Who is signing up for ObamaCare (aka ACA) on Tuesday?
Display Avatars Sort By:
Dave Stoller
(BreakingAway)
What else? on 10/10/2013 23:25:05 MDT Print View

Let's see...


There is no element of ObamaCare that reduces the cost of health care. Not one.

ObamaCare was not passed in the usual way.

The Supreme Court did not affirm the constitutionality of ObamaCare.

ObamaCare does not offer health care coverage to everyone. Supposedly a best-case scenario has half of the currently uninsured signing up.


"The right wing makes up stories, repeats them enough and calls them facts. Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover? The debt ceiling REALLY doesn't matter, it will actually stabilize the markets...how does one refute absolute insanity?"

Please provide examples of made up stories. The death panel reference is an admittedly provocative term for the IPAB. It's simple really and well-proven. Price fixing leads to shortages which leads to rationing. This has been shown to be true over and over and over. Again, if you don't know what the IPAB is you really ought to look it up. Socialized Medicine/Government Takeover - See my earlier post. If the government determines all the elements of a market that market is effectively taken over. The debt ceiling - Obama likes to say the debt ceiling limit refers to previous debt payments so it's not a surprise to see that notion parroted here but it makes no sense. We're borrowing money to pay off money we borrowed before? I don't think so. We're borrowing more money to spend more money.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: What else? on 10/10/2013 23:56:41 MDT Print View

"There is no element of ObamaCare that reduces the cost of health care. Not one."

You have "exchanges" where various companies compete, that reduces the cost.

If you have a pre-existing condition, now you can get insurance. Before, maybe you can get insurance but it would be expensive.

There are thoses boards (death panels) of doctors that are coming up with the most effective treatment. Sort of like the Mayo Clinic, only now it will be more broadly applied.

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Death panels (rationing) have been around on 10/11/2013 05:19:35 MDT Print View

Rationing (i.e. "death panels") have been around for quite some time with regular employer-sponsored health coverage. My mother had terminal brain cancer about 15 years ago, so when her treatment costs reached $1,000,000, ... the insurance nurse gave us a choice of continuing (but they would start collection on the 20% copay and all deductibles) or sending her to hospice, then would forgive all copays and deductibles. In our case, the doctors said it was hopeless as the cancer invaded the brain stem, but had it been treatable, the combined copay (20%) plus deductible (about $250,000 in 1997 dollars) would have crushed a typical family financially.

Richard May
(richardmay)

Locale: Costa Rica
row row row your boat ... on 10/11/2013 06:58:47 MDT Print View

@Doug I: "Edit to add: I also gave up trying to change most people's minds awhile ago. I've found that very, very few people have open minds any more, and very, very few people really bother to actually THINK about issues. Someone made up their minds for them some time ago, and they generally only listen to those who reinforce what they want to believe or already think. These forums are certainly a testament to that, as are any comments section on any website that touches on pretty much any issue. We no longer discuss, we only argue and talk past each other."

Not a cynic. A realist. I find people are afraid of being wrong because they've attached their personas to their ideas. If they are wrong they have personality crisis. It's very sad.

Richard May
(richardmay)

Locale: Costa Rica
Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover? on 10/11/2013 07:06:01 MDT Print View

"Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover?"

I've never heard these outside of political spin. Not once have I seen these terms used as part of a serious research piece. The only life these terms have is in the mouths of politicians and their cheerleaders.

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover? on 10/11/2013 07:34:03 MDT Print View

""Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover?"

I've never heard these outside of political spin. Not once have I seen these terms used as part of a serious research piece. The only life these terms have is in the mouths of politicians and their cheerleaders.
"



Exactly. And that is why that statement was not a fair answer to my questions but rather a good example of cheerleading.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Curious? on 10/11/2013 08:20:04 MDT Print View

Is there anyone here, in favor of the ACA, that would agree that this shouldn't be a federal issue?

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover? on 10/11/2013 08:20:26 MDT Print View

Death Panels are about end of life decisions. A lot of money is spent on health care in the last small period of time. The medical people want to treat and cure people and don't easily give up and just let a person die.

It's not that you want to stop treating someone because it's too expensive, it's because at some point it's ineffective. And being subjected to treatments and tests that have no chance of success is just torture.

"death panels" are about getting panels of doctors to come up with guidelines to help people figure out whether it's hopeless or not.

The same thing applies to healthy people, lots of treatments are done that don't improve your quality of life.

Like tonsils are removed more or less agressively depending on where you are in the country. It's a regional "fashion" decision. People would be healthier and it would be cheaper if we did the same thing nation wide.

You need panels of doctors that analyze data and come up with the best protocols. These aren't what the right wingers call "death panels" but they probably have some other nasty name.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Curious? on 10/11/2013 08:30:59 MDT Print View

"Is there anyone here, in favor of the ACA, that would agree that this shouldn't be a federal issue?"

If one state has good health care and another bad, when people get sick they will tend to move to the state with good health care, so they will subsidize the state with bad health care

Should we tolerate some states abusing their citizens?

Like is it okay for some states to have slavery but if my state doesn't then I'm okay?

It's not totally clear to me, maybe they should have just let the confederate states seperate (but the biggest mistake was after the war not striving more for reconciliation)

Richard May
(richardmay)

Locale: Costa Rica
Re: Curious? on 10/11/2013 08:33:47 MDT Print View

@Fred: "Is there anyone here, in favor of the ACA, that would agree that this shouldn't be a federal issue?"

Well, if states were actively trying to do something about health-care then sure, it should stay out. As it is, it's a national issue and only Mass has attempted to seriously tackle it. States can seek waivers if they are pursuing alternatives that will meet coverage minimums.

@Jerry: Thanks for explaining where the 'Death Panels' come from. It was a little bewildering.

Edited by richardmay on 10/11/2013 08:36:31 MDT.

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Re: Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover? on 10/11/2013 08:44:39 MDT Print View

""Death panels? Socialized medicine? Government takeover?"

I've never heard these outside of political spin. Not once have I seen these terms used as part of a serious research piece. The only life these terms have is in the mouths of politicians and their cheerleaders.
"
Exactly. And that is why that statement was not a fair answer to my questions but rather a good example of cheerleading."


But I disagree. Policy decisions are made in the political arena. Look at the how the GOP is spinning the debt ceiling talks now: "the damage will not be done by default, the damage will be done by Obama scaring everyone..."

There is not a reputable economist or company who feels this way, but thanks to the few GOP mouthpieces who are saying it over and over the policy may not change, and thus the country defaults. It was not a decision based in fact, or in expert opinion even. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101098017)

Look at Texas school books: evolution is just a theory (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/education/creationists-on-texas-panel-for-biology-textbooks.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0),
Thomas Jefferson is not a founding father (has he was the one who wrote of the separation of church and state), the civil war had nothing to do with slavery (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/17/AR2010031700560.html)....
In some states doctors are supposed to lie to their patients seeking abortion and tell them there is an increased risk of breast cancer (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-05-15/women-contraception-abortion-reproductive-rights-doctors/54979766/1)

Is any of this based in fact? Of course not. Yet it is the basis of nationwide at the worst, statewide at the least, policy decisions.

Very real and dangerous changes are happening to the environment and the VAST majority of science agrees. Yet because so many people just ignore the facts, despite the serious people who say otherwise, nothing changes and we continue to head into the abyss.

So no, I'm sorry, while there is a place for niceties and politeness in discourse, I think that is exactly what has been wrong with progressives these past few decades. One side has been bullying and stomping their feet and screaming loudly, the other side has been trying to have a nice, polite conversation and intellectual discussion about the world's problems. Look where that has gotten us...

Matthew is the perfect example - "I know it. It is my opinion," and anything from "mainstream" media is tainted and can't be trusted.

Our society does not value reasoned, intellectual arguments anymore. We keep pulling out the nazi card, or comparing Obamacare to the end of days (see Bachmann). "Intellectual elite" has become an insult. And as far as those people are concerned, nothing says it better than former congressman Barney Frank, to someone who referred to Obamacare as a "nazi policy": "Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table."

Edited by Jenmitol on 10/11/2013 08:50:23 MDT.

Richard May
(richardmay)

Locale: Costa Rica
Reality vs Idiotology on 10/11/2013 08:45:39 MDT Print View

What keeps surprising me about this discussion is how often any kind of health-care solution is feared to have disastrous effects on peoples lives and happiness.

When I look at the list of happiest countries in the world the overwhelming majority have some kind of health care system that conservatives would claim to cause economic and moral apocalypse, slavery, loss of individuality, and the termination of happiness.

If these systems are so terrible then why are these people so happy?

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Jennifer on 10/11/2013 08:51:43 MDT Print View

"So no, I'm sorry, while there is a place for niceties and politeness in discourse, I think that is exactly what has been wrong with progressives these past few decades. One side has been bullying and stomping their feet and screaming loudly, the other side has been trying to have a nice, polite conversation and intellectual discussion about the world's problems. Look where that has gotten us..."

And I find you to be one of the feet stompers, screamers, and bullies. Plenty share your political ideas , and I share some of them, yet still engage in discussions that lead to better understanding. The way I see it you are one of the people that does not engage in nor value reasonable discussion.

Plenty of feet stompers and bullies on the other side, absolutely. I just object with you and others feeling you have every right to do it yourself and call it something different.

Edited by Kat_P on 10/11/2013 08:56:28 MDT.

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Reality vs Idiotology on 10/11/2013 08:57:26 MDT Print View

Richard, my own theory is that the powers-that-be are worried that we will actually LIKE having healthcare, that we do believe it is a right and not a privilege, and then conservatives won't be able to take it away (ala social security and Medicare). Again, where are the mobs of seniors complaining about their government run medical care?????

The right wing has done an excellent job of scaring people into believing that Europeans are awful, that we might actually turn into a place like - gasp!- Sweden! and be happy and healthy and want long vacations and guaranteed maternity leave and all those crazy socialist things.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Jennifer on 10/11/2013 08:57:58 MDT Print View

what's a specific thing that Jennifer said that was foot stomping and screaming?

(I, of course, thought it was brilliant, but then I agree with her : )

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Reality vs Idiotology on 10/11/2013 09:00:34 MDT Print View

yeah, that's why the right is going bat crazy - if people like Obamacare then the right may as well start jumping off buildings

Richard May
(richardmay)

Locale: Costa Rica
Re: Re: Jennifer on 10/11/2013 09:07:06 MDT Print View

(I, of course, thought it was brilliant, but then I agree with her : )

+1

I just keep asking for evidence and asking that it match up with reality. I look for diverse sources pointing in the same direction. You know, like 5% of climates science sources say one thing and 95% say another. Or a group points to a single books as a source and another points to various sources.

Things that make you go hmmm. (Ok, that was un-related but it popped into my head.)

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Jennifer on 10/11/2013 09:14:39 MDT Print View

Kat,

I'm new to chaff. I've only posted on a few threads. I've lurked for a while, reading other people's back-n-forths. You've called me out from my very first post, and pretty much every single thing I've said.

I rarely see you do this to the right wing. If ever.

At some point you have to stop being bullied and bully back. Stomp your feet a bit...
You can preach all day long about being civil and having rational discussions, but honestly Kat, how do you do that when someone equates the government shutdown to tyranny? Or Obamacare to the Nazis? Or a fate worse than slavery? Where in the world does that discussion go that is reasoned?

It kind of reminds me of my schizophrenic uncle Jimmy:
Me: jimmy, give me back my violin.
Jimmy, holding the violin: but I don't have it.
Me: yes you do, it's right there in your hands.
Jimmy: no it's not.
Me: I can see it.
Jimmy: but I don't have it.



Think about how many years the right wing had their talk radio. Then Fox News. What did the left wing media have? Nothing. Then a few pundits started making the rounds, but it was too little too late. The right wing has dominated the scream fest, and one of my biggest criticisms of Obama is that he hasn't stomped enough.

So I won't apologize for not just sitting here taking it - in this forum. Elsewhere, where there IS actual reasoned, intellectual discourse? Absolutely! There is nothing I love better, and I learn a great deal from smart, intellectual conservatives (David Frum, George Will, etc). But I have yet to see that here, and frankly I'm a little puzzled as to why you call the liberals out on this all the time, yet rarely if ever the conservatives.

Again....false equivalency.

Dave Stoller
(BreakingAway)
"Who is signing up for ObamaCare (aka ACA) on Tuesday?" on 10/11/2013 09:15:05 MDT Print View

HK describes a very real and heart wrenching dilemma for all health care systems. But I don't see how moving from numerous boards involved in end-of-life decisions to a single board improves the situation. It seems the opposite would be true.

And Jerry, if we can put together boards of experts to recommend treatment programs that reduce costs why don't we just do that?

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Open minded? Nah on 10/11/2013 09:32:38 MDT Print View

If a conservative hick tells me they have no reason to be open minded about, say, gay marriage or a number of other issues.....what can I say....I won't yell at them, I will still try see them as people worth knowing personally and hope that time and life will open their minds.

If a progressive self proclaimed "open minded "person acts in a very close minded way, I will point it out to them. If like me you live in the Bay Area, you are not really progressive just because you believe in what everyone else here believes, from gender equality to reproductive rights etc. You have just been around it long enough that it all makes sense. How will you react if some tells you that they believe in polygamy and that three or more consenting adults ought to be able to marry one another? I don't like the idea of polygamy at all, believe me, but are you going to react the same way they do in hick town when gay marriage comes up? Being open minded does not mean having beliefs that one considers progressive and open minded....it means having one's mind open to what is new, unfamiliar and uncomfortable. Don't have to embrace it, but should be able to entertain the idea.
To have a set of beliefs, mostly espoused by party affiliation, and then act as if that alone makes you a progressive open minded person....that I have a problem with.
One should be able to discuss any issues, even ones that you think are settled by now, with an open mind.

You attack someone that wants to point out how both sides have faults and how the belief that there really are only two sides is itself ludicrous. You have no problem with hyperboles if used by those you align yourself with. And worst of all, in my opinion, you act as if aligning yourself with one or the other party makes you inherently a better, more compassionate person and you are now now justified but that mere fact to demonize others........but yes, you have been reasonable and kind too long and that is part of the problem.

Ok then.

And when I say"you" I am not speaking to anyone in particular.
And yes, I could do much better and make sure I do not insult anyone. I try, that's for sure.


Edited for spelling and I am sure there is more..

Edited by Kat_P on 10/11/2013 10:06:54 MDT.