The Health Insurers have already won

[Martha]

Yeah, I understand.

 

[samclem]

The "one problem at a time" approach sounds like a good way to incrementally lick all the problems, but I wonder what it would produce. If it is a building-block approach, the first problem you pick (and the solution we decide upon for it) would, deliberately or not, set us on a course that could make the other problems even more difficult to solve, or introduce entirely new ones.

Big change all at once is very scary and politically very hard. I think this President has lost his chance--squandered his capital and goodwill on other projects-of-the-week. It's too bad we can't set up 50 experiments in the 50 states--let's see what works for the US. That would let us gain confidence gradually when we see the results of a particular approach. Unfortunately, state-by-state programs don't work, as the sick people would move to the states that provide them the most advantages, and businesses vote with their feet.

I think, unfortunately, it's going to take a crisis to get a solution to this problem. We don't have a crisis now--we have a long-term chronic problem that affects (primarily) those with the least societal influence. A problem among that population could fester for decades (more) without resolution. Here's my Malthusian prognostication: I think we'll have a crisis when our dysfunctional system (which disconnects the cost of services from the recipients, etc) finally causes sufficient price escalation in medical care that it impacts our economy in general. When these costs (and other factors already in place--including a huge US national debt) make the US noncompetitive and we have a surplus of workers looking for jobs, employers will finally decide that they can dump the by now way-too-expensive medical insurance plans and still keep their employees (and even stay in business). Then we'll have a marketplace for individual policies, and a huge number of people falling through the cracks and into an impossibly stressed government safety net. With the economy in a slump ("no new taxes!") and faced with renewed public pressure and an exhausted credit line, Uncle Sam does what he often does in these situations--passes an unfunded mandate. In this case, it is a mandate for everyone to be covered by some minimal, standard individual health insurance plan available from numerous private sources. Underwriting is prohibited in these approved health insurance policies/plans (making them available and affordable to those with previously existing conditions, but increasing the cost for all others somewhat). The needy get vouchers. Voila! This is how we get to where we ought to be anyway (portability, universal coverage, a choice of insurers and delivery means, all the advantages a free market brings to almost every other area of our economy--reduced costs, innovation, etc) but in the most painful way possible.

 

[Rustic23]

Solving the first problem, could cause problems for the solution to the others, however, it also seems that the same problem exist if you try to solve everything at once. It seems infinitely more difficult to solve all problems at once.

 

[Martha]

SamClem, I agree. bit when you got such a mess it might be the only way to deal with it politically, even if it isn't sensible. I want the whole sector fixed but I am worried that it won't occur. My incremental changes aren't that different from where you think we will end up.

I don't know that I agree that the President squandered his political capital. Many of the[-] projects of the week[/-] bailouts occurred before he was in office, which tarnished the legislative bodies. Our public is impatient. No matter who was president if you have a deep recession you can't expect government to turn it around in six months or a year. Plus, we can never run a counter experiment to see how things would be without bailouts.

I am not impressed with our country right now. I dislike the lack of empathy. I dislike that health care for the poor is being cut by just about every state, including Minnesota. I dislike the rhetoric coming out of the legislature. I dislike the press coverage, which just seems to thrive on excitement. I dislike that people think having a 1000 page plan is bad just because it is a 1000 pages. I used to have clients who wanted to have short agreements as if somehow that made life simpler. Well, I easily could convince them otherwise but the series of "what ifs" that an agreement should address.

Well, it still might happen. But given people don't seem to be expressing much empathy for those without, eventually may be further out than I hoped. The issue may be how close to a crisis we are.

 

[Notmuchlonger]

At least this time I am thankful we have a 2 party system. Its nice to see some give and take. Trying to railroad an absurd system would not be good for us in the long haul

 

[samclem]

I don't know that I agree that the President squandered his political capital. Many of the[-] projects of the week[/-] bailouts occurred before he was in office, which tarnished the legislative bodies. Our public is impatient. No matter who was president if you have a deep recession you can't expect government to turn it around in six months or a year. Plus, we can never run a counter experiment to see how things would be without bailouts.

Yes, the responsibility for the rapidly-increasing public resistance to big government programs rests with the previous and current legislature as well as President Obama (and Bush). It's just that the toll is so much more evident on President Obama. We're used to being disgusted with Congress, but there were such high hopes among those who voted for Obama. And his popularity has definitely suffered more as the public wariness grows and he adopts a more defensive, less inclusive and optimistic, approach to his communications with the public. It all happened so quickly.

 

[Goonie]

....I stll think they'll eventually determine that eating chocolate and cooking with lard will be major positive health factors.

Only Dark Chocolate!!! Not the run-of-the-mill plain-jane milk chocolate!

 

[W2R]

Only Dark Chocolate!!! Not the run-of-the-mill plain-jane milk chocolate!

Dark chocolate is better anyway! mmmmm!!

 

[Goonie]

Dark chocolate is better anyway! mmmmm!!

That's what my Doc told me....he knows that I like chocolate from time to time....So he told me that that was fine, just be sure that it's dark chocolate, because it's better for me!

I REALLY like my Doc!!!

 

[Notmuchlonger]

That's what my Doc told me....he knows that I like chocolate from time to time....So he told me that that was fine, just be sure that it's dark chocolate, because it's better for me!

I REALLY like my Doc!!!

Two birds with one stone. Have some port with some nice dark chocolate. Both are good for the heart

 

[Rustic23]

Martha,
I think you misunderstand those of us that dislike 1000 page plans. The problem with 1000 page plans are the political pay-off that is found in the footnote of page 588 or 396. Maybe just one line, that gives a big donor that tax break the rest of us don't get. When the bills become so big that the majority of the folks voting on them can not read them or understand them, that, IMHO is bad government.

 

[Martha]

I see your point, it is a question of trust. But the problem is that it may very well take a 1000 pages.

 

[Rustic23]

You got it, Trust, and based on the eight years of Republican rule, and the less than one year of Democratic rule, I have no more trust for the Congress of the United States. While there may be some good people up there, I firmly believe they have the own self interest in mind and not the good of the people of this country.

 

[ERD50]

Martha, I agree with much of what you say regarding the issues (but not all of it). However, I do want to express to you that this line you keep trotting out is actually a bit offensive:

But given people don't seem to be expressing much empathy for those without, eventually may be further out than I hoped.

Saying it should be set up as "pay as you go" , or that Congress should read and understand what they are signing is not about not showing empathy. Just the opposite. It is showing empathy, because I want a system which is sustainable. One that falls apart will not help those in the future. I am trying to show concern for both present and future citizens.

I think the vast majority here have expressed that they want reforms. It is the implementation of those reforms that they are concerned about. They want it done right. You seem to be painting anyone against these current proposals as a bit heartless, and I think that is just a bit too convenient, and unfair.

Sorry if that was expressed too bluntly, but I've ignored those comments enough times that the pressure built a little. So please consider how those words sound to some of us.

OK, I got that out of my system carry on.


-ERD50

 

[REWahoo]

However, I do want to express to you that this line you keep trotting out is actually a bit offensive:

Take a glance in the mirror.

If those of us who bothered to read your repeated diatribes expressed offense each time you repeated the same point we'd all be tearing our hair out by now.

Sorry if that was expressed too bluntly, but I've ignored those comments enough times that the pressure built a little. So please consider how those words sound to some of us.

Yep, some quality mirror time is definitely in order.

 

[FIRE'd@51]

REWahoo,

With all due respect (and I do very much respect you), I have to disagree with you here.

IMO, ERD50 is one of the major contributors in terms of content to this forum. I don't always agree with him, but I have found him to be respectful of others' opinions. I would not classify his posts as "diatribes", but rather as non-emotional and based upon intellectual honesty. Count me as someone who is interested in hearing what he has to say about most any topic.

I'm not taking sides against Martha here (she is quite capable of defending herself) - just that I think you have been overly harsh on ERD50.

 

[Martha]

Martha, I agree with much of what you say regarding the issues (but not all of it). However, I do want to express to you that this line you keep trotting out is actually a bit offensive:



Saying it should be set up as "pay as you go" , or that Congress should read and understand what they are signing is not about not showing empathy. Just the opposite. It is showing empathy, because I want a system which is sustainable. One that falls apart will not help those in the future. I am trying to show concern for both present and future citizens.

I think the vast majority here have expressed that they want reforms. It is the implementation of those reforms that they are concerned about. They want it done right. You seem to be painting anyone against these current proposals as a bit heartless, and I think that is just a bit too convenient, and unfair.

Sorry if that was expressed too bluntly, but I've ignored those comments enough times that the pressure built a little. So please consider how those words sound to some of us.

OK, I got that out of my system carry on.


-ERD50

We all get testy, me included. I am tired of this debate on the forum and we all repeat ourselves too often. I get especially testing when posters bring up unsupported claims, like those made in the past day or two about Medicaid. Frankly, I think that you and I should bow out of the discussion here unless we have specific facts to offer.


You are taking my quote about empathy entirely out of its context.I have been clear on saying that I have problems with the current proposals. I would do reform differently. I never said that you cannot criticize current proposals and still be empathetic. And I wasn't talking at all about pay as you go as I have a rather complicated view of the concept. (For example, states in a bad economy are forced to cut medicaid but that is when it is the most needed, sometimes the feds have to step in during recessions and spend more than what is coming in.) I have talked a fair amount about the cost issue, the likely need to raise taxes, the definite need to manage costs, and I am one of the few here who talks about specific suggestions on cost containment and problems in quantifying cost savings. I don't just whine about the need for reform nor do I just whine about how much reform will cost.

I stand by what I said in the post you snipped the quote out of but I will try to be clearer: I was riffing off of SamClem's comment that the crisis primarily is a crisis of the disadvantaged which could fester for decades. It already has festered far too long. If as a country we really value health care for all we would find a way to do it. If we don't it does not reflect well on our country. That is what I think. Others may differ in what they think.

 

[Nords]

IMO, ERD50 is one of the major contributors in terms of content to this forum. I don't always agree with him, but I have found him to be respectful of others' opinions. I would not classify his posts as "diatribes", but rather as non-emotional and based upon intellectual honesty. Count me as someone who is interested in hearing what he has to say about most any topic.
I'm not taking sides against Martha here (she is quite capable of defending herself) - just that I think you have been overly harsh on ERD50.

I think that ERD50 is exhibiting classic noodge behavior in the most Yiddish sense of the word.
Nudge Definition | Definition of Nudge at Dictionary.com

Whether that's involuntary or deliberate is difficult to discern.

But E-R.org members have already voted with the "Ignore Poster" feature. I'm in favor of releasing the "Top Ten" list in that category.

 

[ERD50]

Take a glance in the mirror.

If those of us who bothered to read your repeated diatribes expressed offense each time you repeated the same point we'd all be tearing our hair out by now.

I fully understand that I am often "pushing" the issue in a lot of cases with my posts. It is because I am sometimes trying to dig a little deeper and get a real answer. Some of the recent topics that I pushed on have been discussed every few months, and never go anywhere. Despite the fact that some people may have gotten tired of it, I am actually satisfied that I learned a little more than I did previously. People can skip those posts, or use the ignore function if that is their thing. I am who I am.

What I was commenting on in this case, was not the repetition, but the sum of those which I perceived as a "dishonest debate", putting supporters and non-supporters into a good guy / bad guy role.

I would not classify his posts as "diatribes", but rather as non-emotional and based upon intellectual honesty.

Thanks FIRE'd@51 - that is my intention. I'm glad that someone can see that for what it is meant to be and appreciate it (or not for that matter).

You are taking my quote about empathy entirely out of its context.

Ok, but... oh well, we are probably all too tired of this to go further to understand the context. Sorry if I misunderstood. My intent does stand, relative to my perceived context (as noted above).

Back to Health care, or Franken, or any other topic that will probably lead to health care anyway

Regards - ERD50

 

[Traveler987]

The Health Insurers Have Already Won - BusinessWeek


IMHO, all that we're going to get out of this is that the insurance companies are going to have 47 million additional customers - whether the customers like it or not! In return, they'll do away with the pre-existing-condition stuff.

Our premiums will continue to go up in double-digit percentage increments, the nation's deficit will continue to rise, and the Health Insurance companies will be the next industry with $100M bonuses.

I was so hopeful about this when Obama was elected. Now, it just makes me sick!

Exactly! The greedy insurers have won and the CEOs will continue to fly around the country in their private jets off the backs of their new customers! Premiums will continue to rise and benefits will continue to be cut. Healthcare is broken and politicians are all being paid off by ins companies, who are spending upwards of a million dollars a day to fight the reform.

 

[HFWR]

Exactly! The greedy insurers have won and the CEOs will continue to fly around the country in their private jets off the backs of their new customers! Premiums will continue to rise and benefits will continue to be cut. Healthcare is broken and politicians are all being paid off by ins companies, who are spending upwards of a million dollars a day to fight the reform.

You don't expect them to spend that money on policy holders, now do ya?

Profits are a right; healthcare is not...

 

[lets-retire]

I think what the government needs to do to pay for health care reform is tax wealth in addition to income, because those evil rich people didn't earn their money they stole it from the hard working poor people of this country. Oh yeah, if you have enough money to retire early, that means you will have your wealth taxed enough to make you go back to work, until you are old enough to retire. Remember profits aren't a right the welfare of poor people is.

The point is there is always someone poorer then you, who can claim that you need to help them. Profits have always driven this country. Profits are what have allowed many/most on this board to retire early. If profits are evil then they should be given back to provide for the welfare of the general population, not horded so one or two people can retire early.

 

[donheff]

The point is there is always someone poorer then you, who can claim that you need to help them. Profits have always driven this country. Profits are what have allowed many/most on this board to retire early. If profits are evil then they should be given back to provide for the welfare of the general population, not horded so one or two people can retire early.

So what's up with all of this socialized police and fire department stuff. I am pretty well covered in my gated community. Why should I subsidize your police protection? Buy your own or do without. And don't get me started on your inefficient public schools. I pay for my open market private schools. Why the heck do I have to pay taxes for your kids.

 

[lets-retire]

So what's up with all of this socialized police and fire department stuff. I am pretty well covered in my gated community. Why should I subsidize your police protection? Buy your own or do without. And don't get me started on your inefficient public schools. I pay for my open market private schools. Why the heck do I have to pay taxes for your kids.

The police and fire departments are the methods a government uses to keep the fabric of society intact, health care is not. If you look at New Orleans during the flood after Katrina you will see what happens when fire and police departments are unable to respond to emergencies. Yes the fire department assists in keeping the criminals at bay. If you believe your private security is up to the challenge of defending your walled city then have it, secede from the city/state/nation and see how long you survive. It'll will be a short lived situation (even if they allow you to withdrawal from the union), probably hours at best, before the criminals overrun your shang-ra-la. If you wish to have the government control it's populace by using health care go to a country that has that system. Fear of the government having too much control is the reason for the Bill of Rights, several of which directly limit the methods the policing arm of the government can use.

The same reason I have to pay for every other kids' education. Education is required for a society to be successful, heath care is not. Oh yeah unless your kid is going to the same school as mine you're not paying to educate my kid. This country built itself into the most successful country in the world without national health care, but now we are being told it is impossible to do it. It is not impossible, though it is unlikely, when the populace has come to believe they deserve the good life before they actually have the ability to pay for it. The lessons our parents/grandparents/great grandparents learned during the Great Depression have been lost and we are doomed to repeat thier mistakes.

 

[ziggy29]

Moving to the politics forum, as this thread has taken a decidedly political turn. Please remember that forum rules regarding civility are still in effect. Thanks!