For the last week, my home page has been inundated with reports, opinion, and speculation about the repeal of Obamacare. The issue won't go away, even though there is little new or unexpected to report about. At one time my belief was that Republicans may try to repeal it or maybe not. But the only news that changed that limited view was "It might not be that easy for Republicans to do this." That first report from about a year ago outlined the difficulties in a methodical way, and the falder rahl since has been little more than playing out that first insightful scenario since then.
So in spite of all the recent coverage, I'm developing bored attitude that maybe it's about time for Congress to shit or get off the pot. Dump it, tweak it, or keep it. Whatever happens happens. No amount of coverage is going to change what Congress can or can't do, or what it ultimately does. I think we all know the main points of how this will play out, 24 hour coverage not withstanding.
When Obamacare was passed, it in no way resembled the single payer Canadian/European format that probably 95% of the electorate imagined it would be. The resulting lack luster support created a diversion that became this deformed puppy in the litter of ideas that no one knows what to do with. Not enough people want to kill it. Not enough want to keep it alive. So it just lays there barely able to sustain itself, but not quite ready to die, while Congress, for lack of anything else to do, pokes it with sticks.
If it does eventually die, it reopens a path to truly affordable healthcare once again. Although, this will take some time, because healthcare has left a bad taste in Congress, and the public vision of healthcare today is something no longer worth getting all that excited about. Today, the value of healthcare is driven mostly by it's usefulness as a political football. The concept of serving the public good, as it often seems, has been lost.
Obamacare is the doorway to a better system. Obamacare overall has been a good thing which has vastly lowered the cost of healthcare and saved numerous lives. It has a lot of room for improvement, but the improvement won't come unless the Republicans are eliminated from the picture.
The Republicans aim to destroy healthcare completely and take Planned Parenthood with it. Their intention is to kill off poor and minority Americans. The Republicans are nothing short of pure evil.
Quote from: Atheon on June 23, 2017, 10:22:39 AM
Obamacare is the doorway to a better system. Obamacare overall has been a good thing which has vastly lowered the cost of healthcare and saved numerous lives. It has a lot of room for improvement, but the improvement won't come unless the Republicans are eliminated from the picture.
The Republicans aim to destroy healthcare completely and take Planned Parenthood with it. Their intention is to kill off poor and minority Americans. The Republicans are nothing short of pure evil.
I won't disagree with most of that, but I think Obamacare was a doorway that will retard achieving the eventual goal. Having said that, I hope I am wrong. I would love to be wrong. I've heard the baby step argument used to support Obamacare. I'm just not as enthusiastic or convinced about it as some. Imagine the Republicans trying to repeal single payer as envisioned by most. If Republicans have a problem repealing Obamacare as it now stands, consider how politically suicidal it would be to repeal a program that helps everyone.
Free ponies for everyone! Until then, run around in a circle barking at every R-party rumor. D-party folk are so predictable.
If Obamacare is repealed, people will be reminded, very very quickly, why it was enacted in the first place, and this time they are going to be very angry.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on June 23, 2017, 09:57:49 PM
If Obamacare is repealed, people will be reminded, very very quickly, why it was enacted in the first place, and this time they are going to be very angry.
OK, but I predict the NRA will win ;-( Obamacare isn't free medicine, it is a fraud and a tyranny ... that is falling apart, just like all the other stuff Obama tried. Solyndra much? If you are for free medicine ... I can support that. Forget any insurance scheme. If you have an insurance scheme, no matter what your party, you are a fraud, or a shill for the insurance agents. But free medicine has never been proposed by any party ... wonder why?
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on June 23, 2017, 09:57:49 PM
If Obamacare is repealed, people will be reminded, very very quickly, why it was enacted in the first place, and this time they are going to be very angry.
I doubt that very much. People have been able to rationalize unbelievable things in the current administration, I don't think there will be any trouble whatsoever in rationalizing or spinning healthcare (or lack thereof) into a positive thing.
Quote from: Baruch on June 24, 2017, 12:35:07 AM
Obamacare isn't free medicine
It's not free, but I don't know who is saying it is. It is no more free than medical insurance before Obama. It attempts to provide insurance for everyone by forcing everyone to buy insurance or find someone else to buy it for them. I doubt that Obama himself would deny that, although his explanation would involve the usual politically post-modernistic dance routines.
Quote from: Baruch on June 24, 2017, 12:35:07 AM
it is a fraud and a tyranny
I realize this is an expression of personal distaste, rather than attempt to describe a thing with precise accuracy, and I hate to nit pick, but Obamacare is not a fraud, and no one has violated any criminal laws to enact it. I think you can make a case that it violates certain self righteous attitudes of some about their personal freedom. But it doesn't break any existing laws. I don't know what you mean about it being a tyranny. I suppose that is also an expression of distaste.
Quote from: Baruch on June 24, 2017, 12:35:07 AM
is falling apart,
I agree. It has been under attack since its inception, even by Democrats that almost immediately excused certain groups originally forced to fund it from participating. There is something unsolid about it's structure, which makes it vulnerable as a political target, and supported half heartedly by the half that accepts it, and as most will admit it needs to be fixed. Here "being fixed" signals a danger for the act. For many, "fixing" means to repeal. For Donald Trump, it means simply tweaking it a bit and putting the Trump Label on it. So far, the big concerns like major insurers withdrawing from states hasn't been addressed, at least to my knowledge.
Quote from: SGOS on June 24, 2017, 09:44:49 AM
It's not free, but I don't know who is saying it is. It is no more free than medical insurance before Obama. It attempts to provide insurance for everyone by forcing everyone to buy insurance or find someone else to buy it for them. I doubt that Obama himself would deny that, although his explanation would involve the usual politically post-modernistic dance routines.
I realize this is an expression of personal distaste, rather than attempt to describe a thing with precise accuracy, and I hate to nit pick, but Obamacare is not a fraud, and no one has violated any criminal laws to enact it. I think you can make a case that it violates certain self righteous attitudes of some about their personal freedom. But it doesn't break any existing laws. I don't know what you mean about it being a tyranny. I suppose that is also an expression of distaste.
I agree. It has been under attack since its inception, even by Democrats that almost immediately excused certain groups originally forced to fund it from participating. There is something unsolid about it's structure, which makes it vulnerable as a political target, and supported half heartedly by the half that accepts it, and as most will admit it needs to be fixed. Here "being fixed" signals a danger for the act. For many, "fixing" means to repeal. For Donald Trump, it means simply tweaking it a bit and putting the Trump Label on it. So far, the big concerns like major insurers withdrawing from states hasn't been addressed, at least to my knowledge.
Misunderstanding. No medical insurance is medical care. That is bait and switch by politicians of both parties (and their insurance agents). I didn't say ... Obamacare was free, or that having Obamacare means free medical care (I know now much deductible a Bronze plan has). It is simply fraud ... all medical insurance is ... as a math formula it can only fail, and the insurance companies know this, unless they have unlimited money from the Fed, that they can money launder before paying the doctors etc.
Pay the patients directly (thru free vouchers from IRS for example) who then use them for medical care ... and when the vouchers get back to the government, and get audited by the IRS ... the IRS can run herd on the doctors and pharma. IRS takes fraud seriously, and Medicare now is overrun with fraud.
But yes, focus on the R party or on Trump ... that is the issue, not medical care (the issue is who is our enemy and how can we screw them over).
Major insurers withdrawing from counties and states ... was baked in at the time in those secret meetings that were held. It had to happen, as long as the Fed doesn't freely give unlimited funds directly to the insurance companies. D party secret meeting are just like the secret energy company meetings Cheney held when he was in office.
The Republican Senate bill, assuming it's like the Houses (which there is no reason to assume it's not given the absolute shame and deceit they have shown about it), is not just repealing Obamacare... it's taking our health care back 5, 10 steps and fucking over millions upon millions of people.
If it's being portrayed as a repeal of Obamacare instead of the implementation of Trumpcare/Republicancare, then the media is doing a great disservice to the American people by not telling them just how fucked over they are going to get.
If there's any good news about the Senate bill, it's that not only are the GOP senators representing purple states (Collins, Heller, Portman, probably a couple others) are hesitant to sign on out of fear of having "s/he took away your coverage" used against them in their next race, but also the nutjobs like Paul and Cruz are against it because it's not evil enough for them. And several others in safe seats, like Alaska's Murkowski, have been making not very supportive noises.
So right now, Senator Yertle... er, McConnell is having trouble locking down 40 votes, much less 51. It may be possible that he doesn't even have the votes to defeat a filibuster.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on June 23, 2017, 09:57:49 PMIf Obamacare is repealed, people will be reminded, very very quickly, why it was enacted in the first place, and this time they are going to be very angry.
Maybe. But apparently a lot of these people are grade A morons who'd believe that the moon is made out of cream cheese if daddy Trump tweeted it.
Some people will undoubtedly be angry. But will enough people mobilize to get Obamacare reenacted or spur Congress on to enact (dare to dream) universal healthcare? That's not clear.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 24, 2017, 01:52:02 PM
The Republican Senate bill, assuming it's like the Houses (which there is no reason to assume it's not given the absolute shame and deceit they have shown about it), is not just repealing Obamacare... it's taking our health care back 5, 10 steps.
Well, maybe and maybe not. This is partly why the baby step argument is so meaningless. Here your are perceiving 5, maybe 10 baby steps. You obviously see them as steps backwards, but that might not be the case. I perceive them as steps in the direction that the long term plan, if one actually existed, was bound to create from the beginning.
When a beleaguered public hammered by insurance costs rising out of proportion with inflation anticipated some relief through a traditional single payer bill, somewhere along the line a Democratic controlled congress decided that was untenable, and decided on taking a baby step. That first step was (to me) a step away from the goal, a baby step backwards (relative to the goal). Now the baby is gaining momentum and taking another baby step (5 baby steps using your estimate), but in the same direction as the first. The Republicans are building on the momentum set in motion 4 years ago. I have mentioned this fear long ago when Congress failed to remove for profit insurers from the healthcare equation. This is the direction I anticipated. That the Republicans can be criticized at this time is because they control all three branches of government.
I also think this problem is related to the concept of identity politics previously identified as a failure in Democratic strategy by some Democratic strategists. I'm not sure I agree completely with the strategists but I think they might have hit on something. For programs to be viable and popular they need to encompass the needs of the greater pool of constituents, not just those of a specific identity. Of course, no one bill can please everyone, and if Corporate America has to have their concerns met first, well then we are pretty much fucked, anyway.
But identity politics makes promises to select targets. In this case to the very poor. The middle class, especially the growing lower middle class is forced to bear the brunt of the hardship of rising insurance and lower pay, with no alternative to opt out. I do like the idea of everyone being insured, but if I were in a position where I couldn't afford it, I'd prefer not to be forced buy what I can't afford, especially if I'm young and healthy. Single payer would avoid this.
We keep the suicide option available here if our health ever gets bad enough and we have no ability to see a doctor when we need it. I have absolutely no qualms about people opting out of life when our government does everything it can to make life miserable. Stockpiling pain medication? We never throw them away. I don't know that we stockpile, but we're certainty not tossing pain relief away on some fucking principle.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 24, 2017, 10:03:30 PM
We keep the suicide option available here if our health ever gets bad enough and we have no ability to see a doctor when we need it. I have absolutely no qualms about people opting out of life when our government does everything it can to make life miserable. Stockpiling pain medication? We never throw them away. I don't know that we stockpile, but we're certainty not tossing pain relief away on some fucking principle.
Pain meds are targeted to W Virginia and other strange select locations ... it is the Tuskegee experiment all over again ... though not necessarily on colored folk. The CIA is in charge of drug distribution ... it makes sense that they are also in charge of prescription pain killers.
Pain meds would be a good suicide option, but I don't know how to determine a surefire lethal dose. I'm sure there's a list of dos and don'ts on the internet for ending your life. I'd really hate flubbing the last thing I ever tried to do in life. Just let me get that one thing right. But pain meds are being watched more carefully now. My doctor mentioned that some watchers are watching the medical profession more closely in recent years.
Dentists don't seem to be under the same scrutiny. My dentist asks me if I want pain meds, much the way you would offer a beer to a guest. I should start accepting his offers and lay in a supply just in case, because it's harder to get pain meds than to buy a gun. And I don't want to leave a behind a big pool of partially coagulated blood with brain parts in it for some loved one to clean up. It's kind of thoughtless, almost like a cheap parting cheap shot you want someone else to live with for the rest of their life.
Quote from: SGOS on June 24, 2017, 09:37:49 PM
Well, maybe and maybe not. This is partly why the baby step argument is so meaningless. Here your are perceiving 5, maybe 10 baby steps. You obviously see them as steps backwards, but that might not be the case. I perceive them as steps in the direction that the long term plan, if one actually existed, was bound to create from the beginning.
When a beleaguered public hammered by insurance costs rising out of proportion with inflation anticipated some relief through a traditional single payer bill, somewhere along the line a Democratic controlled congress decided that was untenable, and decided on taking a baby step. That first step was (to me) a step away from the goal, a baby step backwards (relative to the goal). Now the baby is gaining momentum and taking another baby step (5 baby steps using your estimate), but in the same direction as the first. The Republicans are building on the momentum set in motion 4 years ago. I have mentioned this fear long ago when Congress failed to remove for profit insurers from the healthcare equation. This is the direction I anticipated. That the Republicans can be criticized at this time is because they control all three branches of government.
I also think this problem is related to the concept of identity politics previously identified as a failure in Democratic strategy by some Democratic strategists. I'm not sure I agree completely with the strategists but I think they might have hit on something. For programs to be viable and popular they need to encompass the needs of the greater pool of constituents, not just those of a specific identity. Of course, no one bill can please everyone, and if Corporate America has to have their concerns met first, well then we are pretty much fucked, anyway.
But identity politics makes promises to select targets. In this case to the very poor. The middle class, especially the growing lower middle class is forced to bear the brunt of the hardship of rising insurance and lower pay, with no alternative to opt out. I do like the idea of everyone being insured, but if I were in a position where I couldn't afford it, I'd prefer not to be forced buy what I can't afford, especially if I'm young and healthy. Single payer would avoid this.
So cutting millions of people from health care, cutting huge amounts of funding from planned parenthood and Medicaid, and giving corporations breaks at the expense of literally everyone else is just me making mountains out of molehills.
I'm sorry, but when millions of people are being fucked over, when literally every health organization (see; actual experts) agree that this health care bill, using the model the house voted on, say this is one of the most destructive and immoral bills to be voted on, when it has to be hidden in absolute secrecy because it is so immoral... I'm sorry, but I am more concerned about both what my morals and actual experts say, and they both agree, to believe that this is just, "baby steps", and that they might not be in the wrong direction.
When you are talking about taking away millions of people's fundamental right in a civilized society to their health... tell me one other society that would say this might not be a bad thing, or that it's being over exaggerated.
All that is nothing compared to Agenda 21 and the coming culling of anyone who isn't a millionaire, maid, butler or chauffeur. The Elite are that nuts. With most of humanity dead, they won't even need to spend too much precious money on robots ... there won't be consumers to shill to.
Quote from: SGOS on June 25, 2017, 07:25:11 AM
Pain meds would be a good suicide option, but I don't know how to determine a surefire lethal dose. I'm sure there's a list of dos and don'ts on the internet for ending your life. I'd really hate flubbing the last thing I ever tried to do in life. Just let me get that one thing right. But pain meds are being watched more carefully now. My doctor mentioned that some watchers are watching the medical profession more closely in recent years.
Dentists don't seem to be under the same scrutiny. My dentist asks me if I want pain meds, much the way you would offer a beer to a guest. I should start accepting his offers and lay in a supply just in case, because it's harder to get pain meds than to buy a gun. And I don't want to leave a behind a big pool of partially coagulated blood with brain parts in it for some loved one to clean up. It's kind of thoughtless, almost like a cheap parting cheap shot you want someone else to live with for the rest of their life.
Worked in the medical community for 20 years now. Yes, pain meds are very closely watched, and other meds ... because of meth amphetamine production and suicidal maniacs. Can't share the details, and neither can your pharmacist. Pooling old meds ... this is why the police want you to turn in old meds at turn in locations. The slaves can't be allowed to off themselves, this is the task masters job while whipping you in the cotton fields ;-(
Quote from: Shiranu on June 25, 2017, 09:08:18 AM
So cutting millions of people from health care, cutting huge amounts of funding from planned parenthood and Medicaid, and giving corporations breaks at the expense of literally everyone else is just me making mountains out of molehills.
I'm sorry, but when millions of people are being fucked over, when literally every health organization (see; actual experts) agree that this health care bill, using the model the house voted on, say this is one of the most destructive and immoral bills to be voted on, when it has to be hidden in absolute secrecy because it is so immoral... I'm sorry, but I am more concerned about both what my morals and actual experts say, and they both agree, to believe that this is just, "baby steps", and that they might not be in the wrong direction.
When you are talking about taking away millions of people's fundamental right in a civilized society to their health... tell me one other society that would say this might not be a bad thing, or that it's being over exaggerated.
I'm sorry that's all you got from my post. I am not critical of healthcare, just to the way our leaders are trying to implement it. And yes, some of those leaders are Democrats. But then I was critical of ACA as soon as I saw Obama announce that the single payer option was just a teensy part of his goal anyway. He actually signaled "teensy" with his thumb and forefinger when he announced that and semantically turned a Republican leftover from the Clinton days into a "great accomplishment" passed by a Democratic majority.
But the bill is no better today than when the Republicans first came up with it, when I believed the Republicans were 100% tongue in cheek thinking it would never be considered. I think the Democrats can reasonably be criticized on this one, and I will continue to demand better. It's possible that we never will do better, and frankly at this point, I doubt that I'd be alive to see it. But if it does happen and I am still spry enough to get off my chair, I'll happily celebrate the event with you personally over a beer, but by that time, you might not be spry enough to get off your chair either. We might have to do it over the phone... with hearing aides.
Quote from: Baruch on June 25, 2017, 09:38:50 AM
Worked in the medical community for 20 years now. Yes, pain meds are very closely watched, and other meds ... because of meth amphetamine production and suicidal maniacs.
I'm think I may decide to rethink capital punishment and throw my support behind the death penalty, but only in cases of attempted suicide.
Quote from: SGOS on June 25, 2017, 09:55:42 AM
I'm think I may decide to rethink capital punishment and throw my support behind the death penalty, but only in cases of attempted suicide.
Living is unintentional attempted suicide ;-) Dying is intentional suicide in progress. We are in a world of death, not life. We are zombies. Praise Kek!
Well, to paraphrase Grayson: get really sick, then die really quickly.
Solyndra? The only failed company out of a hundred or so successful ones supported by that program?
You fell for the oldest trick in the propaganda book.
Stealing Obamacare from the People will lead to hundreds of thousands of needless deaths:
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gop-healthcare-bill-lead-deaths-216900-americans-2026/
Hey, just think of all the jobs that'll be created for funeral home directors, grave diggers and casket makers!
Quote from: Atheon on June 26, 2017, 05:32:44 PM
Solyndra? The only failed company out of a hundred or so successful ones supported by that program?
You fell for the oldest trick in the propaganda book.
Stealing Obamacare from the People will lead to hundreds of thousands of needless deaths:
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gop-healthcare-bill-lead-deaths-216900-americans-2026/
Obama is the true messiah ... made everyone rich I tell you, rich ... thanks to his magic trillion dollar platinum coin!
The plot thickens -- now Senator Yertle doesn't even have enough votes to bring it to the floor (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40419512). Collins (ME), Paul (KY), Johnson (WI) and Heller (NV) have all said they'll oppose even debating it. Even Mikey can't make it all better when it's 52-48 -- needless to say, no Dem has even indicated the slightest prospect of the merest possibility of even remotely thinking about supporting it.
On top of that, Cruz (TX) and Lee (UT) have both said they'll oppose the bill in its current form anyway. But the changes they want, while they might attract Paul, will probably cost them Portman (OH) in addition to the other three above.
Stay tuned; I'll make popcorn.
Quote from: trdsf on June 27, 2017, 12:53:48 PM
The plot thickens -- now Senator Yertle doesn't even have enough votes to bring it to the floor (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40419512). Collins (ME),...
Stay tuned; I'll make popcorn.
I'll have some of that. I don't follow many individual senators the way you do. Some I do, but not as many. I just remember Collins leaning toward voting for Obamacare way back when, but the powers that be put an end to that in short order. I assume she had pressure applied, but she may just have been talking about it to gain some kind of negotiating power within her party, possibly something not even related to health care. Now is a bit different. More Republicans are fighting the current bill, but they have a way of falling in line when the final vote comes, and their ulterior motives during the foreplay are not always that apparent.
But remember Trump said, "This is going to be a wonderful bill, a really wonderful bill that people are going to think is just wonderful."
Quote from: SGOS on June 27, 2017, 01:15:23 PM
I'll have some of that. I don't follow many individual senators the way you do. Some I do, but not as many. I just remember Collins leaning toward voting for Obamacare way back when, but the powers that be put an end to that in short order. I assume she had pressure applied, but she may just have been talking about it to gain some kind of negotiating power within her party, possibly something not even related to health care. Now is a bit different. More Republicans are fighting the current bill, but they have a way of falling in line when the final vote comes, and their ulterior motives during the foreplay are not always that apparent.
But remember Trump said, "This is going to be a wonderful bill, a really wonderful bill that people are going to think is just wonderful."
The ones that are in purple or even purple-leaning red states, however, are looking at those recent special elections where 'safe' Republican districts turned into nailbiters. Now, 2018 doesn't look like a good opportunity for the Dems to make advances in the Senate; their only realistic chances are in Nevada and Arizona, and they're going to have some difficult seats to hold on to (Indiana, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico and North Dakota are all up), and there's an outsidemost chance that Cruz's unpopularity might give the GOP a case of nerves in Texas, but I don't expect him to lose.
But if the Dems hold the line in the Senate in 2018 against bad odds and make strong advances in the House (or even, dare I hope, win it), in 2020 and beyond Repubs in purple and blue states are going to be running scared shitless --
especially in 2020 if the Democratic presidential candidate has long coat-tails.
Quote from: SGOS on June 27, 2017, 01:15:23 PM
I'll have some of that. I don't follow many individual senators the way you do. Some I do, but not as many. I just remember Collins leaning toward voting for Obamacare way back when, but the powers that be put an end to that in short order. I assume she had pressure applied, but she may just have been talking about it to gain some kind of negotiating power within her party, possibly something not even related to health care. Now is a bit different. More Republicans are fighting the current bill, but they have a way of falling in line when the final vote comes, and their ulterior motives during the foreplay are not always that apparent.
But remember Trump said, "This is going to be a wonderful bill, a really wonderful bill that people are going to think is just wonderful."
Congress = Ali Baba and the 500 thieves.
Quote from: trdsf on June 27, 2017, 03:33:35 PM
The ones that are in purple or even purple-leaning red states, however, are looking at those recent special elections where 'safe' Republican districts turned into nailbiters. Now, 2018 doesn't look like a good opportunity for the Dems to make advances in the Senate; their only realistic chances are in Nevada and Arizona, and they're going to have some difficult seats to hold on to (Indiana, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico and North Dakota are all up), and there's an outsidemost chance that Cruz's unpopularity might give the GOP a case of nerves in Texas, but I don't expect him to lose.
But if the Dems hold the line in the Senate in 2018 against bad odds and make strong advances in the House (or even, dare I hope, win it), in 2020 and beyond Repubs in purple and blue states are going to be running scared shitless -- especially in 2020 if the Democratic presidential candidate has long coat-tails.
Chelsea running in 2020? Or just her mom again? ;-)
The ACA (Obamacare) was a first start toward a single payer system and universal health care as is practiced in most developed nations. It was what could be passed at the time. In spite of Republican efforts, the drive toward basic health care as a "right" will progress. The current fight is a failing hiccup in that drive. The majority of people want it, itt would benefit the economy, it will happen. Eventually.
Quote from: Cavebear on June 29, 2017, 04:59:18 AM
The ACA (Obamacare) was a first start toward a single payer system and universal health care as is practiced in most developed nations. It was what could be passed at the time. In spite of Republican efforts, the drive toward basic health care as a "right" will progress. The current fight is a failing hiccup in that drive. The majority of people want it, itt would benefit the economy, it will happen. Eventually.
Healthcare started as universal healthcare, but once people got behind it, Obama and the Democrats switched it to something else and pushed that through on the strength of the rally behind universal. It's the same strategy used by car salesmen. You ask for Car X at Price A, and are given a promise. Somewhere during the paperwork, you realize you are actually being sold Car Z at Price B. You point out the change and the salesmen tells you it's your mistake, because he could not possibly sell you Car X at Price A. You buy the car and tell yourself that while it's not what you wanted, at least you didn't get fucked as bad as you could have.
It would be unfair to blame all the Democrats, however. Half the Democrats fiercely opposed Obamacare without the single payer option, and about 90% said they preferred single payer over Obamacare. However, in the end they all voted for it, and it became law. All it took was a couple of key Democrats on the Insurance Company payroll and Obama to oppose universal healthcare. Republicans all opposed the ACA, because well, you know. That's just a given.
I've always called Obamacare a bait and switch, although if you said that to Senator Max Baucus or Obama, they would most likely deny it. They would say they never promised universal healthcare in the first place. This is probably true for the Senator, and while I haven't gone to the Library of Congress to look it up, I can't remember if Obama ever said that. But he definitely knew what people were expecting and never told them otherwise until he got the necessary momentum started.
Obamacare was a step to protect insurance industry profits, and it currently doesn't appear to be proceeding in the so called "right direction," otherwise the Republicans wouldn't be getting beaten up for what they are doing. You can blame the Republicans, but remember that it required all the Democrats to get Obamacare through. In other words, when it came to the final vote, none of them supported universal healthcare. The ballot was crafted to exclude the option, altogether. But that doesn't leave them off the hook. The Democrats designed the ballot.
Quote from: SGOS on June 29, 2017, 08:39:11 AM
Healthcare started as universal healthcare, but once people got behind it, Obama and the Democrats switched it to something else and pushed that through on the strength of the rally behind universal. It's the same strategy used by car salesmen. You ask for Car X at Price A, and are given a promise. Somewhere during the paperwork, you realize you are actually being sold Car Z at Price B. You point out the change and the salesmen tells you it's your mistake, because he could not possibly sell you Car X at Price A. You buy the car and tell yourself that while it's not what you wanted, at least you didn't get fucked as bad as you could have.
It would be unfair to blame all the Democrats, however. Half the Democrats fiercely opposed Obamacare without the single payer option, and about 90% said they preferred single payer over Obamacare. However, in the end they all voted for it, and it became law. All it took was a couple of key Democrats on the Insurance Company payroll and Obama to oppose universal healthcare. Republicans all opposed the ACA, because well, you know. That's just a given.
I've always called Obamacare a bait and switch, although if you said that to Senator Max Baucus or Obama, they would most likely deny it. They would say they never promised universal healthcare in the first place. This is probably true for the Senator, and while I haven't gone to the Library of Congress to look it up, I can't remember if Obama ever said that. But he definitely knew what people were expecting and never told them otherwise until he got the necessary momentum started.
Obamacare was a step to protect insurance industry profits, and it currently doesn't appear to be proceeding in the so called "right direction," otherwise the Republicans wouldn't be getting beaten up for what they are doing. You can blame the Republicans, but remember that it required all the Democrats to get Obamacare through. In other words, when it came to the final vote, none of them supported universal healthcare. The ballot was crafted to exclude the option, altogether. But that doesn't leave them off the hook. The Democrats designed the ballot.
As I said, the ACA was what could be passed at the time. Most citizens supported the idea AS AN IMPROVEMENT over the existing system where health care costs fpr almost everyone was increasing. Many citizens were using emergency room care at public hospitals as basic medical care (and emergency room care was costing all the rest of us dearly).
The idea of requiring all citizens to obtain some sort of medical insurance makes economic sense in the long-term. That's so similar to car insurance.
The foundations of the ACA were Republican/Conservative based. Everyone should pay into the insurance pool, some assistance to those too poor to pay, and a basic package of required coverage.
So that's what the Democrats proposed (and with 9 days of public committee hearings and 150 Republican amendments voted on). The Republicans decided on the strategy of "NO" even though the ACA was mostly Republican ideas. The Democrats would have preferred Medicare for all. Very simple idea to implement
Now the Republicans are stuck saying NO to their own proposals. The current bill has 1,000 pages. The majority of the pages are tax cuts for the wealthiest of us.
I would gain from this bill, but I do not support this bill. I support "the greater good'.
A world where I gain personally at the expense of the majority of my fellow citizens is not right and never will be.
If there is any good that's going to come of this mess, I think it's that single-payer is definitely on the table now, and I think outside of the knuckledragger community, that's going to be part of a winning message for Team D.
The thing is, people en masse don't respond to nuanced messages. They respond to strong statements. And given a choice between a mild but true "We're going to try to do this about that and see if that works, although of course compromise may be necessary along the way" and a forceful "OUR PLAN FIXES EVERYTHING EVEN PROBLEMS YOU DIDN'T KNOW YOU HAD AND YOU'RE A TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER IF YOU OPPOSE IT!" even when asserted in the presence of direct evidence demonstrating it won't, people will essentially knuckle under to the bully.
So, I really think it's time to be liberal 'bullies', as it were. Michael Moore made this point twenty years ago in a column in The Nation (http://www.thenation.com), and he was right then, and he's right now: if we can't make the progressive case to Joe Sixpack at the bowling alley, making it to the ivory tower types is of complete irrelevance. Our message needs to be "SINGLE PAYER NOW AND IF YOU OPPOSE IT YOU HATE HEALTHY BABIES!" or something equivalently forceful.
And in any case, turning the other cheek only works if you want matching handprints.
Quote from: trdsf on June 29, 2017, 12:35:34 PM
If there is any good that's going to come of this mess, I think it's that single-payer is definitely on the table now, and I think outside of the knuckledragger community, that's going to be part of a winning message for Team D.
I've considered that possible outcome, but I'm a bit too cynical to consider it as little more than an "in my wildest dreams" possibility, at least in the short term. I see it more as a long term possibility as the electorate loses confidence in the present system. As you point out, the Democratic presentation would be important, and I agree that that the demagogic bashing by the Republicans plays well with much of their base. I'm not sure if the presentation would work as well with liberals. And I don't know that the Democratic leadership is ready yet, partly because they are getting some good political mileage from the current turmoil. From what I understand, much as can be gleaned from the media for what that's worth, the public at large supports universal healthcare, and did 5 years ago. But even with a majority supporting it, if that is indeed correct, it wasn't a critical mass large enough to make a difference. The support has to grow even more to overcome the inertia of the private insurer concept and the political contributions from insurance corporations.
Obamacare may work against a massive build up of support because currently a lot of Democrats are basking under the perception that as it stands, it represents a great victory for the Democratic Party. A future message to the liberal community might be, "We can do better, much better. It's time, and we all deserve it."
Quote from: Cavebear on June 29, 2017, 11:02:34 AM
I would gain from this bill, but I do not support this bill. I support "the greater good'.
A world where I gain personally at the expense of the majority of my fellow citizens is not right and never will be.
We are in agreement there. Although, I won't gain anything from this bill. Fortunately, I don't lose much either, because I'm on Medicare. Sometimes I wonder why I should care about this issue so much, but as you point out "the greater good" is important, and passage of universal healthcare would help more people, and help a great deal. And if the worse case scenarios I've seen put forth by detractors in regards to how much taxes will go up because of universal healthcare are true, the increases in taxes would still be far lower than the costs of private insurance we are forced to buy. Of course, the detractors were most likely just coming up with figures out of their asses. We have yet to hear from the GAO, and then anyone interested in doing their own math (if they can clear the emotional dust out of their heads), can figure out for themselves whether Universal healthcare will help improve their lot or not.