses for the same policy; we will stop this unfair practice.
• Will not exempt members of Congress. Our health care plan will be subject to the same rules as all other employer-sponsored plans.
• Will not cover illegal immigrants, leaving American citizens to pay for it. Section 246 of H.R. 3200 specifically prohibits federal funds from being spent to cover illegal immigrants.
• Will not lead to government-sponsored euthanasia. This bill provides an option for individuals to discuss life-extending measures under various scenarios and for Medicare to cover the cost. It is entirely the individual's choice; it does not require anyone to use the benefit and it does not penalize those who don't. Patients and their families would consult with health professionals, not government officials, if they choose to use the benefit.
• Will not lead to government-sponsored abortions. An amendment was added in the Energy and Commerce Committee that explicitly states no public money can be used to fund abortions.
We will continue to maximize the opportunities throughout August for real and honest dialogue with those who have opinions, fears and questions. What we hope for is continued passionate involvement by many people in a civil environment. Democracy is at its best when this occurs.
Southern Beale's blog couldn't say it any better (link fromoselle.) Just shame on whoever is spreading those death panel legends. Shame on them.
One of the main reasons that I was a supporter of President Obama in the last election was his staunch support of health care reform. My husband is a nurse, who has worked in health care in one way or another since he was 15, and started as a dishwasher in a nursing home, later becoming an orderly (back when they were still called that), an LPN and then an RN. He knows how badly such reform is needed.
So do I. As a child growing up, I was a military brat, a dependent back in the day when that meant something: namely free top-notch medical care. When I turned 21, and found out the cost of medical care for the average person, I was shocked.
But for the first 30 years of our marriage, we were lucky. We had excellent insurance plans through my husband's job, with reasonable deductibles, affordable co-pays, prescription coverage, and vision and dental coverage. Then we had another job change, and there was a gap between our coverage of one job and the beginning of the next job. That's what COBRA is for, right? It was $800.00 a month!
We couldn't have afforded it if my husband had not waived his sign-on bonus at the new job and had it applied to the COBRA instead.
Then fast-forward to another job change. This one did not have very good insurance, but it seemed that it might get better later on, and there were other reasons he needed to take the job. But guess what? Once he took the job, he was told he could not get into the new insurance plan because of our pre-existing conditions! And we could not do COBRA--the price on that had gone up from a year before and was now $1700.00 a month! We managed to struggle through a year with NO insurance before they allowed us to pick it up. But it's a lousy policy with a ridiculously high deductible and it only covers generic drugs. So, our $400.00 a month drugstore bill is not going to be ameliorated in any way by the new policy.
It's about time someone showed a little common sense over the health care issue. The screaming and hollering from people who ask questions and then fail to listen to the answers when they are given, is giving me a headache.
The anti-healthcare people are just rude. I've seen the clips of the town hall meetings, as someone will repeatedly scream a totally ludicrous question over and over at the beleaguered representative without stopping to draw breath or wait for an answer if it does come. When they do answer, IF they are heard, they are called liars.
These people are strident and unpleasant. Do they honestly think that a lack of common courtesy is going to accomplish anything? Or that they will convince anyone who does not already share their views?
I got the following from
claudia603's LJ, and think it deserves to be shared.Dingell: Reform health care based on facts
Citizens deserve full, fair debate so bill can save medical system
U.S. Rep. John Dingell
Town hall meetings continue a democratic tradition that goes back more than 2,500 years. In ancient Athens, they held "Ecclesia" or gatherings to discuss and decide civic matters. Great movements have been born from these gatherings of individuals with different ideas working to forge consensus.
Last Thursday, I held two town hall meetings in Romulus to discuss a matter of the utmost importance -- health care reform. The large turnout made me very happy. I want to hear from opponents and supporters of the legislation.
More important, I need to hear people's specific concerns and the changes they want. In fact, my desire to hear from my constituents is so strong that while only one town hall was planned, I actually added the second that evening to hear from as many people as possible. That is what makes better legislation. I strongly believe the vast majority of the people in that room had legitimate concerns and questions. Sadly, they were denied the opportunity because some refused to let others speak and were only there to disrupt.
I want to hear from my constituents, but also explain that by lowering costs, improving quality and giving more choices to Americans, we can save both our health care system and economy.
The impending collapse of our health care system is one of the most important questions facing our nation, and full, free and fair debate is urgently needed. Here are the facts. The bill would:
• End the practice of denying insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
• Not allow termination of insurance if you become seriously ill.
• Preclude exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses, deductibles or co-pays.
• End annual or lifetime caps on coverage.
• Provide guaranteed oral, hearing and vision care for kids.
• Allow people to keep their doctor and their plan if they wish, while also creating more choices of insurance plans.
• Eliminate lifetime limits on health insurance coverage.
Unfortunately, the fiction about this bill is getting more attention that the facts. This bill will not do the following:
• Will not lead to employers discontinuing health care coverage in favor of government coverage. Based on an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 3200 will actually increase the number of people who get health insurance coverage through an employer compared with current law.
• Will not create an undue burden for small businesses. According to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, 96 percent of small businesses will pay no additional fees under the bill. In fact, small businesses will benefit from tax credits to empower them to provide health insurance for their employees. Small businesses are now paying 18 percent more than big businesses for the same policy; we will stop this unfair practice.
• Will not exempt members of Congress. Our health care plan will be subject to the same rules as all other employer-sponsored plans.
• Will not cover illegal immigrants, leaving American citizens to pay for it. Section 246 of H.R. 3200 specifically prohibits federal funds from being spent to cover illegal immigrants.
• Will not lead to government-sponsored euthanasia. This bill provides an option for individuals to discuss life-extending measures under various scenarios and for Medicare to cover the cost. It is entirely the individual's choice; it does not require anyone to use the benefit and it does not penalize those who don't. Patients and their families would consult with health professionals, not government officials, if they choose to use the benefit.
• Will not lead to government-sponsored abortions. An amendment was added in the Energy and Commerce Committee that explicitly states no public money can be used to fund abortions.
We will continue to maximize the opportunities throughout August for real and honest dialogue with those who have opinions, fears and questions. What we hope for is continued passionate involvement by many people in a civil environment. Democracy is at its best when this occurs.
Southern Beale's blog couldn't say it any better (link from
oselle.) Just shame on whoever is spreading those death panel legends. Shame on them.
no subject
Part of the problem is that while I agree that the healthcare system does need to be reformed, I don't know who to believe or trust. One thing I've heard is that bit about the mandatory counseling on how to commit suicide for the elderly. I know the thing up there said it 'provides an option for individuals to discuss it..." but knowing how some things have evolved in the education arena I don't trust that it won't become a more high-pressure situation.
I also heard that pregnant women with unborn children who will be Down Syndrome are offered an abortion. They don't have to take it, but if they don't they will be 100% responsible for the medical costs for their children...
I just hate that I don't trust any side - not the politicians and/or bureaucrats, not the insurance people, not the media reporting on it. And I rarely like big government's solutions on problems for me. And most of all, I hate all the vitriol on all sides. And it DOES come from both sides...
no subject
• Will not lead to government-sponsored euthanasia. This bill provides an option for individuals to discuss life-extending measures under various scenarios and for Medicare to cover the cost. It is entirely the individual's choice; it does not require anyone to use the benefit and it does not penalize those who don't. Patients and their families would consult with health professionals, not government officials, if they choose to use the benefit.
The bill provides for an option that every five years, a doctor can take the time to counsel a patient about what is involved when approaching the end of their life: do they want heroic measures taken if they should have a cardiac arrest? do they want to be hooked up to machines if they are in a coma? do they want to have a living will? do they want to die at home among their family? what is a hospice, and how could it help them? These questions are all things we'd prefer to stick our heads in the sand over. I know *I* don't like to talk about them, and get very fidgety when my husband brings it up. But we do have to think about them.
Nowhere at all is there any reference to euthanasia. And if you think that it's not already being done by insurance companies, please read the link I provided-- her language is a bit rude, but the situation she describes is exactly how it is NOW-- insurance companies basically telling families that they will not pay for their family members to have certain measures taken at the end of their lives.
• Will not lead to government-sponsored abortions. An amendment was added in the Energy and Commerce Committee that explicitly states no public money can be used to fund abortions
You can see right there that the abortion claim is false.
Anyway, I do understand being conflicted when it comes to political matters. This one hits pretty close to home. I do hope that you are able to come to a decision about it that makes you comfortable.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
I am surrounded by people who are ultra-right-wing-conservative, and who don't want to hear anything else. The very few of us who don't believe that way, tend to speak in low-voiced clusters, and change the subject when others come our way.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
(PS Can you email me and send me your new snail mail address? I am sad to say I mislaid your beautiful invitation, and I have something for you!)
no subject
Of course, different countries have different issues. Canada isn't perfect, not by a long shot, but everyone has a right to healthcare, and that is something that I feel is intrinsic to our national culture. I hope that one day all Americans will have the same right. I hope very deeply for all your sakes as I have heard too many stories of desperately afraid and unhappy people in the States who have nowhere to turn.
no subject
As if there would not be *some* problems in *any* system! But the scare-mongers don't care if they are misleading people, as long as they can spread fear.
no subject
Another thing that makes me shake my head is that those ranters/anti people keep on referring to socialistic Europe (aka cesspool), without having a single clue how healthcare is arranged here. That is that every Dutch citizen above the age of 18 is privately ensured (no government healthcare funding), for those who cannot afford that get tax reductions, but yeah my kids are freely insured which means I never have to make decisions regarding them: what my kids need, they get. Neonatal care, pre-neonatal care is for free and trust me, my insurance company is more than happy to bill me for other stuff if the hospital doesn't bill it clearly.
I just don't get it why a health young woman is being treated so simply because she might want to have kids or that when fate hits you and you're health insurance is suddenly denied because you've become a risk. I just don't get the cruelty of insurance companies who will do anything to find a reason why a client should pay out of pocket. Again, it is greed and no compassion in sight... So yes, I do worry for my US friends where this will end.
no subject
no subject
The ultimate irony in all this screaming about death panels is that the insurance companies are pretty much doing this now. I have an online friend (have known her since 2002--fellow LOTR geek) whose 16 year-old son contracted an extremely rare form of cancer about four years ago. Because it is rare, and won't make Big Pharma much money as a result, very little research has been done on it. It attacks boys between the ages of 9-20, and occasionally teenaged girls. No cure has been found (obviously) and most patients don't live longer than 3 years, which was indeed the case with my friend's son. While the pediatric oncology department at the hospital in Portland, Maine was fabulous, EVERY step in that sweet boy's treatment was a fight with the insurance company. They were essentially saying, "Your son is a drain on the company; he has no right to live." And the deductibles were huge; I'm sure the family--bereft now of their brave and inspirational boy--is also going to be struggling financially forever.
You don't get much closer to a death panel than that, folks. And compare it to the exhaustive, pull-out-all-the-stops triage care being given to desperately brain-injured soldiers on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. That's GOVERNMENT medicine. (It should be noted that veterans' care has a ways to go stateside--the result of 30 years of neglect.)
I really appreciate you and Claudia bringing all this up. I'm just sick to death of watching people being manipulated by corporations into supporting policy decisions that are patently NOT in their best interests. It is pure evil, what's being done right now. I hope everyone reads what you've got here and does whatever research they need to do to be sure.
no subject
Do you know, they showed on the news the other day, a senior citizen who did not BELIEVE that Medicare was a government program? She kept saying "Keep the government's hands off of my Medicare!" *shakes head*
no subject
What gets me is that we pay for people from other countries (some even from countries with gov't paid health care) to come here and get free high-cost medical prodecures. :\
I really do think that a patient bill of rights in each state will cover a lot, if not all, of these issues. We have them for auto and homeowner's insurance, why not health care? If the insurance company wants to do business in the state, then they have to abide by the bill of rights for that state, which should include covering pre-existing conditions, covering all prescriptions, putting a cap on co-pays, etc. Make it the insurance companies' problem, not the government's. Some states do already have a patient's bill of rights, but that doesn't cover all these issues.
The system is broken and it does need to be fixed. As I said to Claudia's post, adding another system, while ignoring the problems in the one we already have, and throwing a bunch of money around isn't going to fix it. It's ridiculous what happened to you and everyone else in your situation, but I think people have become so desparate that they're willing to jump at anything that comes along.
no subject
You're assuming the insurance company would actually answer to the state; that it actually (1) cares about its clientele, and (2) wants to conduct business with integrity. Given the great big finger Wall Street has served the masses who bailed them out, why should we assume the massively wealthy insurance companies won't do the same?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I now have insurance through my employer, but our monthly premium went up by about 25% a paycheck--the insurance company said it was because we as a group were not as healthy in the last half of 2008 and the first half of 2009. The agency that handles our insurance is now trying to educate us on options that they plan to implement in October. They are switching us to a Healthcare Savings Account. This should bring our premiums down, but will increase our out-of-pocket expenses. I'm one of the lucky ones. I understand how this works and have had to explain it to a few of my co-workers. Now here's the irony. I learned about HSA's while working for an insurance company that would not insure me because I had a pre-existing condition. I only got insurance through that company when the government told insurers that they had to provide coverage for their own employees.
For years after I left that company, I had no insurance at all. My daughter was able to qualify for Medicaid, but I had to wait till I had been on Social Security for two years before I could qualify for Medicare. Even once I got Medicare, I was afraid to use it because I couldn't afford the out-of -pocket costs.
Now that I have good insurance, i choose to go to the in-hospital clinic that most of the uninsured in Indianapolis use. I choose it because that is where I have gone for years, and my daughter has always got good care there. One of my friends, who is anti-healthcare reform always comments when she looks around the crowded waiting room that this is what we will all have to put up with with nationalized medicine. I told her that we have rarely known anything other than this system and it is just part of the price of getting healthcare--nationalized or not.
I hope that the yelling stops and real help for the masses comes from this.
Just my two-cents worth.
no subject
no subject
Our system is far from perfect, but we know if we fall ill,treatment and drugs are available regardless of status or income.If you prefer to go privately and can afford it,you are free to do so.
no subject
It just makes me want to bang my head against a wall.
no subject
I think people just fear change. Heaven forbid that the government look out for the people, because then we might become communists. People need to get their heads out of their asses and actually listen to what is being proposed instead of just filling in what they don't know with their own fears.
Also, I don't care what your stand on abortion is. If you don't believe in it, don't have it done. But it is a person's choice, like it or not. That is the law, and even though we have some pretty backward states, for the most part it holds true.
I can't watch the news anymore because I get so mad. Everyone was so thrilled that Obama was elected, and now that he's doing exactly what he promised, they're pissed. Forcryinoutloud! People, make up your mind or shut up and sit down.
no subject
I'm beginning to think that expecting logic and common sense from these people is impossible. The only solution is for those who *WANT* health care reform to start doing their own shouting.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think the rudeness and the shouting down of more reasonable POV's is exactly the point. They don't want to hear the other side, and they don't want anyone else to hear it either. It is theatre, whether or not these people are getting paid.
Regardless of any merit their views might have, their tactics are beyond disgusting.
no subject
no subject
My biggest complaint about all the screaming that is going on regarding the proposed Health Care Plan is that most people are taking their info from soundbites on the news--regardless of which side of the Liberal-Conservative span they are on. And most of the things that are being said are outright wrong, or being taken terribly out of context.
I have pulled up the 1000+ page bill and have begun to read it, to try to understand just what it says for myself. It's going to take me a few weeks to get through the whole thing as I really want to understand what it says.
I get the impression that very few of the screeching mob on either side have actually done so. What bothers me most is that a good portion of the politicians on both side have not read it in its entirety either, and so can't answer questions when they are speaking to their constituents.
I want those who can't be covered by insurance under current rules, or those who can be covered but only by impoverishing themselves, to be able to get and pay for quality care. I most definitely want all pre-natal and neo-natal quality care to be provided for every woman who is bearing a child, regardless of ability to pay.
I want families who have members with cancer (whether children or adults) to be able to get the very best care they can for them, regardless of the prognosis, even if it's giving the person another year or three before the cancer takes them; without having to work three jobs (assuming jobs are available) or filing bancruptcy. (This is a very sensitive point for me as this happened to my best friend and twenty years later they are STILL paying the medical bills for the 12-year-old son they lost.)
But I hate how everyone is RUSHING to get this passed. We've seen in the past where government programs that were rushed through they ended up being a disaster for the people that they were initially meant to support. I'm sure you can name several of them without much mental effort. I'm not saying to take 4 to 10 years to get it done, but surely we don't need to force the bill through in the next 30 days, do we?
Can't we afford to take the time to make certain that everyone knows exactly what is really in the bill so that the misinformation that is being spewed by the media and people with an agenda doesn't force an unnatural outcome to the bill's passing or not? Read it yourself before you make up your mind about it. Don't rely on the media to educate you about it.
Call your congressman and senator, and insist that they stop and read and UNDERSTAND the whole bill... all 1000+ pages of it... before they vote on it, not just "talking points" that obsfucate the reality of the legislation. Insist that they use objectivity and not "Party opinion" when it comes to voting on it. I might not necessarily agree with their final decision but I'll certainly respect it a LOT more if I know they made it with full knowledge and understanding of what and why they voted the way they did.
I truly want Health Care Reform... but I want it done well, and not just rushed through to prop up a politician's approval ratings or to show they kept a campaign promise (most of which get broken anyway quite quickly after the election ends and the person is in office).
Let's just take the time and effort to do it right with thoughtful consideration for what is really needed, and not just what is politically expedient.
*Er, sorry about the speech... Let me get down off this soapbox*
no subject
I sadly suspect you are correct that most have not read all the bill. I confess, I've only checked out certain parts of it, rather than trying to actually read it all the way through.
Unfortunately, I also suspect the reason for the rush and hurry. The President remembers the last time reform was shot down. It took 16 years before anyone was brave enough to tackle it again. Our country can't afford another 16 years of the same-old same-old.
If I honestly thought both sides would spend a few months actually going over the bill and not simply trying to railroad it (one way or the other) I would not mind waiting another few months, or even a year. But I am afraid that the money and effort being poured in by the opponents will do the exact same thing that happened before.
Token dissident
Well, there goes that. At least nothing's turned violent.
But. I still am concerned with this bill because I would personally rather have private insurance than public insurance, and I don't want to have to pay for both.
The bill itself won't ax private insurance, but it's going to make continuing it an economic disincentive, which means that over time more and more people may have to switch.
Secondly, the mindset that public insurance creates concerns me. Under private insurance, patients are people who need to be kept alive with expensive procedures that will screw you out of every penny. Under public insurance, those people can be viewed as burdens on the system. You're screwed either way, but I'd rather be screwed by people who want to keep me alive. That's not the same thing as the euthanasia horror stories, but it at least explains why people are willing to believe them.
(And generally speaking, I prefer getting screwed by businesses than getting screwed by the government, because businesses can't tax you and don't have an army.)
And finally and most importantly, what's the rush? Why can't we have time for our representatives to read the bill and niggle over it to look for loopholes that nobody's noticed yet?
That's really what I want more than anything else at this point. Read the freaking bill. I'm tired (already) of this administration trying to rush things through Congress before Congress--and its constituents--can find out what they're voting for. So far most of the things that have been rushed through haven't worked (unemployment has risen above no-stimulus predictions since the stimulus).
Now, I do agree with you that the system's messed up. But I think the best way to take care of that is to get rid of any sort of third-party system, so that no one is making any sort of money off my potential illnesses. Let me save my money privately in case of an emergency; reserve third parties for only the most dire and unpredictable of circumstances. And if I had my money that's going into Social Security (which I likely will never see again) back I would more than willingly help someone else who can't afford a treatment out. I can't do that if my money's being used elsewhere. And. Make it no longer economically sensible for healthcare providers to settle lawsuits out of court. Lots and lots of tort reform would make medical costs go down.
Ultimately, conservatives are getting vitriolic because this is happening so quickly, and at a very bad time in our economy. We believe that we cannot as a nation afford doing this right now. We'd be upset anyway because this is happening at all, but on top of everything else it's rubbing salt in our wounds.
There are other concerns I have with the whole thing: the incentives that pharmaceutical companies currently have to develop new products, which are then used worldwide by countries that do have universal health care, the fact that there's no other country for conservatives to run to if they don't like it here, the fact that this has never been tried on a country this large...
Token dissident, cont'd.
But the thing that worries me most now is that apparently the White House wants us to report those who are spreading this misinformation (by whose definition?). Huh? What are you even going to do with that information? Why not use your great marketing genius that worked so well during the campaign to reduce the other people to irrelevance?
I would love to hear a calm, rational discussion on the matter--an old Lincoln-Douglas debate, by which I mean "Two hours for the argument; one hour for the rebuttal" so that everyone's opinion is heard in a fair matter and all arguments can be presented coherently. Since our attention spans aren't that long anymore, I guess it's a vain hope.
I hope I was able to present my thoughts as an "anti-healthcare" person (what does that mean, anti-healthcare! Of course I'm pro-healthcare! Just not government-paid!) in a non-rude fashion. I know, especially because of your disclaimer, that I'm outnumbered here, and I'm sure given where you live that you've heard these arguments ad nauseam, but I at least wanted to give you a glimpse of how someone on the other side of this debate is thinking so that we can have some rational discussion of this. Let's sidestep the whole "town hall, raucous protest" thing and discuss it like civilized Americans right here.
Finally, I wanted to say that I respect you because you voted for Obama for very rational and personal reasons. That's a lot more than I can say about most of my acquaintances.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
I wish I could be as sanguine as you are about the insurance companies wanting to keep people alive. I don't think that really is their concern, or there wouldn't be all these caps on coverage, or the denial of coverage when people actually NEED the services they have been paying premiums on.
I do tend to be a rational and selfish person when it comes to voting, and I have to say that the main campaign promise that got me, and that if nothing else at all comes of this bill, I hope will: the elimination of the "pre-existing conditions" clause, and the denial of coverage for those who actually have the nerve to get sick. I would also like to see caps on premiums, and the elimination of lifetime caps on coverage, though those aren't quite as urgent to me. So if nothing else but that gets done, I will be moderately pleased.
But I'm afraid even those reforms are not going to make it in the current circus atmosphere.
(By the way, though you are in the minority of commenters on this post, you are not totally alone--
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
Re: Token dissident, cont'd.
no subject
Thought you might enjoy a little laugh. It really is a dreadfully serious question and I hate all the half-truths, though. So seriously, thanks for this post.
no subject
I don't think Americans really understand just how the NHS is regarded in Britain. We moan about it sometimes - well of course we do. But compared with what America has it is fantastic!
These euthinasia stories are just total lies from beginning to end! Euthinasia is illegal here (of course it is). There is much controvosy over people travelling to Switzerland to euthenase themselves - and the threat that relatives who help them could be prosecuted here.
I think the "stories" come from a couple of newspaper articles where terminal cancer patients were allegedly denied expensive drugs which MIGHT have prolonged their lives by a few months. No doctor ever 'fessed up to this being the case and it is understandable that, if you are dying of cancer and you read that there is a drug which might give you a bit more time you will want to have it.
But honestly, the UK National Health Service is excellent! Filled with caring professionals.
It is NOT the equivalent of your current "charity" health care. It is used by everyone and therefore not seen as "second-rate" - as indeed it is not.
I can get a same day appointment to see my doctor. I do not pay for ANY medicine. I can get surgery if I need it. I do not have to worry about getting ill!
Or my kids getting ill - or their kids. What is so wrong with that?
Treatment is based on need - not on the ability to pay.
Just read the comments on
http://liz-marcs.livejournal.com/453187.html?page=3&view=7353667#comments
(no subject)
no subject
(That isn't to say we *liked* how our last President turned out...*Sigh*...But that's not the issue here, as he's not president anymore, so I'll stop that one there)
I don't understand politics and I don't understand economics. I know our economy is messed up (particularly in California) but really, this all goes over my head. I know I've been let off with being 'too young' to understand such things, and I may be only young but I'm not getting any younger *wry look* and I'll have to understand them sometime.
I'm glad you brought this up because it helps me understand what people are going on about somewhat better (though I still don't completely get it) I'm on MediCal myself and one thing I do understand about my insurance is that no good doctors seem to accept it (even my neurologist doesn't normally, though because it was me, he did, thank God...and he convinced my neurosurgeon to, too. That was a definite blessing!)
But right now I do not have a physician I can go see, because the first one they gave me barely speaks English and all her other patients are Vietnamese, and when I tried again the physician ended up being one who worked for Planned Parenthood and didn't work as a GP for anyone else. o.o...I really need help figuring out what to do here...
*Sigh*
Anyway sorry for unloading all of that Dreamflower. I just wanted to say, thanks for putting this up and I definitely agree with you. I'm just not sure what to do politically, as my granddad says Democrats raise taxes and Republicans start wars...He votes Green or Independent normally...I think I should either do that or move to England, lol.
Thanks again, mellon-nin.
Your friend,
Kaylee