Comments on: Is The House Bill a Real Answer For Health Care?

By: ProfElwood

ProfElwood — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 05:39:19 +0000

I know that I sound like a broken record, but then again, so do all these other points. When anyone proposes a health care bill that sends the AMA, the pharmaceutical companies, the hospitals, and the health insurance companies into screaming hissy fits, I'll support it. But instead, we're going to cut back on the amount of care rather than the cost of care. And, as I've stated before, it makes no sense to support government created competition in order to fix government created (via McCarran-Ferguson) monopolies. It would be like allowing a doctor to put a tourniquet on your leg so that he could torture you into getting it replace with an artificial one.

By: adelinesdad

adelinesdad — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 05:13:51 +0000

With regards to your experience with your employer, are those numbers subsidized by your employer? It is common practice for employers to subsidize a smaller percentage of adding a spouse to a plan, which would make it appear that the spouse costs more than the employee. If that's the case, the numbers are the result of her not being an employee and you being an employee, more than her gender. But, I don't dispute that insurance companies can charge women more, so I'm just nit-picking there.

"With globalization, declining salaries and rising unemployment still changing the face of the American economy we would be much better off if we were not saddled with the cost of our healthcare in the same way we are now."

I agree that we need to change the way we are saddled with health care costs, starting with decoupling them from employment. I assume this is what you mean when you listed globalization as one of the reasons we need to change things. So if we agree that we need to lift the burden from businesses that have to carry their employee's health care costs, why does the current proposal tax businesses who don't provide it? Isn't that the opposite of what we'd want to do if we want our businesses to be able to compete globally? Isn't that the opposite of what we'd want to do if we want people who are unemployed to be able to keep their coverage?

Secondly, changing the way we are saddled with health care costs does not make those costs go away. We can adjust things to make it more fair, but unless we deal with the high cost of health care, it will still be a burden. It's just a question of whether that burden is an insurance premium or a hidden tax or fee.

By: shannonlee

shannonlee — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:32:25 +0000

Although most things in America are truly best left to the private sector, healthcare is not one of them. With globalization, declining salaries and rising unemployment still changing the face of the American economy we would be much better off if we were not saddled with the cost of our healthcare in the same way we are now. Healthcare should be on the same list as our police and fire protection, road maintenance and other infrastructure items.

I competely agree.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:13:36 +0000

“CBO score is 1.055 trillion.”

That's now. Mr. Bell may have slipped, or he may have put the revised figure, later, already into the queue.

By: JSpencer

JSpencer — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:06:10 +0000

Money is god. Humanity is dispensible. Government and corporate interests uphold this status quo and the electorate stumbles along in various degrees of cluelessness… (most TMV readers and contributors exempted

By: Davebo

Davebo — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:46:37 +0000

Although the House has finally come up with a bill for national healthcare it falls short of accomplishing Democrat’s original goal of total healthcare. When the news broke out today it was touted as an $894 billion piece of legislation, but the congressional budget office believes the bill will spend more like $105 trillion over the next decade.

You're missing a decimal point. CBO score is 1.055 trillion.

By: Flint teachers and district headed back to court Thursday over proposed health care insurance change | Auto Insurance Quotes

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:34:36 +0000

[...] Is The House Bill a Real Answer For Health Care? (themoderatevoice.com) [...]

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:15:15 +0000

It's a first step and a substantial precedent (and accomplished fact, which will be the object of future incrementalism, not reversed) for the House Democrats, and for the Democrats. (They are once more co-ordinated; Reid already has stated that Senate Dems are receptive to a public option, the core of the Dem initiative, which is a success in the House.)