Health Care Bill Passes House 220-215

[gnomon]

I have problems with a lot of it.

* The penalties for being unable to afford their "affordable" coverage.

Historically our government really has no clue as to what is "affordable" for the average American.
This bill will actually increase the hardship for many who already cannot afford it as they will have to pay for it anyway or face penalty.

*The idea that within 5 years there will still be any employer who offers insurance if this bill is passed into law.

I can only say that my GM would gladly drop our employee insurance coverage if he only had to pay 8% of our payroll as penalty.
It`s a deal to him.

I`ll have a look at the actual bill but these items just from the abstract are enough for me to pray for the quick demise of this idiocy.

Employers dropping their group plans worries me as well. I pay very little for my insurance coverage in premiums. Looking at my latest paystub I see it's not that much higher than my pretty low auto coverage on my 10 year old small sized pickup with good driver ratings. In other words I'm not putting my dollar amount out there but it's low.

Thing is, the price I would pay if I lost private insurance would be far greater and my income is not really that impressive. I also doubt the argument that if the group plan was dropped I would see an appreciable increase in my net income. Of course, then I could try to see how Obama is pushing for home ownership, yet again, for those who cannot afford it and I can become one of those statistics who tries to buy an unaffordable home hurting the economy even more! (small rant)

My biggest concern is still the wisdom of the federal government stepping into the health insurance field and assuming such costs when our economy is still poor, unemployment doesn't look to be subsiding and there are still derivative investments out there which can drive us down even more. The failure of the government to even take a reasonable stance to fix the issues with the market and spending more of it's time by essentially expanding the public sector is rather irresponsible.

 

[Alceste]

For those of you who are concerned about the 2% penalty on those who choose not to be insured, how does your concern for their welfare rate against your concern for the welfare of uninsured children?

It seems all children will have full health coverage (including dental!) under this plan. I know one in five children in Texas (the worst-ranking state) are currently uninsured. Is covering those kids worth 2 % of your paycheck, assuming you choose not to be insured?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Reality check: --> Drudge, WND distort health care bill to fearmonger about cost of insurance, possibility of jail time | Media Matters for America

I especially like the bit about less than 100 tax dodgers actually being sent to jail last year. So much for needing to build new prisons.
...and that doesn't even take into consideration the funds that many companies will save, the increased quality of life for many line-workers (decreased morbidity), the increase in productivity (and salary) resulting from such decreased morbidity, and the decrease in general tax costs from keeping ~40 million (currently uninsured) people healthier and at work, rather than sucking up our tax dollars in the emergency rooms of thousands of hospitals throughout the U.S.

 

[gnomon]

For those of you who are concerned about the 2% penalty on those who choose not to be insured, how does your concern for their welfare rate against your concern for the welfare of uninsured children?

It seems all children will have full health coverage (including dental!) under this plan. I know one in five children in Texas (the worst-ranking state) are currently uninsured. Is covering those kids worth 2 % of your paycheck, assuming you choose not to be insured?

My concern has less to do with the tax than the fact that certain exemptions apply. It's hard to determine who would be exempt but the first one that springs to mind are Christian Scientists and other such groups who deny modern medicine. May be a small percentage but I believe in the law applying across the board. Hardship exemptions are understandable but not a religious exemption.

Extension of health coverage is something I do not have a problem with. I would gladly pay more on my own premiums to extend my companies group plan to part time employees. Not seasonal employees who work other jobs and just work for some extra income during the holiday season.

I really would like coverage for children with congenital defects previously denied due to pre-existing clauses and the associated medical costs, the health of children in general and some programs in place to provide for the uninsured. Personally, I would rather see some piecemeal legislation to address specific issues than large all-encompassing legislation. Especially when arguments over abortion can prevent passage of legislation regarding the aforementioned issues.

 

[Mindful]

No, God is bigger than Nancy Pelosi.

 

[Mister_T]

oh OK. thank you for explaining but i still do not understand why right wing people consider this as a sign of end of republic. what's the relation between health insurance and republic?





.

In my opinion, they're saying this because it's an end of their own personal version of what they want to be our republic:

You see, the whole premise for far right wingers reason for believing what they believe, is because they claim that "our government can't do anything right" when it comes to domestic affairs/helping out it's citizens. They assert that things like healthcare must be done by private sectors, with little to no regulation. Well, it's obvious by now that things such as privately run/unregulated healthcare with no other options in this country, works about as well as a blind person taking a driver's exam...which is why we're having healthcare reform done in the first place.

Bottom line is that if government run/assisted healthcare works out great (which it should) and the people see that it works great and are benefitting greatly from it (which they should), than that whole schtick of "the government can't do anything right" that far right wingers have clinged to since Reagan was in office, isn't going to hold water, which in turn means that they're going to have a hard time getting votes for any election for a long time to come.

 

[gnomon]

No, God is bigger than Nancy Pelosi.

Well, she's about five feet tall and doesn't look that heavy.

Or did you not mean to put in the comma and wanted to say that no God is bigger than Nancy Pelosi. That would mean all the Gods are pretty small.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Well, she's about five feet tall and doesn't look that heavy.

Or did you not mean to put in the comma and wanted to say that no God is bigger than Nancy Pelosi. That would mean all the Gods are pretty small.

Well DUH! That's how they all get around without being seen.




OK. Back to the topic. :slap: <-- self-smack.

 

[linwood]

For those of you who are concerned about the 2% penalty on those who choose not to be insured, how does your concern for their welfare rate against your concern for the welfare of uninsured children?

It seems all children will have full health coverage (including dental!) under this plan. I know one in five children in Texas (the worst-ranking state) are currently uninsured. Is covering those kids worth 2 % of your paycheck, assuming you choose not to be insured?

Ahh yes..the "Think of the children!" argument.

There are other ways to insure Americas chilcren.

In fact I think Bush declined to sign legislation that would have done so just before he left office.

President Bush yesterday rejected entreaties by his Republican allies that he compromise with Democrats on legislation to renew a popular program that provides health coverage to poor children, saying that expanding the program would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance.
Bush: No Deal On Children's Health Plan - washingtonpost.com

If I recall correctly.

 

[Alceste]

Ahh yes..the "Think of the children!" argument.

There are other ways to insure Americas chilcren.

Oh come on - this bill has a factual, measurable, direct impact on the wellbeing of children. You can not deny that it does - it's hardly a vague and unsupportable connection. Your criticism, if I understand it correctly, is the 2 % penalty and / or the increase on income tax for ridiculously rich people which is expected to pay for the changes.

My question is, are you or are you not willing to pay slightly higher tax to ensure that all America children have access to life-saving medical care?

IMO, brushing it off as an appeal to emotion is lazy, and it only serves to illustrate you are unable to answer the question honestly while maintaining your distaste for health care reform.

 

[linwood]

Oh come on - this bill has a factual, measurable, direct impact on the wellbeing of children. You can not deny that it does - it's hardly a vague and unsupportable connection. Your criticism, if I understand it correctly, is the 2 % penalty and / or the increase on income tax for ridiculously rich people which is expected to pay for the changes.

My completely legitimate question is, are you or are you not willing to pay slightly higher tax to ensure that all America children have access to life-saving medical care?

IMO, brushing it off as an appeal to emotion is lazy, and it only serves to illustrate you are unable to answer the question honestly while maintaining your distaste for health care reform.

I`ve answered the question honestly and supplied refernce for the solution.

I want health care reform.
I`d give 10% of my income in taxation to aquire national healthcare reform.

I won`t give 2% to enrich insurance companies and cause hardships for those already under hardships.

This bill is crap and will die in the house as it should.

It panders to insurance companies while spitting on the concept of equality concerning who is and isn`t eligible for help.

Our country has dozens of active evidenced systems to choose from which could be easily adapted and or enlarged to do the job in an equitable manner.

This bill is unacceptable and your argument "for the children" is nothing more than an emotional plea (as well as a mindless mantra)considering I`ve already supplied evidence that it isn`t necessary to pass this bill to insure our children.

What sickens me is the fact that I`ve had to resort to rooting for the GOP to stop the madness my country has been calling "reform" ever since the first bailout.

Talk about cognative dissonance.

 

[Alceste]

linwood, I agree the bill is crap. I'm Canadian - to me, and to all the rest of us up here, anything other than universal health insurance coverage is a ridiculous way to go. But, since Americans are apparently too ignorant of the facts to support that kind of reform, I think a measure that provides universal health care to children only is BETTER than the status quo, which provides semi-reliable health care only to the very rich and the very poor.

Personally, I don't feel particularly "emotional" about children, so I don't see pointing out the claimed benefits for children as "appeal to emotion", but if the summary of the bill is correct, American children will all be covered, and your taxes won't increase unless you earn more than a million dollars a year or choose not to purchase insurance.

Cognitive dissonance is insisting that if you can't get EXACTLY the reform package you, personally, think would be ideal, you should have no health care reform at all, and everybody should vote for Sarah Palin to prevent it.

 

[linwood]

Cognitive dissonance is insisting that if you can't get EXACTLY the reform package you, personally, think would be ideal, you should have no health care reform at all, and everybody should vote for Sarah Palin to prevent it.

It`s just that in so many ways I see this bill as increasing many of the problems all Americans seem to want fixed yet they ..as you said ..are too ignorant to understand that they are fighting against their own best interests.

Yes, children should be insured and insured first if anyone is to be but this isn`t a "good" way to do it.
We`ve put forth legislation that was a "good" way to do it outside of the current legislation flying around DC and had the right wing GOP nutbags kill it for "philosophical" reasons.

Damn it this isn`t hard!

Health reform is easy if we`d only show a single iota of rational thought.

The entire industrial world has done it without a serious problem.
Hell, we do it in certain instances (VA, Medicare)already.

I`m just frustrated that something that really truly is so simple can`t be accomplished by "The Greatest Nation on Earth" for the single fact that as a nation we`re truly to stupid to see we`re being had every time one of our leaders opens his mouth or writes a bill.

In fact this is easier for us than it was for you since we have your model and dozens of others around the world to learn from.
With that kind of evidenced success and our resources we should have the very best system any nation could have.

If I hear one more right wing nut job attempt to justify the resources wasted on killing brown people across the globe while complaining about the cost of a true national health system I`m going to kill something.

The priorities of my people are simply stupid.

 

[Alceste]

It`s just that in so many ways I see this bill as increasing many of the problems all Americans seem to want fixed yet they ..as you said ..are too ignorant to understand that they are fighting against their own best interests.

Yes, children should be insured and insured first if anyone is to be but this isn`t a "good" way to do it.
We`ve put forth legislation that was a "good" way to do it outside of the current legislation flying around DC and had the right wing GOP nutbags kill it for "philosophical" reasons.

Damn it this isn`t hard!

Health reform is easy if we`d only show a single iota of rational thought.

The entire industrial world has done it without a serious problem.
Hell, we do it in certain instances (VA, Medicare)already.

I`m just frustrated that something that really truly is so simple can`t be accomplished by "The Greatest Nation on Earth" for the single fact that as a nation we`re truly to stupid to see we`re being had every time one of our leaders opens his mouth or writes a bill.

In fact this is easier for us than it was for you since we have your model and dozens of others around the world to learn from.
With that kind of evidenced success and our resources we should have the very best system any nation could have.

If I hear one more right wing nut job attempt to justify the resources wasted on killing brown people across the globe while complaining about the cost of a true national health system I`m going to kill something.

The priorities of my people are simply stupid.

ok, I totally sympathise with your frustration, but don't be rooting for the GOP just because you're angry with the Democrats. There's always Ralph Nader.

Do you want a president Palin?

 

[Vile Atheist]

Well here in Alaska, we think she's great !

 

[McBell]

We who?
Are you including the wildlife in that we?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

We who?
Are you including the wildlife in that we?

Well, I'm pretty sure the wolf and moose voting blocks are firmly against her. :sarcastic

 

[astarath]

Good for america. If they can get past the concept of "damn socialism" they may be able to help some people in serious need with this bill.

 

[Vile Atheist]

We who?
Are you including the wildlife in that we?

Me and my bud Steve . We think she's awesome!

 

[McBell]