The business about “death boards” is over-the-top nonsense and is indeed being presented in a dishonest, unhelpful manner. But nobody — not even Sarah Palin — is arguing that the Democrats actually put a measure into writing that requires offing granny when she gets too sick to be worth the cost of healing her. Rather — as Snow finally admits two minutes into the piece — the argument is that a natural consequence of having government involved in these decisions while trying to keep costs low is rationing of care and encouraging people away from expensive, extraordinary measures. The fact that the law, as written, puts the final decision in the hands of the patient doesn’t dispose of that fear.
ATTN James:
Scroll to the 2:35 part if you don’t want to watch the whole thing.
Now- nobody SANE is arguing that the health care reform proposals will include death panels, which is probably why James thinks it is so preposterous. He is sane.
On the other hand, the same crazy people who the right wing has whipped into a froth the past couple of decades sure as hell do believe there are going to be death panels. But then again, they also think a small increase in the top marginal rate is socialism, that Sarah Palin would make a great president, that you can make people ungay with therapy, that the earth is ten thousand years old, that Obama was born in Kenya and doesn’t say the pledge of allegiance and was sworn in on a Quran, that the Clinton death list is real and that Hillary murdered Vince Foster, and on and on and on. And operatives in the Republican party, to include elected officials, have spent decades making people believe this stuff. We didn’t imagine Dan Burton shooting pumpkins in his backyard and we aren’t imagining Richard Shelby and others pushing birther nonsense. There is an entire industry pushing this crap.
James may think it is just hyperbole and harmless, because he is SANE and not an IDIOT. The same can not be said for the rest of the remaining GOP. When Mike Sola says “What you are doing is sentencing our families to death… We are American citizens who want one thing, to be heard before you put us down,” he is pretty convinced that Rahm Emmanuel’s brother is going to be rounding up old people, putting them before death panels, and then “putting them down.”
Napoleon
Joyner is just flat out being dishonest in his post.
The right has for years gotten away with the press not looking closely at the fact that a huge percentage of their base are flat out wack jobs, but now that the media is finally taking notice people like Joyner are taking to trying to deny the obvious, IMO to try and waive off the public and press from taking too close a look at what the right really is in this country.
gopher2b
This does beg the question of what to do about the wide swaths of people that will now demand more care than they otherwise would have without public healthcare?
Or is this already an existing issue (because Medicare already exists) and this is the government using this bill to deal with this problem.
Bulworth
Any proud, Bible-thumping fundy would be the first to tell you the earth is no more than 6,000 years old.
Dave S.
the earth is ten thousand years old
More like six thousand. What kind of secular humanist are you?
asiangrrlMN
@Napoleon: Or stupid. We mustn’t rule out stupid. If no one believes there will be death panels, then for god’s sake, quit fucking saying there are going to be death panels! Really. I can feel sorry for someone like Mike Sola for being fearful, but I cannot forgive the industry shills and the GOP for callously playing on these fears and exploiting them for the good of Big Pharma.
Please. I am so sick of this crap.
smiley
Anyone know who supposedly visited him “in the middle of the night?” Acorn? SEIU? New Black Panthers? It also seems that one of the new talking points is that congress is foisting on us what they won’t accept for themselves. I hope the president made it clear today that what they’re “foisting” on us is exactly what all federal employees have now.
SGEW
Just when, exactly, did major television news organizations start allowing random crazy people onto their programs?
In the 1950’s, were there people ranting about fluoride, jazz music voodoo, and Soviets micro-transmitters implanted in their jawbones ever interviewed on national television?
Gatekeepers? Hell, we don’t even have gates anymore.
tomdurk
Your area wingnuts must be enlightened. Most think the earth is 6000 years old
Joshua Norton
It seems to me that the current profit driven model is more conducive to “death panels”. I mean the old fools will probably hang around, what, only 5 or 6 more years? Meantime we’re just throwing money down the drain that we need to cover our CEO’s raise. Pull the plug and cut our losses now.
beltane
I thought the earth was only six thousand years old.
Seriously, we are aghast when someone from a remote village in Zimbabwe thinks he can cure his AIDS by raping a young girl, but are the paranoid delusions of the far right any less insane?
In addition to the the right wing propaganda industry, the extreme politicization of the megachurch movement is a cause for concern. A couple of days ago, I saw a car with Oklahoma plates that had that had this bumpersticker: “Liberals are Lucifer’s footsoldiers”
WTF?
Kid G
My head hurts after listening to this guy talk. I hope the new government health plan will take care of it, but I don’t think it will.
/snark/
Makewi
Yep. Ignore the larger issue by framing it in terms that make it seem crazy to even discuss. Insurance companies might deny care that results in what can only be equated to a death sentence, but the government cares to much to ever allow that to happen, is that it? They don’t pay providers enough for procedures currently under Medicare payment schedules, but this reform is going to fix that as well?
Yeah, lot’s of crazy going around these days.
Calouste
realityfied
media browski
I agree with Napoleon (and have waited several lifetimes to say that): it’s all part of the wingnut game to have their astroturfers & mouthbreathers spout crazy-nonsense which they make part of the debate while their “reasoned conservatives” make the play that they know nothing about any such crazy-nonsense.
I know this a little to well. Mea culpa: I worked for the coal industry in the 90s, and we worked with these astroturf/mouthbreather groups. And that’s what I thought of them then: a dangerous combination of corporate interests and stupid people who are reflexively against progress.
God forgive me.
norbizness
The only thing that’s going to dispose of that fear in the base of the party propped up by Joyner is about 30 mg daily of Haldol.
Zifnab
It’s the same old games.
The fringe populists go frothing nuts and drive the conversation hard right with claims of black helicopters and fake birth certificates. Then when the policy-minded Democrats step up to refute the ridiculous claims, the serious minded Republicans all look aghast and confused and say how they never claimed any of that. And then we get to hear budget, budget, budget, budget.
The media gives overwhelming amounts of time to the GOP positions – both penny pinching sane and frothing mad – while the Democrats get a few minutes to once again explain that they’re not soci alists and the policy is paid for, while journalists try to spring “gotcha” questions on them.
At the end of the day, we meet a “compromise” that somehow manages to shovel another hundred billion dollars into the waiting arms of corporate executives while half-assed sorta fixing the problems at hand. And the GOP ride into the next election bitching about all the problems their foot dragging created while promising every voting age citizen a new pony with trillions of dollars in unpaid tax cuts.
stevie314159
“Soylent Green is ……….Republicans.”
SGEW
“Within the last 10,000 years or so” is how the Gallup poll was worded. (44%!) So it’s a common misconception.
But yeah, the standard Begat-ematics places the age of the Earth at around 6,000 years old (or, as Harris puts it, sometime after the Sumerians invented soap). And almost half the country believes it.
Hooray for America!
Makewi
The media gives overwhelming amounts of time to the GOP positions – both penny pinching sane and frothing mad – while the Democrats get a few minutes to once again explain that they’re not soci alists and the policy is paid for, while journalists try to spring “gotcha” questions on them.
First, this is just delusional. Second, nationalizing health care (which is 17% of GDP) is socialism. You can pretend it isn’t, but it is. Go ahead and put your case forth for what you think you want, but lying about it just makes you a dick.
Martin
For a moment there I thought the whole thing had collapsed under its own weight. Nope. They doubled down on stupid yet again today.
Don’t let DougJ read this. Pretty goddamn ballsy move if you ask me. I wonder how long it’ll take to extract the Secret Service from his ass.
4tehlulz
SOYLENT GRUN UND MATZAH FUR ALLES
freelancer
http://obamaisliterallyhitler.tumblr.com/
YES! YES! YES!
Steal the meme back!
Fucking AWESOME!
kay
“the argument is that a natural consequence of having government involved in these decisions while trying to keep costs low is rationing of care and encouraging people away from expensive, extraordinary measures.”
I think he’s just wrong. Arranging for a consultation re: advanced directives is a private, voluntary, series of acts.
There’s nothing natural or inevitable about it, or the last twenty years of encouraging people to do so would have been effective, and we’d all have one.
Ash Can
In other news, all is not lost: Advertisers are pulling out of Glenn Beck’s batshit-fest. Free market, bitchez.
cleek
i’m impressed though, at how quickly the professional GOP got this together. they went from nothing, no organization at all, to the teabaggers aimlessly marching around, to the birthers spinning shit into fury, to deathpanelists storming town halls with death threats and Hitler signs, in like six months.
RedState has been trying to mobilize the right for what, five years?
cleek
who is trying to nationalize healthcare ?
JohnEWilliams
I’m not sure the shrieking and wailing people necessarily “believe” the scary stories they’re being fed — the point is, they WANT to and NEED to believe them. They want the world to see them as the most oppressed, unfairly-treated, victimized people on Earth, and any story that backs them up will do. Their real problem is they think they used to be in charge and called the shots, and now they don’t, and it scares them shitless.
If President McCain was making the same proposals for healthcare, they wouldn’t give a shit, or even pay half attention.
gwangung
Which the entire rest of the world does (including that “red” haven of Taiwan). Gonna call what they’re doing soc1al1sm, too?? If you do, I’m prepared to watch you and some of my Taiwanese cousins go at it. Got popcorn, too.
arguingwithsignposts
Having met mr. joyner at a conference, he seems like a bright enough guy, but glibertarianism has set in and that’s his niche, so he keeps plumbing it. he’s not as ass-hat crazy as steve verdon, but that’s not saying much. Here, he seems to want to have his cake and eat it too, which is the republican way, after all.
El Cid
Napoleon is correct. Stop this bullshit, undeserved politeness extended to an establishmentarian commentator and call it for what it is — straight up deceit.
And it’s deceit of either two categories: One, lying about what he has seen people write and say; or lying about what he has seen and is pretending to have done research that he simply hasn’t done.
It isn’t some complex function of being ‘part of the beltway’ mindset and I’m sick and tired of these high visibility shit-heads being allowed to get away with things I would sure as hell be fired for or would have been failed on in school.
cbear
@cleek: You sound almost suprised, cleek.
Me, not so much. IMHO, 20-30% of the people in this country have the mental capacity of your average shithouse rat—on a good day.
Leo
I spent some of the weekend debating with right wingers about health care stuff online. Basically, I put to them the facts about health costs in this country (16% of GDP; nearly double anyone else) and health outcomes (among the worst in the developed world on any number of measures, including life expectancy).
I was accused of “wanting to shove granny in the incinerator,” being an “autocratic apparatchik” and a “bolshie,” and supporting Obama’s goal of cutting off health care when someone reaches their “government determined expiration date.” I was also informed that the reason the U.S. has poor life expectancy numbers is that we’re not as “homogeneous” as some other countries.
Although it was amusing to see gaskets blow over my stating a few simple facts, it was also quite unnerving. It was quite clear that most of the people there really believed even the craziest of the nonsense that was out there, up to including literal death panels and nationalization of all doctors offices.
Xenos
@Makewi:
This is intellectually dishonest twaddle. Of course nationalizing and industry is social-ism, you jerk. Thus, Medicare is social-ism. Thus, a nationalized health system would be social-ism. But the Democrats are not (alas!) proposing nationalizing health care. This is a weak, industry friendly, watered-down reform bill that has the support of the AMA, and ostensibly at least, the major private insurers.
So fuck off with your ‘OMG Social-ism! Just admit it Libtards!” crap.
Makewi
@cleek:
Obama, and the Democratic leadership.
freelancer
Can we quietly pass legislation to make wingnuts pass a four question Vocabulary test? Seriously, you shouldn’t be allowed to be for or against something until you can define it.
Define the following words, correctly:
1)Freedom
2)Liberty
3)Tyranny
4)Social-ism
Too much of Levin, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, and Bush ret-conning patriotism is ruining our language and our democracy.
demimondian
@Makewi: I’d love for you to support that claim with, you know…evidence. Not that I think you made it up, but rather that I think you are so used to repeating lies that you simply assumed that since the facts refute it, it had to be true.
Ash
@Makewi: Except…..you’re wrong. That is a fact. To deny the fact that you’re wrong would be to deny reality. Which would make you insane.
That wouldn’t be very surprising though.
Makewi
@Xenos:
It’s not twaddle. I know it’s socialism, but apparently some of the other commenter here don’t understand that (hi cleek, hi gwangung). Although, Medicare isn’t socialism because it isn’t taking ownership of the industry. Medicare is part of the social safety net. There is a distinction, but you’d probably have to be less angry to see it.
The Democrats are absolutely planning on nationalizing health care. It’s only the rubes, or the dishonest who are pretending that it’s something else.
So fuck off you jerk!
Alan
Evidently, people like Makewi think the problem has a simple binary solution. Government intervention bad, private enterprise good. So it’s easy to cry socialism without actually understanding the system we already have.
As a former conservative I was quick to say that government’s involvement in healthcare is the problem–if Medicare didn’t exist costs would be under control. How stupid and naive was that? The whole reason Medicare exists is because private insurance didn’t want to cover the most costly segment of our population–the elderly. Our “private enterprise” healthcare system is set so the government assumes most of the cost and the private companies ride the gravy train of the healthy. Yeah, let’s keep that system in place–talk about misallocation of limited resources.
As an aside, I’d wager most of the people going bankrupt due to medical costs were financed by a company owned by an insurance company. Fractional reserve banking is like printing money. And if you can strap someone to a lifetime of monthly payments…well, that’s banking baby.
cleek
@Makewi:
you are either ignorant or lying.
Leo
Makewi fails at words.
steve s
Not exactly. Social1sm is government ownership of an industry. Madicare is a single-payer system. Like the military. The government does all the buying, but it doesn’t own Lockheed Martin. So it’s not exactly socialistic.
me
This page could make a good crazy test. Avoid anyone who takes it seriously.
me
I guess the blockquote tags are broken.
Makewi
@cleek:
Sure hon. It must be one of those. Have you read the latest interviews with Moore and Gergen in Rolling Stone? They seem to believe that nationalized health care is the goal too. Probably for the same reasons I do.
I have a comment in moderation. I’m guessing for using the same language that was directed at me.
geg6
@smiley:
“Anyone know who supposedly visited him “in the middle of the night?” ”
I thought he was blaming Nancy Pelosi for sending out her thugs.
freelancer
@me:
It’s the site’s fault. WordPress broke your brain.
NickM
@cleek: It’s true, they’ve ramped up quickly, and its worrisome. But I have to think that, unless the economy takes another nosedive, they’re probably exhausting all the available crazy kindling.
Blue Raven
@Makewi:
This factoid couldn’t possibly have anything to do with how Medicare’s budget gets yanked around, the medical community jacks its base prices up to astronomical levels because of the uninsured people who are never able to pay their bills, and how the “paid enough” is compared to the rate for uninsured patients in a charming looped argument, could it?
Mark S.
Who gives a fuck what you call it? If we nationalized health care and ended up spending only 12% of GDP on health care (which is about the second most any country spends on it), that would be $700 billion a year that we weren’t spending on health care.
JR
I call them “Dupes”: people who are mental carbon-copies of each other, who internalize and devoutly believe whatever nonsense allows them to feel the sense of community that comes from hating liberals. They’re the ones with purple heart band-aids and receipts from SBVT donations. They’re the ones who (if you check the comments on Roger Simon’s uncharacteristically thoughtful piece on Politico right now) appear in the comments of every news site in the country to mock us for worshipping our “Messiah” and demean us for having the temerity to suggest adopting something so Nazi-like as a non-universal, non-single payer health insurance plan that has less negotiating power than Wal-Mart (“We knew Hitler was a monster from the first co-pay!”).
They believe whatever bullshit they’re fed, and a massive industry has been created to ensure they’re constantly slopped.
They’re first-rate Dupes, herded by professional liars, and they’re depressingly numerous.
God Bless America!
geg6
@Makewi:
Fuck you, you fucking asshole fuck. I just watched a friend fucking die because of the direct actions of one of those goddam insurance companies of which you seem so enamored. Fuck you, fuck your fucking lying friends on the right, and fuck everyone you know. I’m sick of assholes like you who are perfectly happy to see good people die to make some brain dead political point.
Oh, and did I mention fuck you?
wasabi gasp
Not only is Joyner sane and not an idiot, but he also has a wonderful ability to look on the bright side of life – even when he has to stick his head where the sun don’t shine to see it.
cbear
@geg6: Please allow me to join the conversation.
@Makewi: Fuck you!
me
How many fucks is that?
gypsy howell
Here’s the thing the stupid corporatist democrats can’t seem to figure out (or don’t want to):
At this point, they should just throw out all previous plans, and go straight for single payer care.
Let the crazies scream and shout about evil soc1alism — right up until the first time they figure out they don’t have to worry about paying the medical treatment they need. The screeching and wailing about soc1alism would come to a halt, I guarantee. (OK, they’d move onto another subject, but at least we’d all have health care.)
Woe be to the politician who henceforth tried to take away the wackos free medical care. I don’t see any of the elderly wingers clamoring to get rid of their medicare.
The democrats could be heroes in spite of themselves.
I know… won’t happen.
Molly
@Makewi: “nationalizing health care (which is 17% of GDP) is socialism. You can pretend it isn’t, but it is.”
Off-topic, but interesting to me. Why is “social ism” such a big deal, heavy-weighted word? An emotion word? Meant to provoke some kind of visceral response in me? “Ooooh, it’s so BAD, the S-word. Only EVIL people do that.”
It creates no response in me at all. Maybe I’m not a proper capitalist American, and I should be trembling in fear and indignation.
gypsy howell
BTW, has anyone heard the backstory yet on “Pelosi’s thugs came to my house” What is he talking about?
freelancer
@Makewi:
Fuck you, also.
cleek
no. but feel free to quote the relevant sections for us!
They seem to believe that nationalized health care is the goal too. Probably for the same reasons I do.
because you, like Micheal Moore want such a thing ?
and, when you quote those relevant sections, please be sure to point out where the claims of three non-politicians match up to the bill that looks like it might make it through congress.
steve s
@me: a lot.
cbear
@me: I’m not sure, but I got a few extra if you need one.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG5Xs0s55eU
Only eight seconds long, yet George says it all.
asiangrrlMN
@gwangung: I am Taiwanese American, and I have a lot of family in Taiwan. They have their ups and downs with their health care system, but by and large, it works.
@geg6: I’m really sorry to hear about your friend. I remember you writing about him and the horrible choice he had to make. I really wish the Dems would push this point more: We already fucking have death panels–only the insurance companies head them.
@Makewi: Oh, and fuck you from me, too.
Alan
@gypsy howell:
It wouldn’t be free. Most likely their will be a payroll withholding wrapped within FICA. Then, miraculously, all worry over Medicare going bankrupt will disappear. And everyone will be covered.
asiangrrlMN
Oh, and I would MUCH rather have the government running health care than the fucking private insurance companies whose sole purpose is to make a buck. Don’t want a government bureaucrat between me and my doctor????? Hell, yeah, I do! It’s much fucking better than an insurance agent between me and my doctor!
Seriously, Democrats. It’s time to play fucking hardball and reframe this whole discussion.
wasabi gasp
When it’s my turn to fuck Makewi I’d appreciate if he freshens up a little bit.
gypsy howell
@Alan:
Well, I know it wouldn’t literally be free, but it would feel “free” just like any service paid for by your tax dollars feels free when you use it, (like the library, or interstate highways, or the fire department, or the Smithsonian … you know what I mean.)
Makewi
I understand the anger. You don’t like hearing that there is no magic bullet to a “problem” that involves 300 million unique situations. You want to believe that the part of the government that you like (your team) is going to be able to make it all better. You really don’t like people who tell you things that you don’t want to hear.
Which is all fine, but it doesn’t change the reality of the situation. I’m glad you guys are supporters of baby murdering, because with all the fucks going on in this thread someone is likely to get knocked up and the idea that some of you’d be raising children scares me a little.
Sorry to hear about your friend geg.
NR
@Makewi:
Rant about socialism all you like, but there are some facts that you cannot escape:
1. All the other first-world countries have single-payer health care. The United States alone does not.
2. Most of those countries have better health care than we do (data available here; for example, the United States ranks 36th in infant mortality rates worldwide).
3. Those countries spend an average of 10% of their GDP on health care costs; in the U.S., we spend 19%.
Now, given the fact that in the U.S., we spend more money for worse health care, the only question becomes, how stupid does someone have to be to fight to hang on to that system?
cbear
@wasabi gasp: For the WIN!
Alan
@asiangrrlMN:
Honestly, the claim on the Right, government is inefficient with resources. But somehow government is going to be extremely efficient and not spend money healthcare. Amazing.
gypsy howell
@asiangrrlMN:
Not gonna happen. But the funny thing is, these guys would get re-elected for life if they would just pass single-payer. OK, maybe the insurance dollars would dry up, but surely there’s some other graft and bribery that would take its place to keep our congresscritters in the lifestyle they think they so deserve.
eric k
Joe the Plumber is a two bit huckster looking to get as much for himself as he can, he and the Fox crowd deserve each other.
For Fox and other righties to exploit this obviously disturbed guy rather than get him help is evil.
gypsy howell
@Makewi:
My turn. Go fuck yourself.
Makewi
@cleek:
Wait, are you still arguing that the goal isn’t to nationalize the system?? Seriously, let it go.
asiangrrlMN
@Makewi: No, you understand nothing, you pretentious fucking nitwit. Simply put, the government would provide better coverage than the private insurance companies. However, that is not what is under consideration here. A public option that in time is not completely subsidized by the tax payers will force the private companies to be more competitive and cut out their client-gouging practices or the companies can fucking wither up and die. That’s free market, bitchez. What are you punk asses so afraid of?
By the way, baby killers is so passe. Think of a new insult, will ya?
kay
@asiangrrlMN:
I’m sorry, we can’t. Conservatives won’t let us. They’re all up in arms because the House bill provides funds for lower-income mothers to get home visits after having a baby. It’s been going on for at least 20 years. It’s administered by county health departments, and it makes a lot of sense, because then new mothers don’t go to emergency rooms with what are common infant-care issues. They show them how to spot a real problem.
Here, they bring a children’s book donated by Dolly Parton, and a lot of freebies with the names of local businesses on them, like baby calendars, diaper coupons, etc. It’s nice.
Conservatives think it’s a government plot to subvert their parental rights.
Kirk Spencer
@Makewi: What they say is that they believe it’s to lead to single payer, not nationalized. There is a difference. It is, as you accurately noted about medicare, not taking ownership of the health care system.
It’s France or Holland, not Canada or the UK.
NR
Last comment stuck in moderation; trying again.
Makewi, you can rant about socialism all you like, but there are some facts that you cannot escape:
1. All the other first-world countries have single-payer health care. The United States alone does not.
2. Most of those countries have better health care than we do (data available here; for example, the United States ranks 36th in infant mortality rates worldwide).
3. Those countries spend an average of 10% of their GDP on health care costs; in the U.S., we spend 19%.
Now, given the fact that in the U.S., we spend more money for worse health care, the only question becomes, how stupid does someone have to be to fight to hang on to that system?
asiangrrlMN
@gypsy howell: I know that. That’s the part that fucking frustrates me. The Democrats aren’t looking longterm enough. Fucking punk-ass politics instead of actual governing.
Ash Can
@Makewi: Here you go, and not an F-bomb in sight:
From Merriam-Webster Online:
Nationalize: to invest control or ownership of in the national government
Sozialism (deliberately misspelled to avoid comment moderation): 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Now, if you really listened to what Barack Obama was advocating, you’d know that the centerpiece of his reform goal is a publicly funded and administered option, designed to act primarily as a safety net for individuals unable to obtain private insurance, whether due to cost or due to said insurers declining to sell said individuals their product. Interestingly, this option would have the secondary effect of competing with private insurance. Since you evidently feel that private insurance is superior to its public counterpart, what are you unhappy about? Private insurance would continue to thrive.
Explain how this meets the definition of “nationalism” and “sozialism” (spelling note as above).
I have to wonder why the potential for competition from the public sector concerns you so. It makes me suspect that you’re secretly fearful that the public option might actually prove to be superior. And that the models the rest of the industrialized countries use actually work, and that the free market really is inadequate for supplying what, like national defense and firefighting and policing, is necessary for the overall wellbeing of a civilized nation.
Kirk Spencer
I would like to point out that almost all arguments used against the health plan are identical to those used to attempt to stop Medicare and Medicaid – which worked up till 1965, and were then shown to be wrong.
It bothers me that nobody reads history.
Minionero
@gypsyhowell
Exactly. And now would be the perfect time. What could the right possibly say that hasn’t already been said?
cbear
@Makewi: Was it good for you, baby?
Makewi
@Alan:
You don’t understand the claims “from the Right” is what the problem is, I think. I am curious, are you suggesting that the government is efficient? How about effective, is the Federal government generally effective?
gwangung
Which is that you’re either a) a troll or b) yet another yahoo who doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
Come on. Do better. I can puke a better troll.
kay
@Kirk Spencer:
I’m with you. The only way around it is through it. Pass it. Conservatives get completely discredited again, and we get rational health care delivery.
A twofer.
gwangung
No, he understands them. YOU don’t.
Stop regurgitating warmed over arguments.
Molly
@cbear: “I’m not sure, but I got a few extra if you need one.”
Add one for me too.
Sully posted my “View From Your Sickbed” story last week, but let me share what I dealt with here also, shorter version.
My son was born premature with the umbilical cord wrapped around his neck. He had complications and was in NICU. The first bill came the day I left the hospital without him.
The two weeks he was in NICU, I spent constantly fighting with insurance companies, trying to get them to cover his care. One of them told me they would not pay a $6,000 claim because he had a pre-existing condition. I had just given birth, was exhausted, had a child in NICU with some real issues, and I was trying to get insurance companies to pay for things so we wouldn’t go broke when the costs were totalled up. THAT is what I did the first 3 weeks of my son’s life. Convinced insurance companies that pre-existing conditions don’t apply before a child is actually born.
I keep hearing this problem will exist under government health care, only I’d be having that conversation with other, less-responsive people. The times I’ve dealt with government officials, it’s pretty-well defined what they will and will not pay for. There is criteria defined, there are rules, as much as we scoff at them, scoff at the process, it’s written down, I can point to it, I can refer to it, I can make decisions based on those rules. Very, very little of that exists with insurance companies. You don’t know what will happen. You don’t know what surprises await you. You just hope it won’t be too bad.
So, I don’t want to hear it about “rationing” or “others making decisions for you” or “end of life counseling.” Just shut the hell up until you are the one sitting next to an infant in NICU struggling for life, wondering how you’re going to pay for it.
And by the way, my son is perfectly healthy and beautiful and thriving. We were lucky.
kay
Why do they think the federal government administers health care? They don’t. They don’t even administer public health services. County health departments do.
I think we’re having a basic civics problem again. Rearing its ugly head.
cleek
who’s goal ? not Obama’s, not Congress’. there is nothing in play right now that looks anything like a total government takeover of the healthcare industry. Obama’s proposals, and what Congress is arguing over are absolutely nothing like that. does Micheal Moore want that ? yeah, maybe. but he’s irrelevant.
you’d know that if you weren’t ignorant. and you’d admit it, if you weren’t lying.
still waiting for those quotes.
Minionero
Ask Grandma how she likes Medicare.
Makewi
Now, if you really listened to what Barack Obama was advocating, you’d know that the centerpiece of his reform goal is a publicly funded and administered option, designed to act primarily as a safety net for individuals unable to obtain private insurance, whether due to cost or due to said insurers declining to sell said individuals their product. Interestingly, this option would have the secondary effect of competing with private insurance. Since you evidently feel that private insurance is superior to its public counterpart, what are you unhappy about? Private insurance would continue to thrive.
Obama has, oddly enough for a career politician, changed what he says on this issue. I will be sure to mark you down as one who is clinging to the idea that this isn’t a move to nationalize the industry.
Don’t we have a “designed to act primarily as a safety net for individuals unable to obtain private insurance”? I believe we do, and it’s called Medicare. I seem to recall reading about how Medicare was going to bankrupt the country at some point, but I’m sure the new and certainly not social-ist design will be much, much better. Because wishing makes it so.
Private insurance will be going away dearest, because the system is being designed to be rigged in favor of the public option. What’s more, the idea that private interests can compete with an entity that literally makes the rules and who can supply itself with capital by taking it when it wants to is insane.
You people are so sweet with your f-bombs. You really don’t like dissenting voices eh? The world would be so much better if everyone was just forced to agree or shut up?
Makewi
@Molly:
Sorry to hear about your sons problems and yours with the insurance companies, and while I realize it is a liberal dream to put up your victim creds as proof that only you should get to speak on a subject, the truth is that everyone gets a say in this country.
Makewi
@cleek:
Liar, liar pants on fire. You sir, are a fantastic debate participant. What quotes are you looking for?
Nah, don’t bother. I could show you quotes that you are asking for, from Obama and from other Dem leaders, from some of the architects of the “plan” and you would still find a way to cling to your notion that what you were being shown is just lies. You believe what you want to believe, because it comforts you to believe it.
Makewi
@kay:
How come that logic doesn’t apply to the evil health insurance companies? It’s a non starter, and not a very good one.
Makewi
@gwangung:
I’m a truth teller. You are a bitter clinger.
Speedy
I wonder if Mike Sola got his visit from the “Dem thugs” before , or AFTER the aliens kidnapped him for his anal probe?
cleek
i accept your forfeit.
Tax Analyst
Makewi said:
“I understand the anger. You don’t like hearing that there is no magic bullet to a “problem” that involves 300 million unique situations. You want to believe that the part of the government that you like (your team) is going to be able to make it all better. You really don’t like people who tell you things that you don’t want to hear.”
Well of course there’s no “magic bullet”, you moron. But we’re looking at a situation that is currently untenable and trying to get something that works better and more humanely, and I don’t think that’s out of the question, although the GOP is doing it’s damndest to stop, water down or somehow screw up whatever eventually comes down the pike. Then they can say, “See, we told you it wouldn’t work”. Perhaps you’ve noticed that they do this with everything they can get their mitts on. Or perhaps you have chosen not to notice. Yes, it’s true – if you water down a decent idea enough it will eventually just turn into useless, watery gunk. I’m hoping that isn’t the Health Care Reform we end up with.
But hey, stand there smugly on the sidelines and play whatever word or semantical games that float your boat. Why not, what’s it to you if insurance companies whether people are “sick enough”, or perhaps “too sick” to receive treatment?
Will “my team” “make it all better”? I don’t know, but I damned sure know that “your team” won’t. The fact that it may be difficult doesn’t mean the attempt shouldn’t be made.
In an effort to remain civil I will now yield the floor so that somebody else can tell you to go fuck yourself.
Mark S.
@Makewi:
My turn: Fuck you Makewi.
Fern
@Kirk Spencer:
Scuse me, but the Canadian health care system is a single payer system NOT nationalized health care.
Plus delivery of health services is a provincial, rather than a federal mandate, so the feds couldn’t run the system if they wanted to.
cbear
@Makewi: Yes, and your “say” has been deemed both intellectually incoherent and historically ignorant by the community you are trying to engage.
Now, fuck off.
Ash Can
@Makewi: Just out of curiosity, how many countries have you lived in?
jharp
I read most of the posts and forgive me if it’s already been said.
Didn’t this fucking douchebag liar Sola say he was a senior?
And thus he’d be on Medicare.
And his disabled son would also be on Medicare and Medicaid?
gwangung
Son, have YOU got THAT wrong. Then again, no one can see who is who on the internet.
Cmon, folks….y’all can handle a troll better than this, can’t you?
kay
@Makewi:
What logic? You said the federal government administers Medicare delivery of health care. They don’t. Medicare recipients don’t deal with the federal government in nearly any capacity. They deal with staff at doctors offices and hospitals.
Oh, and Medicaid is administered by the 50 states, all differently, through enabling legislation passed by elected state legislatures. A lot of Medicaid programs are administered at the county level.
Conservatives are conflating and confusing and muddying the water, to nail their favorite boogey-man, the Big Bad Feds. It’s deceptive, and what’s worse, it’s stupid.
Tell the idiots lining up for these thing something. Tell them we don’t have a national referendum on federal legislation, but once every two, four and six years. They don’t get a direct vote in the US House. We chose a different system. It’s not “tyranny”, it’s a deliberate plan. It was designed to mitigate the effect of loonies.
NickM
I think the government is generally effective. The military does its job well, and its about half of “government.” Medicare and Social Security seem to function well. Regulatory agencies from the FAA to EPA to local sewer and water authorities generally seem to be doing a generally competent (and underappreciated) job, even if not perfectly. The National Parks system is great, as is the Smithsonian. NIH and NASA are institutions I think we can be proud of, as a nation. As far as I can tell, government is about as good at responding to my compliants as private companies I complain to about inadequate service.
The things that are pointed at continuously as flaws – Post Office and DMV — are difficult to do. UPS and FedEx are trying to get out of the relatively much moreexpensive “last mile of service” that the Post Office is mandated to do. The DMV has to get official government documents to a population that’s about 50% functionally illiterate, and no-one wants to be there. Even they do an adequate job, in my experience.
les
@Makewi:
Citation needed. Better trolls, please.
Molly
@Makewi: “while I realize it is a liberal dream to put up your victim creds as proof that only you should get to speak on a subject, the truth is that everyone gets a say in this country.”
Who says I’m a liberal, and who says I consider myself a victim? As I said, we were very lucky. I had insurance. I knew enough to properly fight my battles and to win them. Believe me, Makewi, I do not think it is acceptable for anyone to abdicate personal responsibility for their lives, and I do not believe in a “nanny state.”
I do know this. The current system will not hold, and we need to do something to correct it. If you do not agree with me on this, if you think we’re OK the way we are now, if you think there is a way to change this without government intervention, please, share those ideas, share those thoughts. I am more than willing to listen. I’d prefer the government to not have to take on yet another responsibility. But, I see no other option.
I am focused on improving current state, not ideological arguments. Give me a concrete proposal I can look at and assess for myself.
Fern
@Makewi:
That was heinous.
Makewi
@Ash Can:
18.
@cbear
Yes, but the community is a little angry at such a small thing. A lot of anger over 1 dissenting opinion. Makes me wonder how many mood altering chemicals are prescribed to this ‘community’
@Tax Analyst
Nearly 70% of those polled are happy with their current health care plan. The untenable system, as you put it, really isn’t. But by God you are going to force us to change it so that it will be more “fair”.
gwangung
Taiwan’s system. Even Makewi agreed.
Kirk Spencer
@Fern: I sit corrected. Thank you.
Fulcanelli
It seems the ones howling the loudest about how Obama’s so-called ‘Death Panels’ are going to “put them down” are the ones who are so frickin’ gullible and easily misinformed that maybe they should be put down.
So let’s see…
Who would I feel more comfortable with overseeing my claim for medical treatment?
An insurance company bureaucrat who is trained and taught to deny claims like mine based on phony, self-serving, industry risk management assessment data created to maintain obscene company profitability levels and who, coincidentally, may also lose his job if he approves too many of them?
Or…
A reasonably well paid government bureaucrat with union job protection (and thus no fear of job loss), and no profitability concerns to worry about, just the policy holder’s health and satisfaction with the system he’s paid into to be concerned about.
Hmmmm… Apparently this isn’t the no-brainer question I thought it was or these FUCKING RIGHT WING RETARDS WOULDN’T BE COMPARING THE GUY WHO WANTS TO PUT SUCH A SYSTEM IN PLACE TO HITLER, and instead they would be lining up to make it a reality.
Right at this very moment, someone, somewhere is wrong on the internet. I just know it.
/rant n’ roll
Molly
@Fern: No worries, Fern. I await Makewi’s counter-proposal for health-care reform, or the statement that there is not a problem right now and current state is acceptable.
cbear
@Makewi: You’re confusing anger with disdain.
@Molly: On your behalf, dear lady.
@Makewi: Fuck you.
steve s
Agree with Nick. If you think the DMV or the Post Office is unhelpful or uncooperative, try canceling your cell phone contract. I got a Florida driver’s license in 30 minutes. My brother spent _months_ trying to cancel a fraudulent Direct TV contract. I’d rather have 50 interactions with the Post Office than one with a health insurance company.
kay
@Makewi:
Conservatives don’t want the federal Medicaid program that sends home health workers to the homes of new mothers, because Chuck Norris has some paranoid fantasy that local LPN’s want to brainwash ‘lil Christians?
Here’s what you do. You elect or appoint a conservative county health department director, and he or she doesn’t apply for that grant. He or she will have to answer to voters on her ideological or spiritual objections to home health care visits, but them’s the breaks.
Makewi
Molly
You have my apologies for my earlier snark. What you say is reasonable. I will tell you that my chief concern is the idea of putting the government in charge of anything to do with health care decision making. Private care is not perfect, and the current system we have is causing problems with cost, which must lead to unrealistic denials of claims, so my suggestions would center around reforming that. As a rough outline, I would expand Medicare coverage to include more of those currently uncovered and I would seek to eliminate the employer paid system we currently have as it keeps those individually covered at too much of a distance from what things cost. It drives the costs up, because “someone else is paying for it”.
Makewi
@steve s:
Unless the Post Office loses your mail, in which case your pretty much screwed. Also, the comparison you are really looking for is dealing with the DA’s office who is absolutely convinced of your guilt even though you didn’t do it.
Alan
@Fulcanelli:
What Fulcanelli said.
JK
Gun-Toter At Obama Town Hall: ‘Who’d Be Silly Enough To Carry An Unloaded Firearm?’
h/t http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/2009/08/gun-toter-at-obama-town-hall-whod-be-silly-enough-to-carry-an-unloaded-firearm.php?ref=fpblg
Makewi
@gwangung:
Taiwan’s system is unsupportable. The average doctor visit lasts 2-5 minutes and the government has to borrow money from the banks in order to pay for it. There is no system in place to gauge how it is doing. It also doesn’t cover everyone, although it gets the vast majority.
How is Taiwan doing in the medical and pharmaceutical innovation department?
Indylib
@Makewi: The government is very efficiently supplying the healthcare needs of my family through a a system that is almost 100% “nationalized”. Most of us go to government owned hospitals, are treated by government employed nurses and doctors, have our tests done by government employed technicians, get our medication at a government run pharmacies. It’s called TriCare and it is used to provide healthcare to active duty US military servicepeople and their families. It covers over 9 million people, almost half of which live in 13 southern states. And I don’t know any of the people in the military or their families that are standing up screaming about how horrible “socialized” medicine is.
http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/07/single-payer-tricare-military-health-plan-popular-in-southern-states.html
And fuck you from me, too. Also.
jharp
Makewi
“As a rough outline, I would expand Medicare coverage to include more of those currently uncovered”
Which is pretty much exactly what the public plan outlined by Obama does.
Geez.
Kirk Spencer
@Makewi:
A few points to consider. First, a bit over 25% of the people polled were on Medicare and Medicaid. We know from many polls over the years that most (85% or better) of them are happy with their plan. We also know that only approximately 55% of the population has private insurance.
In other words, probably only about 51% of the people who are not on medicare or medicaid are happy with their current health care plan.
Second point. I am truly unhappy with the complaints about the USPS and DMV. In my experience both do very well, particularly given the constraints under which they must operate. Consider for a moment that the USPS must deliver EVERYWHERE – both FedEx and UPS have locations they will not go because it’s “unprofitable” that get USPS service. USPS sustains regular on-site pickups for no additional charge, whereas to get the same service from UPS or FEDEX costs quite a bit more. Costwise, all three are comparable for what can be delivered.
If I could spend as little time in waiting rooms for physicians as I’ve spent in the DMV office, I’d be overjoyed. (My daughter got her driver’s license not so long ago – I’ve recent experience for comparison.) The DMV staff has been efficient, effective, and personable – not always true of some of the doctor’s staff.
As a consequence I am a little annoyed at the smears I see of these two offices. ain’t true, and I’m tired of lies.
Tax Analyst
Makewi –
You REALLY believe the current system is tenable? Keep in mind that tenable is defined as, “reasonable, acceptable, defensible, plausible, rational, sound or justifiable”. Personally speaking, I find it none of the above. You say “Nearly 70% of those polled are happy with their current health care plan”. Does this include the uninsured? They number somewhere between 47 and 56 million from the numbers I’ve seen. Even supposing that your “nearly 70%” isn’t the result of some semantical monkey-wrenching in how the question is presented, including a proportional percentage of the uninsured would likely bring your “nearly 70%” down to somewhat less than 1/2. Or don’t they count in your world?
jharp
Makewi
“Taiwan’s system is unsupportable.”
Bullshit.
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/22/3/77
Fern
You know, I think that Americans have dealt with private insurance so long that they are having trouble getting out of that mindset.
Under a single payer system like the one I am familiar with, the government makes decisions on what procedures will be covered (for example, cosmetic surgery is not covered except for reconstructive surgery and other very good reasons). The government does NOT make decisions about what treatment among those that are covered will be approved for individual patients. These decisions are made by patients and medical practitioners. And then the practitioner bills government. Which pays the bills. And that is that.
DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
I am guessing that MakeWee enjoys pissing (and moaning) all over the place here solely for the attention it brings. Since it is clear that she is in dire need, maybe we can take up donations to buy her a pot to piss in.
Oh, and a well intentioned ‘Fuck You’ to MakeWee. Too. Also. Ubetcha.
Makewi
@jharp:
No, it isn’t “pretty much” what the Obama plan does.
Geez.
jharp
The Singapore government spent only 1.3 percent of GDP on healthcare in 2002, whereas the combined public and private expenditure on healthcare amounted to a low 4.3 percent of GDP. By contrast, the United States spent 14.6 percent of its GDP on healthcare that year
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/01/singapores_heal.html
More details on how Singapore’s system works:
* There are mandatory health savings accounts: “Individuals pre-save for medical expenses through mandatory deductions from their paychecks and employer contributions… Only approved categories of medical treatment can be paid for by deducting one’s Medisave account, for oneself, grandparents, parents, spouse or children: consultations with private practitioners for minor ailments must be paid from out-of-pocket cash…”
* “The private healthcare system competes with the public healthcare, which helps contain prices in both directions. Private medical insurance is also available.”
* Private healthcare providers are required to publish price lists to encourage comparison shopping.
* The government pays for “basic healthcare services… subject to tight expenditure control.” Bottom line: The government pays 80% of “basic public healthcare services.”
* Government plays a big role with contagious disease, and adds some paternalism on top: “Preventing diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tobacco-related illnesses by ensuring good health conditions takes a high priority.”
* The government provides optional low-cost catatrophic health insurance, plus a safety net “subject to stringent means-testing.”
fledermaus
fixed!
Makewi
It’s horrible when people have opposing opinions. If only you people could round them all up and put them in camps or something.
Have fun at your the government will solve all my problems party.
gwangung
@Makewi:
Dude, I’m not even sure you can find Taipei on a map, let along talk knowledgeably on their health care system.
Fern
@jharp:
Sounds complicated.
Alan
@Tax Analyst: And more than likely that 70% are all relatively healthy.
gwangung
@DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal): Classic troll.
Surprised the folks at BJ can’t handle it better.
Ash Can
@Makewi: Have any of those 18 countries had any sort of publicly funded/administered/owned health care programs? If so, do you think they were failures? If so, why?
Or do you simply believe that the United States government is uniquely unable to provide for its citizens? If so, why?
No, we’re angry because you’re trying to peddle crap to us and tell us that it’s truth. For example:
What you’re ignoring here — or hoping we’ll miss — is the fact that not included in this 70% is the huge number of people who have no health care plan at all. I can use statistics to support my viewpoint too: Also according to Gallup, 71% of those polled want to see health care reform. See? Easy. I’ll even provide a link. However, I’ll be honest enough to give some context, and say that this doesn’t reflect the substantial disagreement among respondents of what this reform should look like. How about you?
Tax Analyst
Oh, yeah…let me also second (and third) the comments that the USPS and DMV are not all that bad. CA DMV handles much of it’s business either on-line of through the mail. On that last occasion I had to actually make an in-person visit to the DMV my situation was resolved in an orderly fashion within 20, including my wait time to see the clerk. I barely had time to crack the newspaper I bought in anticipation of a lengthy wait. This was for a visit WITHOUT an appointment. Sometimes I find a moderate line at the Post Office, but about the only time I need to go in is to resume mail delivery after a vacation or business trip.
Tax Analyst
that should say, “…within 20 MINUTES”. Oh, “Edit function”, where art thou (thee???)?
kay
@Tax Analyst:
We tried really hard at the post office, when I worked there. Most of us. A lot of us. Interestingly, and perhaps related to our current troubles, the vast majority of complaints came from the over-65 set. I always attributed it to time on their hands, and because some of them (literally) were waiting for the mail. Like, standing just inside the screen door when I arrived on the porch.
gwangung
Makewi should concentrate more on her job at Investors Business Daily and not waste time here on Balloon Juice.
Mark S.
@Makewi:
I would say 99% would constitute the vast majority.
Fulcanelli
A point to ponder…
I wonder how much of American health insurance company stock is owned by foreign nationals or investment firms who don’t have the good health or financial solvency of the american public at the top of their list of priorities?
Any guess?
Tax Analyst
kay said:
“@Tax Analyst:
We tried really hard at the post office, when I worked there. Most of us. A lot of us. Interestingly, and perhaps related to our current troubles, the vast majority of complaints came from the over-65 set. I always attributed it to time on their hands, and because some of them (literally) were waiting for the mail. Like, standing just inside the screen door when I arrived on the porch.”
Yes, I haven’t seen the oft-used all-purpose smear about “lazy government employees” either at the physical post office nor in the delivery personnel. The last time I encountered truly obnoxious Public Employees was several years ago at the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office. It seemed over-staffed based on the number of employees one could see sitting around on the other side of the glass, apparently waiting for the clock to strike “5”, but they managed to have only 1 window open for customers at 4:55pm that evening…and a line of about 35-40 people waiting. When I asked about opening another window and pointed out all the people sitting at desks in the back the Supervisor drew down the blinds over all but the one open window – that sure resolved the issue. So I politely mentioned just how easy it would probably be for one loud and disatisfied ‘patron’, not NECESSARILY ME, to whip up a whole bunch of palpable anger from the currently stewing and grumbling group in that line. Oddly enough, she began to see my point of view and within about 90 seconds THREE additional windows opened up.
But that was several or more years ago…let’s see…I’d say it was about 1995. I haven’t been there since so I have no current insight on that office. I would venture to say they probably have a lot fewer people working there today, considering the current economic situation.
Molly
@Makewi: “Have fun at your the government will solve all my problems party.”
And now, where is BOB? Everyone’s fangs are bared and sharp. :)
I learned a lot from all of you today. Thanks.
Makewi
Awesome.
Makewi
@gwangung:
Wow, you really told me. You didn’t deal with what I said, but man what slick commentary.
Makewi
In any case, it won’t pass. The best part is that it will not pass completely at the hands of the Democrats. Not that this will dissuade any of you from being angry at those evil Republicans who ruined it for the rest of us.
Molly
@Makewi: Where’s the full essay? I’d like to read it.
kay
@Tax Analyst:
It was a rural post office, and I got promoted. I was the postmaster for a while, which meant I was the only person in the building when the carriers left for the day.
I used to get right wingers who came in to complain that I was there, because I was, after all a federal employee. I’d ask them, “we can’t have less then one person here, and remain open. Should we just close this facility”
They all said “no”. Of course not. They just don’t want to pay for it.
Makewi
@Molly
here
fliegr
I own multiple vehicles as a hobby and as such spend a greater than average amount of time at the DMV. In the seething clusterfuck that is Los Angeles, administered by the dysfunctional government of California, my wait times were rarely more than 10-15 minutes, with total transaction times always less than 30. Their appointment system is fantastic, and their employees execute their jobs quickly and efficiently. I just had my first encounter with the Nevada DMV and it was only worse due to lack of an appointment system. These are the negative examples of government operations?
Tax Analyst
kay said:
“@Tax Analyst:
It was a rural post office, and I got promoted. I was the postmaster for a while, which meant I was the only person in the building when the carriers left for the day.
I used to get right wingers who came in to complain that I was there, because I was, after all a federal employee. I’d ask them, “we can’t have less then one person here, and remain open. Should we just close this facility”
They all said “no”. Of course not. They just don’t want to pay for it.”
Well of course, kay. That’s pretty much the winger’s life-credo – “Give me the services I want because they’re important, but don’t ever ask me to pay for them. We can afford to do that if we just cut into the waste and fat and shut down all the services I don’t use. The only people that use those are just lazy, free-loading do-nothings anyway. Send ’em all back where they came from, I say.”
And can you imagine people disrupting a Town Hall Meeting about Tax Cuts in the same way the TH Meetings about the Health Care issue are being disrupted? I can hear the outraged squeals now.
But when you mentioned a while back that it was mostly folks over 65 that bitched about the postal service it made me smile, because that means I only have about 5 1/2 more years before I can join that club and start happily bitching away at everything…at least until the Death Panel Review Board calls me in.
I have noticed, however, that I DO tend to complain about things a lot more than I used to. Guess I’m just warming up.
Kirk Spencer
@Makewi: Actually, it’s rather nice to read the WHOLE ARTICLE. See, if you read it Dr. Emanuel is trying to establish a basis for deciding between basic and discretionary service. He suggests that a test can be whether the treatment will “cure” or not – whether, if service is provided, the recipient of the service would then be a contributing member of the society.
To paraphrase this and much of the writings so many detractors point to: “We can’t do everything for everybody. Therefor, we must determine by what method we shall choose who shall receive and who shall not. Here are some possibilities.” Inevitably, somebody will fall into “not” when such is discussed. As it is and has been a major topic for bioethicists (of which Dr. Emanuel is one) for several decades, I can assure you that you can cherry pick a couple of paragraphs from any of them to show they’re heartless bastards.
Makewi
@Kirk Spencer:
I find it curious that you think you improved that reading by explaining it further. What I quoted, and what you said are the same.
Useless eaters need not apply. But not “death boards”, oh no, completely different things.
Kirk Spencer
@Makewi:
Really?
We can guarantee some things, and the rest are available provided we don’t run out of resources. thing is, we haven’t enough resources to provide everything for everyone.
That you choose to label it death boards tells me you’re so mired in your mindset you can’t see this is what private insurance companies and hospitals and triage centers and pretty much EVERY SINGLE MEDICAL SYSTEM IN THE WORLD already does. By every single system I INCLUDE those in the US.
Makewi
@Kirk Spencer:
Huh, I wonder if we can count on those aspects of the government who will decide how to distribute those scarce resources to keep politics out of it. Given the track record of every other thing the federal government does, I’m going to have to say no. Fortunately the deciders will have better health care then the rest of us, so they won’t be affected by it.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
“Agree with Nick. If you think the DMV or the Post Office is unhelpful or uncooperative, try canceling your cell phone contract. I got a Florida driver’s license in 30 minutes. My brother spent months trying to cancel a fraudulent Direct TV contract. I’d rather have 50 interactions with the Post Office than one with a health insurance company.”
If you look only at first class mail, the USPS is the most successful organization in the history of the world, and it’s probably not even an arguable point.
Customer service is not part of the DMV’s mission. I wish it was, but it isn’t. In terms of collecting money and licensing people and vehicles, the DMV in my state is quite successful.
The private sector also does a good job, generally, of hiring speakers of English as a second language and making it nearly impossible to coax them into canceling a service that you don’t need.
The meme of government-run=poorly-run is conventional wisdom, but not by any means the necessary truth.
pattonbt
Why bother with Makewi, he wont come with facts or have an honest debate. His position is simple – its the “I got mine, so screw you” selfish asshole defense. He just wont come out and say it. So then it works like this, find just ONE flaw or scare story in a social system and then paint the entire system with that to justify not supporting it. Its the Animal House defense strategy “I will not sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America! Gentlemen!” of taking the lone case and applying it to the largest population possible. It makes the selfish less responsible for their selfish hateful ideology. Its a mental defense mechanism to make them feel that their hideous beliefs are somehow principled.
So, Makewi, all your blathering about facts is delusional. Your argument is 100% emotional. All Id like to see is you own it honestly, because you make yourself look rather stupid trying to paint over it with your “facts”. It is OK to be a selfish douchebag, just be an honest selfish douchebag. Because otherwise you look like a stupid, dishonest douchebag.
What you dont get is most of us would say “sure, we expect there to be problems with any system, but we want the system which provides the best outcomes for the greatest number of people at the best cost AND if that means I have to pay a bit extra, so be it”. We see a utility to the society as a whole (which those unfortunately devious facts support) when basic infratsructure (roads, health, security, fire, etc.) is more socialized. Im not afraid to say it, I want a more socialized healthcare system, the facts show it works better on a utilitarian scale. I might have to pay in more than people poorer than me, but I dont have a problem with that. It seems you do.
Leo
Makewi is still having trouble with words, I see. He’s now confusing discussions of what should be socially guaranteed with discussions of what should be available.
I wonder if he knows you can get services even if they aren’t provided by the government? Has anyone asked him?
Ash Can
@Makewi:
I notice that you never did respond to my questions about your first-hand experiences with health care in countries outside the US. In addition, you disingenuously excerpted a passage from E. Emanuel’s treatise — a passage that all the anti-reformists have been tossing around like a beachball — to supposedly support your viewpoint.
Seriously, is your problem with the United States government per se? And just why would you have a problem with the United States government?
Republican politicians and their voters claim that government can’t do shit. Then these voters elect these reps, and these reps proceed to prove this premise correct. Democratic voters, on the other hand, claim that yes, government does provide good services, IF you elect the right people — and we do our level best to vote for those people.
Bonnie
Health care in the United States is and always has been rationed. If you have a lot of money, you get a lot of health care. If you have a medium amount of money, you get a medium amount of health care. If you have a tiny bit of money, you get a tiny bit of health care. And, let’s not go into the vast discrimination that the U.S. health care is based on.
Kirk Spencer
@Makewi:
I cry foul.
Just upthread you stated that most of the federal government does several things well – even listed some, but wanted to exclude the post office and dmv. Heck, it sparked a brief flurry of information disagreeing.
And now you’re back to “government sucks”.
In other words, you just believe that way regardless of facts.
As a minor aside, just to nail the point to which you were responding, I’ll give you a specific example of when a decision is made NOT to give health care to dementia patients.
Heart transplants.
Limited supply compared to need. There is some degree of “first come first served”, and a bit of lottery, but for situations where the patient also has problems such as dementia you can’t get the heart. In short, your fear is based on false perception.