are YOU for or against Obama's health care bill?

[BRHornet45]

tons of debate on here sons. I wanna see a poll. simple question, simple answer.

[Scola]

For. Happy it finally got passed, its a very watered down version but its the only thing they could compromise on.

[boutons_deux]

In spite of having to include some really, really bad shit to get it past the corps and doctors (avoiding their successful attack in '94), the bill also has some really good stuff.

The bad stuff will be addressed and the good stuff will get better. It's a battle won, with casualties, in hugely necessary, justifiable, non-bogus war for human decency.

[coyotes_geek]

Against. It's a poorly conceived bill that's destined to fail.

[SouthernFried]

It's the end of the beginning...which really started under FDR. Sad day for America, but Marx and Lenin are chuckling in their graves "we told you so..."

...and so it goes.

[benefactor]

Against. It's a poorly conceived bill that's destined to fail.
This.

[ElNono]

If being against it means going back to what was the status quo until last tuesday, then I can't really tell you that I'm against it. I'm definitely not for it, since I think reform should have been quite different from this. I just don't know that it's so black and white, yes or no situation.

[101A]

The bill utterly fails to address the (ostensibly) single biggest issue in health care in this Country; Cost. Fix that, and everything else is easy. Don't fix it, and nothing, ultimately, is fixed.

[whottt]

If Obama is so fucking cool and with it how come he doesn't legalize the plants?

At least the South American commies are legalizing their shit.

Obama OTOH is forcing us directly into the hands of the pharmaceutical companies.

Fuck him. And don't say this is partisan...I was bitching about the plants before he even announced his candidacy.

Obama fears no one and pwns big corporations...man of the people, just shit on 200 years of some sort of bi-partisan govenment, which is something both parties could have done before in the past, yet always managed to resist the temptation...and now the fuckover contest is totally on between the parties and none of us, not a one of us, that actually live here, will come out the better for this.


If he truly fears no one and is as ballsy as you think...if that Democrat congress is what it claims to be, as it tries to play itself off as being as it legislates us into corporate servitude...they'll the legalize the shit.



I wipe my ass with health insurance. I could careless about it. I think it's the problem. It will be free to me, and I can say with all certainty, you can have it. I do not want it. I have zero intention of using it whether I have it or not.

[whottt]

The bill utterly fails to address the (ostensibly) single biggest issue in health care in this Country; Cost. Fix that, and everything else is easy. Don't fix it, and nothing, ultimately, is fixed.

Right...there's a difference between medical insurance and medical care. This bill has slightly lowered the cost of medical insurance as it made it mandatory, and it hasn't done jack shit to actually make the care cheaper.


Medical insurance, doesn't make medical care cheaper, it makes it more expensive. It also doesn't keep you from getting crushing medical debts.

It's like people truly believe they are never going to have to pay anything but a deductible and a premium for the rest of their lives or something and their medical problems are over.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I am for anything that pisses off whott, wc, jackiesommerset, spursncowboys, yonivore..:toast

[SouthernFried]

I am for anything that pisses off whott, wc, jackiesommerset, spursncowboys, yonivore..:toast

And that folks, is what's most important.

[baseline bum]

Against. This bill is a handout to the insurance companies without a public health plan.

[boutons_deux]

"single biggest issue in health care in this Country; Cost"

agreed, the "cost" to patients is REVENUE to corps and docs. And they have many more $Bs to go "Harry and Louise" on reform much more dishonestly and aggressively than they did in '94. They had to be bought with ugliest compromises to get anything done.

What SPECIFICALLY is YOUR solution to control rip-off health costs in USA?

Other advanced countries have addressed this issue, and they still have private insurers, and still have plenty of doctors, and use the same drugs and medical technologies as the
USA.

NPR's "Sick Around The World" is an excellent survey of how other countries control costs while providing care for everybody, with no patients/families destroyed/beaten down into poverty and bankruptcy by medical catastrophe or even non-catastrophic care. USA is World Champion Loser when caring for its own people.

But I expect the nativists and USA supremacists won't watch "Sick Around The World" because they don't want to learn how inferior and childish the USA is compared to the other advanced countries.

Health care is a huge fucking mess retarding the USA, with no solution in sight, while it was SOLVED long ago by other countries.

[baseline bum]

NPR's "Sick Around The World" is an excellent survey of how other countries control costs while providing care for everybody, with no patients/families destroyed/beaten down into poverty and bankruptcy by medical catastrophe or even non-catastrophic care. USA is World Champion Loser when caring for its own people.

Are you talking about the PBS Frontline episode? Amazing show.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

[rjv]

i voted an extremely reluctant and pissed off yes.

[cheguevara]

Against. This bill is a handout to the insurance companies without a public health plan.

right but it leaves the door open for public option. That accomplishes their goal.

it was either that or complete failure.

[EVAY]

i voted an extremely reluctant and pissed off yes.

this.

I HATE this bill in most ways, but I like that insurance companies can no longer deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. This makes it worthwhile to me.

I wish that the republicans had given voice to the things that they thought were good, rather than saying no to it all. If they had done so, I think they would be in better shape going forward. Now, just saying "Repeal and Replace" promises nothing, which is what they've come up with so far.

[coyotes_geek]

this.

I HATE this bill in most ways, but I like that insurance companies can no longer deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. This makes it worthwhile to me.

I wish that the republicans had given voice to the things that they thought were good, rather than saying no to it all. If they had done so, I think they would be in better shape going forward. Now, just saying "Repeal and Replace" promises nothing, which is what they've come up with so far.

While I respectfully disagree with your conclusion that the positives outweigh the negatives in the bill, I do agree that the republicans have done a pretty piss poor job in opposing it. Given the ultra-partisan political climate of today I think it's a bit much to have expected the republicans to say "here's what we like about the democrats bill", but they should have at least come up with some semblance of a plan of their own. Instead of just mindlessly screaming SOCIALISM, the message should have been "their plan is too expensive, their plan won't work".

The republicans very easily could have put together something centered around republican-friendly concepts like tort reform, allowing insurance providers to sell policies across state lines, expanding HSA accounts and tax cuts. Would such a plan actually work? Doesn't matter. The democrats weren't interested in republican ideas. But at least that way the gop would have had the shots being directed at their ideas instead of at them for not having an idea.

[EVAY]

While I respectfully disagree with your conclusion that the positives outweigh the negatives in the bill, I do agree that the republicans have done a pretty piss poor job in opposing it. Given the ultra-partisan political climate of today I think it's a bit much to have expected the republicans to say "here's what we like about the democrats bill", but they should have at least come up with some semblance of a plan of their own. Instead of just mindlessly screaming SOCIALISM, the message should have been "their plan is too expensive, their plan won't work".

Fair enough.:toast

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

In spite of having to include some really, really bad shit to get it past the corps and doctors (avoiding their successful attack in '94), the bill also has some really good stuff.

The bad stuff will be addressed and the good stuff will get better. It's a battle won, with casualties, in hugely necessary, justifiable, non-bogus war for human decency.

The bad stuff will never get addressed. You're a dumbass.

[Spurminator]

I don't know yet. We'll see how it goes. But I hope it works.

[TheProfessor]

i voted an extremely reluctant and pissed off yes.
Same. Not as optimistic as boutons about the bad stuff getting fixed, but we'll see what happens next.

[DarrinS]

I doesn't go far enough.


It needs more government control --- maybe something between Logan's Run and Soilent Green.

[ploto]

It's a move in the right direction- but I wanted a public option.

I do like that kids up to age 26 can stay on their parents' family health insurance because many young adults are uninsured.

[coyotes_geek]

The bad stuff will never get addressed.

Exactly. After all the trouble it took to get to this point the last thing the democrats want to do is basically admit that they pushed through a bad bill by going back and attempting to "fix the bad stuff". Instead they'll just talk up this bill as being just fine and look to move on to something else. The bill we've got now is the one we're going to have to live with.

[rjv]

Exactly. After all the trouble it took to get to this point the last thing the democrats want to do is basically admit that they pushed through a bad bill by going back and attempting to "fix the bad stuff". Instead they'll just talk up this bill as being just fine and look to move on to something else. The bill we've got now is the one we're going to have to live with.

i do not know if i necessarily agree with this. if history is an ongoing discourse between thesis and anthisesis (which i believe it is), then progess is incremental, with the resulting product of a dialectic recognizing its own contradictions and then creating a new dialogue.

this is a major loss for single payer (which is what i was for) for several years, but it may just be a linear step in what will be a long process towards true reform within our current dysfunctional democracy.

[coyotes_geek]

i do not know if i necessarily agree with this. if history is an ongoing discourse between thesis and anthisesis (which i believe it is), then progess is incremental, with the resulting product of a dialectic recognizing its own contradictions and then creating a new dialogue.

this is a major loss for single payer (which is what i was for) for several years, but it may just be a linear step in what will be a long process towards true reform within our current dysfunctional democracy.

The problem I see with regards to whether or not a public option will become a reality in the future is two-fold. In the short term, the neccessary congressional political will for a PO is not there now and things don't get any easier for the pro-PO crowd after the mid-term elections in 2010 and congressional redistricting in 2012. In the longer term, the unfunded liabilities in medicare are going to catch up with us and I just don't see there being support for a public option at the same time we're being forced to raise taxes and cut benefits in order to keep medicare afloat.

At least that's my $0.02.

[Winehole23]

The Hegelian emphasis was unexpected, but maybe it's unreasonable to expect a through-and-through Hegelian not to brag about it eventually.

[rjv]

The problem I see with regards to whether or not a public option will become a reality in the future is two-fold. In the short term, the neccessary congressional political will for a PO is not there now and things don't get any easier for the pro-PO crowd after the mid-term elections in 2010 and congressional redistricting in 2012. In the longer term, the unfunded liabilities in medicare are going to catch up with us and I just don't see there being support for a public option at the same time we're being forced to raise taxes and cut benefits in order to keep medicare afloat.

At least that's my $0.02.

sure, there are many reasons to feel the public option will never come to fruition. another is the fact that our parties are both slaves to the corporate interests vested in health care the most.

perhaps i should have been less opaque in my remarks. i do not expect any changes to this current reform in the near future. all it did was take one step up from where it was before. but it is still in the abyss.

[rjv]

The Hegelian emphasis was unexpected, but maybe it's unreasonable to expect a through-and-through Hegelian not to brag about it eventually.

my perspective was not so much philosophically based as it was an observation on how history can occassionally work. hegel was not the first or last thinker to suggest such an historical process. he simply added aspects of the divine and determinism to his version.

i was not being metaphysical at all. but perhaps there was something to the way i posited it that would lead one to make the inference you have.

i don't really get the sardonic hue however.

[j.dizzle]

A 2000+ page bill makes me nervous..Theres probably so much hidden shit in there that will cost so much more then what ppl think. I dont like the fact that ppl think its great to have a government that is getting bigger by the day..Who the hell wants the IRS on your ass & the gov telling you what you can & cannot do??? Our economy & jobs should have been the number one focus. Expect slow growth for the next five years the way things are being handled.

[angel_luv]

I definitely don't want the bill IF it uses tax money to fund abortions. I am still not clear as to whether that occurs with the current bill. Can someone clear that up for me?

[Winehole23]

i don't really get the sardonic hue however.Easy hoss, you use it plenty yourself. Mornin cup of coffee to me.

Top o' the mornin to ya, rjv. :toast

[rjv]

Easy hoss, you use it plenty yourself. Mornin cup of coffee to me.

Top o' the mornin to ya, rjv. :toast

didn't mean i did not get why you were being sarcastic. i meant i did not get the actual sarcasm.

[Winehole23]

I meant it in all jocundity, and I thought it was a little bit funny. Perhaps I miscalculated.

[EVAY]

I definitely don't want the bill IF it uses tax money to fund abortions. I am still not clear as to whether that occurs with the current bill. Can someone clear that up for me?

Preexisting law forbids federal funds ever being used to fund or pay for abortions. That does not change in this law.

There was some flap about it because some folks said that the fact some private insurance policies may cover abortion procedures, combined with the fact that some folks may get federal help in paying for insurance premiums if their income is below a certain level, led to concern that it was a 'back door' approach to federally funding abortions. That is why some democrats (e.g. Stupak, etc.)were not going to support the bill, unless Obama promised to reaffirm the ban on federal funds being used in any way.

That is why Obama came out with that Executive Order today, reaffirming that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions, period. That was the confirmation that Stupak et.al. wanted to get them to support the Senate version of the bill.

[Wild Cobra]

I am for anything that pisses off whott, wc, jackiesommerset, spursncowboys, yonivore..:toast
In a twisted way, I'm glad this bill passed.

In a few years, it will prove you all to be libtards.

[Wild Cobra]

I doesn't go far enough.


It needs more government control --- maybe something between Logan's Run and Soilent Green.
I'll bet if those movies had a political history, this style of bill would be in it.

[Wild Cobra]

It's a move in the right direction- but I wanted a public option.

I do like that kids up to age 26 can stay on their parents' family health insurance because many young adults are uninsured.
So...

In a time that many businesses are going out of business, you like the fact that the government is making their costs of insuring their employees higher, promoting more layoffs and more business bankruptcies?

[ploto]

There was some flap about it because some folks said that the fact some private insurance policies may cover abortion procedures...

I would be curious to know if any insurance covers elective abortive procedures. I do not know of any.

I did find this:


5 states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance plans; 4 limit coverage to cases when the woman’s life is endangered; 1 limits coverage to life endangerment, rape and incest.


12 states restrict abortion coverage in insurance plans for public employees.

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RICA.pdf

[EVAY]

I would be curious to know if any insurance covers elective abortive procedures. I do not know of any.

I did find this:





http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RICA.pdf

I don't know of any, either, Ploto. I have never considered it, frankly, as anything that insurance might cover.

Does anyone know of any private insurance that covers abortion procedures?

I mean, it obviously would be theoretically possible, but I can't imagine why an insurance company would offer it. Who would make them?

[Fpoonsie]

http://photos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs410.snc3/24795_1411977225130_1403501120_31146168_3892826_n. jpg

[DarkReign]

Its a typical half-baked, half-thought, half-done, half-ass compromised bill shoved through against popular will.

Proponents of universal healthcare admit this bill doesnt go nearly far enough, nor does it address key variables (cost of care, not insurance).

Opponents see it as the end of everything. The first step, as it were.

I am against the bill only because I think the government mandating that all Americans have to purchase a good or service (oh, except for the poor souls who cant afford it, of course) from a private corporation is patently unconstitutional. Make it a redistributive tax, or an indirect tax on some goods or services so as to allay any Constitutional concerns.

Nah, fuck it. Fuck the whole document wholesale, really. The Constitution only means something to people when its convenient. If youre going to force health coverage upon all Americans, could you at least adhere to the Constitution while doing so, please?

No, lets just make shit up as we go along. Congress and Obama, IMO, made a deal with the insurance corporations. Basically, your time is short, but we're going to throw you a really big bone and give you a couple years until everyone figures out this is complete bullshit and would rather have an universal system.

Compromise, compromise, compromise. Life is not about compromise in everything. Do it right or dont do it all.

[angel_luv]

Preexisting law forbids federal funds ever being used to fund or pay for abortions. That does not change in this law.

There was some flap about it because some folks said that the fact some private insurance policies may cover abortion procedures, combined with the fact that some folks may get federal help in paying for insurance premiums if their income is below a certain level, led to concern that it was a 'back door' approach to federally funding abortions. That is why some democrats (e.g. Stupak, etc.)were not going to support the bill, unless Obama promised to reaffirm the ban on federal funds being used in any way.

That is why Obama came out with that Executive Order today, reaffirming that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions, period. That was the confirmation that Stupak et.al. wanted to get them to support the Senate version of the bill.

Thanks very much for the info.

[RandomGuy]

I wipe my ass with health insurance. I could careless about it. I think it's the problem. It will be free to me, and I can say with all certainty, you can have it. I do not want it. I have zero intention of using it whether I have it or not.

... he says before getting into an accident that requires numerous recontructive surgeries to some appendege to achieve some semblance of functionality.

That or some nasty bug (necrotizing fasciitis) that doesn't give a shit how healthy you are, but literally eats a hole in you, if you are one of the seven in ten to survive the infection.

Health insurance isn't about intending to use it or not.

It is about having it because health outcomes cannot be known.

[RandomGuy]

In a twisted way, I'm glad this bill passed.

In a few years, it will prove you all to be libtards.

First off, the youtube video in your sig is epic. :toast

Secondly, in a few years,

m0r7pCHpSkQ