FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

GeorgeFHayek · Feb 5, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Starman said:

cranberry said:

a) single payer wasn't politically possible
Click to expand...

Of course not, after Kumbayabama decided for the 47 gazillionth time to punt on first-goal from the 7-yard line in an effort to build goodwill and cooperation from "Moderate Republicans."
Click to expand...

LOL ... yeah, single payer was right there, in his grasp, and he just let it slip away.

BenPoquette · Feb 5, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

LanceyHoward said:

Tarheel316 said:

GeorgeFHayek said:

Tarheel316 said:

Are you making fun of Lancey's situation?
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think he's making light of the interpretation of Lancey's situation. I am sure he/she is, like me, pleased that Lancey's condition was treatable (rather easily, it seems) and is not a serious cause for immediate and/or long-term concern.

I'll be the first to admit here that the whole pre-existing conditions challenge is a tough nut to crack. At my age I've seen this play out numerous times, and I certainly understand this as a root of dissatisfaction with the current (actually, the on-the-way-out) system. Most recently I had a first cousin whose older (late teens) son was diagnosed with cancer. Fortunately for him the cancer was caught early and the surgery/chemo regimen was (apparently) very successful. Unfortunately for him, he'll always have that pre-existing condition, which means that unless he goes to work for: 1) the government; or 2) some big firm, he's going to have both the cancer shadow AND the insurance shadow chasing him. I have serious problems with any system set up that way.

On the other hand, our health care system as it is emerged under a regime of insurance as primary financing mechanism, which means that an alternative approach (i.e., one in which insurance really is insurance, rather than prepaid health care) can't, as a practical, political matter, get a fair hearing. I think this is terribly unfortunate since what evidence there is (and there's not much, but there's some) suggests such a transition would be a very, very positive outcome.
Click to expand...

That's some good analysis. I just don't it's right for people to be bankrupted by medical bills. It's immoral. For starters, fee-for-service has got to go.
Click to expand...

My situation as treated with medication. The medication reduces my heart rate so but does not thin the blood so that the chances of clotting increase. So my future risk of a stroke is now much higher. nNw feel fine but if I lose my current insurance because of a layoff I will have trouble getting coverage of my heart condition becasue what insurance company wants to pay for recovery from a stroke? That was my orginal point.

To respond to a previous post where a guy said he had saved money all his life and it would be unfair for him to subsidize some irresponsible person I disagree. How many 55 year old people are two life events away from near bankruptcy? The first is a layoff where they lsoe their current insurance. And the second is a major medical crisis.

So if you or I have a stroke most of us will be pretty much wiped out, even if we have saved a couple of hundred thousand dollars. All the effort that went into saving that money will have been wasted becasue the medical companies will take everything you have. So in my view Obamacare is a great thing for the person who saved the extra money because if he suffers a medical crisis while uninsured there will be something left for his family. The guy who lived off his credit cards will have very little to lose so he actually makes out better in the old scenario where at some point both parties probably wind up on Medicaid. The irresponsible guy just arrives earlier.
Click to expand...

This again goes back to the fact that the actual medical procedures are too expensive. One of the reasons for this is malpractice insurance. That's another thing that frosted me about Obamacare...not only did he not sack up and actually go for what he wanted, he failed to even remotely address tort reform. And we've heard nothing about it since.

I don't care what side of the aisle a person is on, or what their political views are...if you think single-payer is the best solution, go for single-payer. Would there be a political price? Maybe, but is that how we want our president to make decisions? If all we are worried about is politics nothing productive will ever get done.

Boom_70 · Feb 5, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Charles Pierce on Drones:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/all-the-kings-drones-15063268

Riptide · Feb 5, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Boom_70 said:

Charles Pierce on Drones:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/all-the-kings-drones-15063268
Click to expand...

It says "Guest post by Tom Junod."

old_tony · Feb 5, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Tarheel316 said:

GeorgeFHayek said:

Tarheel316 said:

Are you making fun of Lancey's situation?
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think he's making light of the interpretation of Lancey's situation. I am sure he/she is, like me, pleased that Lancey's condition was treatable (rather easily, it seems) and is not a serious cause for immediate and/or long-term concern.

I'll be the first to admit here that the whole pre-existing conditions challenge is a tough nut to crack. At my age I've seen this play out numerous times, and I certainly understand this as a root of dissatisfaction with the current (actually, the on-the-way-out) system. Most recently I had a first cousin whose older (late teens) son was diagnosed with cancer. Fortunately for him the cancer was caught early and the surgery/chemo regimen was (apparently) very successful. Unfortunately for him, he'll always have that pre-existing condition, which means that unless he goes to work for: 1) the government; or 2) some big firm, he's going to have both the cancer shadow AND the insurance shadow chasing him. I have serious problems with any system set up that way.

On the other hand, our health care system as it is emerged under a regime of insurance as primary financing mechanism, which means that an alternative approach (i.e., one in which insurance really is insurance, rather than prepaid health care) can't, as a practical, political matter, get a fair hearing. I think this is terribly unfortunate since what evidence there is (and there's not much, but there's some) suggests such a transition would be a very, very positive outcome.
Click to expand...

That's some good analysis. I just don't it's right for people to be bankrupted by medical bills. It's immoral. For starters, fee-for-service has got to go.
Click to expand...

Great. Too bad Obamacare is set up to bankrupt people even before their first medical bill arrives.

3_Octave_Fart · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Ten years ago this week was the Columbia catastrophe.
Is it me, or does it seem totally overlooked?
In a society that seems to enjoy commemorating death and destruction, this gets short shrift.
Especially compared to the Challenger.

Starman · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

GeorgeFHayek said:

Starman said:

cranberry said:

a) single payer wasn't politically possible
Click to expand...

Of course not, after Kumbayabama decided for the 47 gazillionth time to punt on first-goal from the 7-yard line in an effort to build goodwill and cooperation from "Moderate Republicans."
Click to expand...

LOL ... yeah, single payer was right there, in his grasp, and he just let it slip away.
Click to expand...

Would he have gotten it ? Probably not. But he never even brought it to the table to be bargained away. Again the football analogy: he punted on first down (more accurately, he punted in pregame warmups).

He CERTAINLY would have gotten more energetic support out of his progressive base if he had at least given it a cursory shot. And there's a fighting chance some of that support might have carried over into the 2010 midterms.

Instead he worried about coming up with some concoction "centrist Republicans" could support. Unfortunately nobody ever informed him there are no "centrist Republicans."

Tarheel316 · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

old_tony said:

Tarheel316 said:

GeorgeFHayek said:

Tarheel316 said:

Are you making fun of Lancey's situation?
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think he's making light of the interpretation of Lancey's situation. I am sure he/she is, like me, pleased that Lancey's condition was treatable (rather easily, it seems) and is not a serious cause for immediate and/or long-term concern.

I'll be the first to admit here that the whole pre-existing conditions challenge is a tough nut to crack. At my age I've seen this play out numerous times, and I certainly understand this as a root of dissatisfaction with the current (actually, the on-the-way-out) system. Most recently I had a first cousin whose older (late teens) son was diagnosed with cancer. Fortunately for him the cancer was caught early and the surgery/chemo regimen was (apparently) very successful. Unfortunately for him, he'll always have that pre-existing condition, which means that unless he goes to work for: 1) the government; or 2) some big firm, he's going to have both the cancer shadow AND the insurance shadow chasing him. I have serious problems with any system set up that way.

On the other hand, our health care system as it is emerged under a regime of insurance as primary financing mechanism, which means that an alternative approach (i.e., one in which insurance really is insurance, rather than prepaid health care) can't, as a practical, political matter, get a fair hearing. I think this is terribly unfortunate since what evidence there is (and there's not much, but there's some) suggests such a transition would be a very, very positive outcome.
Click to expand...

That's some good analysis. I just don't it's right for people to be bankrupted by medical bills. It's immoral. For starters, fee-for-service has got to go.
Click to expand...

Great. Too bad Obamacare is set up to bankrupt people even before their first medical bill arrives.
Click to expand...

I have said all along that health care costs too much.

Tarheel316 · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Starman said:

GeorgeFHayek said:

Starman said:

cranberry said:

a) single payer wasn't politically possible
Click to expand...

Of course not, after Kumbayabama decided for the 47 gazillionth time to punt on first-goal from the 7-yard line in an effort to build goodwill and cooperation from "Moderate Republicans."
Click to expand...

LOL ... yeah, single payer was right there, in his grasp, and he just let it slip away.
Click to expand...

Would he have gotten it ? Probably not. But he never even brought it to the table to be bargained away. Again the football analogy: he punted on first down (more accurately, he punted in pregame warmups).

He CERTAINLY would have gotten more energetic support out of his progressive base if he had at least given it a cursory shot. And there's a fighting chance some of that support might have carried over into the 2010 midterms.

Instead he worried about coming up with some concoction "centrist Republicans" could support. Unfortunately nobody ever informed him there are no "centrist Republicans."
Click to expand...

Really. What's a centrist Republican? Doesn't exist.

Azrael · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Ideologically, Mr. Obama is a slenderer William Howard Taft.

YankeeFan · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Starman said:

And there's a fighting chance some of that support might have carried over into the 2010 midterms.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what would have happened.

GeorgeFHayek · Feb 6, 2013

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

YankeeFan said:

Starman said:

And there's a fighting chance some of that support might have carried over into the 2010 midterms.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what would have happened.
Click to expand...

LOL ... I was thinking along the same lines. I am sure Scott Brown wouldn't have been elected had Obama pushed for single payer.

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

GeorgeFHayek Member

BenPoquette Active Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

Riptide Well-Known Member

old_tony Well-Known Member

3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

Starman Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

Azrael Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

GeorgeFHayek Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

GeorgeFHayek Member

BenPoquette Active Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

Riptide Well-Known Member

old_tony Well-Known Member

3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

Starman Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

Azrael Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

GeorgeFHayek Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches