Anyone touting or critisizing either Obama or Hillary over their health care plans is full of BS.

[Solon]

To be frank, I find it somewhat amusing. Neither plan is a panacea for our health care problems, and, unless Hillary actually gives out a lot more details about her public plan, neither covers people 100% of the time. Neither is truly Universal in this sense. Oh, they are billed as such, but, to be honest, they are babysteps, maybe, in the direction of single-payer health care. Really expensive babysteps, and unnecessary in my opinion, but babysteps nonetheless.

The reason I find this whole debate so ridiculous is that neither plan is going to go through Congress intact. I find it distinctly counterproductive to either prop up a presidential candidate over such a plane, or slam them over the same. I frankly don't give a shit about either's plan, they both suck ass in this regard.

Wouldn't it be more productive to make sure we get a much larger Democratic Majority in Congress in 2008 and then put pressure on them to support HR 676? Especially the blue dogs, give the Dems some spine, at least on THIS issue, so that maybe that bill can pass relatively intact, and I don't think either Obama or Hillary are going to veto it.

[demnan]

1. Here Here! and an R

Best post I've read all day. :hi:

[Vinca]

5. Ditto - a good plan. nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. As you said: Neither would pass Congress intact, and both suck ass.

And the reason they suck ass is that they don't involve single payer-coverage; the reason they don't involve single-payer coverage is they're afraid the Republicans would seize on it and holler "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!" like banshees on crack. So each of the candidates had to come up with some semblance of a plan that sort of covers everybody, mostly; that they think might be sort of acceptable to Congress in bits and pieces; that won't set off the GOP smear machine; and that won't offend (mostly Hillary's) health industry and big pharma donors.

Otherwise it's all pretty meaningless, so can we please come up with something else to carp about?

[creeksneakers2]

12. If people want to pay extra to buy private insurance

why should we care? That's what I don't get about insisting on single payer. Under Hillary and Obama we'd have an option to buy into a government plan. How is it right to force people who are paying for their own health insurance and don't wish to participate to buy something they don't want?

[BootinUp]

19. The naysayers are confused is all. nt

[Solon]

22. Some people don't use Medicare or many other services throughout their lives...

it doesn't mean they get to skip out on their societal responsibilities to those less fortunate than themselves. A single payer plan, such as "Medicare for all" would always be available to people to use, if someone want to pay for a private room, that doesn't mean they shouldn't pay into Medicare as well.

[creeksneakers2]

29. The people with the private plans will pay in to the public plans

through their taxes.

[Oregone]

3. Absolutely!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. K and R. Both plans suck. Single payer is the way to go and it needs to come from Congress. nt

[KittyWampus]

6. agree 100% BUT we're fighting over policy differences instead of stupid shit. Be HAPPY!

it's a good thing.

[tammywammy]

7. LOL

Facts aren't allowed in GD: Primaries. :P

[malletgirl02]

8. I agree

Good post. I'm going to recommend your post. I hope others do as well.

[Levgreee]

9. First thing we have to do is fix the broken system, and reduce prices, hands down

Obama said, if we were starting from scratch, he would support single payer.

In the future, let's think about and make single-payer. Right now people are hurting though, and we need to lower prices and get rid of the corruption, as soon as possible, so they can buy health care.

[Solon]

11. The problem is that the current system was designed to be "broken"...

remember, to the insurance companies, it works just fine. The system, from the top down, is fucked up, not for the people in it, but for the people locked out. It needs an overhaul.

[Kahuna]

10. I agree. They're both too vague for my taste. Neither has indicated..

what the cost to citizens will be.

[Solon]

13. Heh, I actually calculated that myself...

Not using position papers, but taking the total cost of our current system, seeing where the savings could take place, and I found out that the total cost for citizens would be 97 dollars a month, to pay for a single payer system. This is assuming a flat tax, make it progressive, and for people in lower and middle classes would pay only a fraction of that a month, around 30 dollars or less. That's not bad, especially compared to insurance premiums.

[MindMatter]

14. As an employer, I ask the question that nobody seems to want to address

Why the fuck is it MY responsibility to provide YOUR health insurance? It is hard enough for me to create a job for you.

Kucinich seems to be the only person in either party who understands this should not, and cannot possibly be an employer responsibility.

[Solon]

17. I don't like the idea that insurance is tied to employment anyways...

That's how I got screwed, my condition manifested itself before the requisite 90 days was up at my new job so I would be covered by their health insurance. My last job had insurance as well, but it just sucks that you lose insurance, or have to change it, when you change jobs.

[jberryhill]

21. That's part of the game

The "pre-existing condition" deal allows health insurance companies to take advantage of that number of folks who will lose and/or change their jobs, by shedding risk.

And they make you feel as if you tried to pull a fast one by developing a health condition and then changing your employment.

[Solon]

24. I know, its bullshit, to be frank about it...

The thing is that it actually will cost doctors and hospitals more as well, but not the Insurance companies, they rake in the dough, deny payment of care, and laugh all the way to the bank.

[jberryhill]

18. As a self-employed individual....

...I get a chuckle out of the wage and salary slaves whose perspective on this always begins with "Well my employer provides..." and ends with "I should be able to decide."

As if these jokers had any "choice" about their health coverage now.

Oh, yes, I know that some employers allow their wage and salary peons to play Eenie, Meenie, Miney, Mo among a few pre-configured options.

These people are pretty funny, IMHO. They don't want to lose the "choice" that was handed to them by the graciousness of those few employers left who realize that sick people don't work very well.

[Kahuna]

25. It's not your responsibility. That is the worst part about it. We need

to move away from employer mandated coverage. It's just not right.

[suston96]

15. Sorry, Solon, but this is really about trashing a candidate and has little to do.....

...with the context of the plan.

Wage deductions for Social Security and Medicare already are government entitlement payments which are way more repugnant than the same wage deduction for comprehnsive health care for people of all ages.

Social Security and Medicare don't happen until ages 62-65. Healthcare happens before birth and lasts at least until retirement.

But hey, it's not about sensible debate on health care. It's about trashing a candidate.

[jberryhill]

16. Some people believe that we elect an emperor....

...it's juvenile really - like some playground conception that the President is a king who can do anything alone.

As if Clinton is elected, every other Democrat is going to evaporate and not participate in shaping policy. Or Obama will be all alone in the White House.

[Solon]

20. Even FDR couldn't pass everything he wanted to when he was elected...

and he was the closest thing to an absolute ruler we ever had, at least up till Bush got selected. He used as much of his clout as possible to hammer through the New Deal, and the New Deal 2, and even those didn't go through completely intact.

[Raejeanowl]

23. My God...A Breath of Reason

How did you get in here? The other part about why it's so ridiculous...you are going to pay for your coverage one way or another. It's not a gift from Obama and it's not a scourge from Clinton.

Where it really gets scary is reading some of the fine print in the plans about aggressively preventing and managing chronic diseases and getting all your medical info into electronic databanks. I think everyone should be having the big one over those items and running to the emergency rooms right now.

[marlakay]

26. I don't like either of their plans I am voting for Obama

because number one I don't like Hillary and number two I think he can win in November.

[no name no slogan]

27. Nixon's was better, anyway

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/22163.html

Sad to see our candidates base their health care "solutions" on one Nixon came up with in 1974 :crazy:

[Solon]

28. I know, that seems insane. n/t