(no subject)

[new-wave-witch.livejournal.com]

This is really fuckin scary.

Comments

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You misunderstand the protest - many of them would love to see reform. The majority of people simply disagree that the reform put out there by the Democrats is the correct one.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

it would be nice if that was the case, but its not.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

How do you figure?

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

how do you figure that they've offered an alterative?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I know they've offered alternatives. Numerous have been offered and shot down in the House, and many of those people have other ideas as to how to fix health care.

Also, it's worth noting - saying "no" is valid when the option being offered is worse.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

I've yet to see a counter offer, and i don't believe whats offered is worse (it will be worse without a public option but the blame for killing that lies with the right)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Counter offers (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Democrats-stifle-Republican-health-care-plans-8224780-58644807.html).

i don't believe whats offered is worse (it will be worse without a public option but the blame for killing that lies with the right)

A public option will undoubtedly make health care worse in this country. It's why I oppose it so strongly.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

how will a public option make health care worse?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

We don't have enough doctors, it will reduce the amount of private plans available, if the fine goes through as Baucus wants it will make the poor poorer. And that's just the surface.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

Reducing the amount of private plans will lower health care costs (33% of health care costs comes from dealing with 1000 flavors of adminstrative paperwork) and if there is a public option the fine is irrevlent.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Reducing the amount of private plans will lower health care costs (33% of health care costs comes from dealing with 1000 flavors of adminstrative paperwork)

This is basically untrue. The percentage is way off, and the assertion that it could lower health care costs is way off, as the public option is another administrative paperwork piece, and beyond that, the administrative costs of a public option are merely hidden in other goernment areas, a la Medicare.

and if there is a public option the fine is irrevlent.

It's irrelevant to charge thousands of dollars to poor people for not holding insurance? Really?

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

I was going from memory and was 13% off, adminstrative paperwork is 20% of the cost

"U.S. health insurance companies have the highest administrative costs in the world; they spend roughly 20 cents of every dollar for nonmedical costs, such as paperwork, reviewing claims and marketing. France's health insurance industry, in contrast, covers everybody and spends about 4 percent on administration. Canada's universal insurance system, run by government bureaucrats, spends 6 percent on administration. In Taiwan, a leaner version of the Canadian model has administrative costs of 1.5 percent; one year, this figure ballooned to 2 percent, and the opposition parties savaged the government for wasting money."

Source - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101778_2.html



if there is a public option and a fine for not having health insurance, only the rich and the retarded would be paying the fine, not the poor

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I was going from memory and was 13% off, adminstrative paperwork is 20% of the cost

20% is the high end (http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/wm2505.cfm), and there's no difference in public or private plans.

if there is a public option and a fine for not having health insurance, only the rich and the retarded would be paying the fine, not the poor

Uh, no (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/9/778980/-Baucus-plan:-No-public-option,-$3,800-fine-for-uninsured).

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

In the article i linked before, it states and 33% of healthcare costs are administrative, so I'd bet that 20-25% is about the true costs.

Also, thank you for proving my point that there needs to be a public option to avoid the fine for not having healthcare (the point of the dailykos article you linked)

look, the Baucus version of the bill is a total mess, I can't disagree, and the major reason its a big mess is that it doesnt have a public option and Baucus is a right leaning democrat in the pocket of health insurance.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

In the article i linked before, it states and 33% of healthcare costs are administrative, so I'd bet that 20-25% is about the true costs.

And I'm saying your article overstated it, as my link references the other studies.

Also, thank you for proving my point that there needs to be a public option to avoid the fine for not having healthcare (the point of the dailykos article you linked)

The kos link was only for Baucas. The rest i would never subscribe to, they're insane.

I can't disagree, and the major reason its a big mess is that it doesnt have a public option and Baucus is a right leaning democrat in the pocket of health insurance.

Baucas's plan is no different than what the Democratic legislature put together in Massachusetts.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

Heritage is a right leaning organization so if they say administrative costs are in the 12% range and a left leaning article from Taibbi claims 33% than its reasonable to put the true costs in the 20% range.

Only Baucas' plan is the only one without a public option for like the 3rd time. I can't be blamed if you refuse to understand this.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Heritage is a right leaning organization so if they say administrative costs are in the 12% range and a left leaning article from Taibbi claims 33% than its reasonable to put the true costs in the 20% range.

Heritage is sourcing the studies. Taibbi isn't sourcing anything.

Only Baucas' plan is the only one without a public option for like the 3rd time. I can't be blamed if you refuse to understand this.

But the chances of it being added to the public option plan is a very good one if the public option doesn't die on the vine like it probably will.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

"But the chances of it being added to the public option plan is a very good one if the public option doesn't die on the vine like it probably will."

You'll have to better explain what you're saying here.

Also I can site studies that says there is no harm in smoking but that doesn't make it so. Even if adminstrative costs are in the 12@ range and im sure that they are higher, thats double what it costs in Canada.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You'll have to better explain what you're saying here.

i'm saying that the public option ain't gonna pass, but this Baucus-style fine will be in a final bill.

Even if adminstrative costs are in the 12@ range and im sure that they are higher, thats double what it costs in Canada.

Except that it isn't. The study linked via the Heritage piece discussed that.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

Maybe it wasn't clear from before, but I am completely against the Baucus fine without the public option, and you're right to oppose that part of the bill.

From the article you linked - http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/images/wm2505_chart1.gif

12% is correct and a very low estimate.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I give you credit for an excellent reversal there.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Well, that too.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

You over estimate the intelligence of those you're defending.