Slashdot Mirror
House Passes Massive Medical Insurance Bill, 219-212
The votes are in: yesterday evening, after a last-minute compromise over abortion payments, the US House of Representatives narrowly passed a bill effecting major changes in American medical finance. From the BBC's coverage: "The president is expected to sign the House-passed Senate bill as early as Tuesday, after which it will be officially enacted into law. However, it will contain some very unpopular measures that Democratic senators have agreed to amend. The Senate will be able to make the required changes in a separate bill using a procedure known as reconciliation, which allows budget provisions to be approved with 51 votes - rather than the 60 needed to overcome blocking tactics." No Republican voted in favor of the bill; 34 Democrats voted against. As law, the system set forth would extend insurance coverage to an estimated 32 million Americans, impose new taxes on high-income earners as well as provide some tax breaks and subsidies for others, and considerably toughen the regulatory regime under which insurance companies operate. The anticipated insurance regime phases in (starting with children, and expanding to adults in 2014) a requirement that insurance providers accept those with preexisting conditions, and creates a system of fines, expected to be administered by the IRS, for those who fail or refuse to obtain health insurance.
Sorry, you're not going to get any treatment. I'm going to have to pick and choose who I give treatment to, because I have these other people the government will put me in jail for unless I come up with the right metrics. You don't fit the formula, so I don't have any time for you.
There are other perverse incentives. The $750 fine per employee (for firms with between 50 and 199 employees) constitutes a regressive payroll tax, discouraging the hiring of lower-wage entry-level employees in favor of higher-wage higher-productive employees.
So if you only own a bicycle you're being forced to buy auto insurance? What hell are you living in? Oh yeah, the Obama hell where I'm sure that will come next.
The ONLY winners in this whole fiasco are the insurance companies
You forgot: 1) the AMA, which still gets to limit how many people may enter the profession, 2) the pharmaceutical companies, 3) the bureaucracy, and 4) the congress.
The Republicans set us on the road to financial ruin, and the Democrats have just floored the accelerator.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Isn't it just social to make everyone pay equal, to make health equally available?
Say, you insured your bike for plan A. Someone else his car for plan B. You get run over and get a new bike, but your wheelchair isn't covered in plan A.
Plan B guy has a windshield replaced once in the time he's paying for his plan B.
Wouldn't you rather have the excess of plan B payer to be spent for your plan A wheelchair, which you sortof need harder? Without needing to pay for plan B fully?
Such things only work when you look at a larger scale and sortof care about other people, the "well, as long I can save 5 buck a month. Nothing will happen to me." which causes small drama's everywhere when shit does hit the fan.
What's the benefit for you, then? Well, more healthy people means less cost in unemployment and those kindof failover systems, less people annoying you for your money to "charity", more people do keep the economy going, bringing in taxmoney that could be back spent to your benefit.
Horseshit. This is a summary of how you choose to view it; the "script" as it were. It ain't reality.
The 1,990-page health care bill (PDF) is ugly. It's full of insufficiently rigorous thinking and poor quality communication.
Most of the manner in which the new legislation will operate is not specified in the bill. For example, on page 77 it says, "The Secretary shall adopt and regularly update standards consistent with the goals described in paragraph (2)."
The U.S. Congress uses an outdated font. It is not possible to generate a readable copy because each line is preceded by a number. There are numerous quirks, like sometimes capitalizing the word "website".
Here is a guess: Possibly there is no one in the media who writes about the bill who has actually read and understood the bill.
Still, in my opinion the bill is better than nothing. As many have mentioned, the present U.S. health care system would otherwise be one of the biggest causes of U.S. government bankruptcy.
Unless you steal them from someone who does work, isn't allowed to protect themselves because of gun laws and you frankly don't care...
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
I agree. It should be a day to celebrate in America.
I was talking to a friend in the US over the weekend, about this issue. I, in high-tax Britain, earn substantially more than she does, in supposedly lower tax California. It turns out that her medical insurance alone was more than my total income tax (which, in case you missed the point, pays for the National Health Service as well as all the things your federal income tax pays for).
This can't be anything but good news for America. Everyone will be better off, and the only people who even might lose out are a few big corporations.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Here's one of the major points that seems to go unnoticed....
US citizens in my age group (35-40) have come to the realization that the money we pay each week in payroll tax will never be recouped. Social security will have gone insolvent by the time my wife and I are old enough to claim it. It is just a tax on everyone my age. But now they are going to get more. More of my money that I should be saving for retirement, since the government won't be able to keep up it's end of the ENTITLEMENT bargain. When you start robbing one bankrupt entitlement to pay for a new entitlement, you have absolutely exceeded your spending limits. This bill should have looked for savings in the programs that they currently offer in the health care instead of spending for 10 years for 6 years of benefits. You reap what you sow...
My blog post for today was simply titled "Help". The contents of which was a png image of the United States of America Flag... upside down.
I actually work for a car insurance company handling claims, and I have seen plenty of situations like this. If someone is uninsured and causes an accident, it is almost impossible to collect against them personally for damages. If they don't have car insurance in the first place, it is unlikely they have any assets to go after for restitution. The upshot is that if you're poor, don't worry about car insurance and just hit whatever and whoever you want while driving, because there are few consequences. Did you know that in some states (like NJ), municipal entities are legally protected against restitution from car accidents? Just like the uninsured individual, if a local goverment-owned vehicle smashes into your parked car, they're not responsible for your damages and you're out of luck. Its things like this which really burn me about the industry and laws.
The fact you see it differently is sad indeed. How long have you lived with your mental retardation?
This is RIDICULOUS!
Now we're caught up with the other european countries that were "ahead" of us.
Joy.
The question is, how many people realize that not a single major invention/achievement has come out of them. YAY.
I'm 25 and I have bone cancer.
Boo hoo...
I started having strange problems almost ten years ago, and my idiot doctor took six years after I had fairly obvious symptoms to detect my low grade sarcoma.
Well if it was so obvious, why didn't you diagnose it yourself?
What should I have done differently? Why is my life worth nothing to you?
Wrong question. What makes your life more important than everyone else? Why should they have to pitch in to help you?
Echoing the same unbacked talking points the Republicans/conservatives have been spewing around for over a year. Have you ever done any research into the lobbying funds that go into a large fraction of congressional Republican wallets (and then compare them to Democrats)? It's incredible -- how about FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity? Both have as their main leadership people who are key players in the health insurance lobbying business. All of these "enormous record-breaking protests you've been seeing" are the product of astroturf created by the health insurance lobbyists/shareholders themselves. It's sad that the Republicans butchered their reputation so much throughout the last year: they might not see it now, but the history books will not do them justice and will talk about them in a negative light for the all the extremism rhetoric they have stood next to and taken advantage of. It's fine though - they'll eventually have the opportunity to do good things and repair their image, but if they continue this attitude they will be viewed unfavorably by future generations. Why don't you naysayers actually show one citation from the legislation to back up your claims? The bill has been accessible by anyone for months upon months now, a simple Google search would give you everything you need.
Someone once told me, "The problem with radicals is that they only read radical literature; the problem with conservatives is that they don't read anything." I think Thomas Carver said it. And I'm not just bitter over politics, either; in fact, I'm actually currently writing campaign material in support of a Republican candidate. I just don't like how many conservatives seem to consider me to be the inferior one when I ask for any little piece of evidence to back up some of their outrageous claims.
How much trust can you place in the words of pathological liars and race baters? Yes, CNN and Black Caucus I am looking at you! And by the way calling somebody a Nigger or faggot is not a crime. Yet.
What a sad day for the nation and the world.
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
"America overwhelmingly voted for Socialism when they elected President Obama" - Al Sharpton
Do they not assign 1984 to be read in school anymore? Seriously, what the hell is wrong with people?
(sigh). FIXED AGAIN:
Never mind. I don't feel like typing a whole script. But let me share MY viewpoint of the situation: - The Senate Bill passed the Senate 60-to-whatever. In the Senate 60 votes have been required since time immemorial. Even Senator Obama said that during his time in the Senate, and he REFUSED to change the rule during his time there.
Next the Democrats questioned if they even need to vote. Pelosi said she could just "deem" it passed without a rollcall vote! Then she changed her mind but even the fact she Considered it makes me question her honesty or legality. ----- Now the bill has passed the House, which means the Senate has to vote a SECOND time on the revised bill, per the Constitution and 200-yr-old tradition. The Democrats say 51 is enough, but the Republicans naturally question if the bill could pass, PER THE RULES which require 60.
The Republicans are merely trying to follow the laws of the House and Senate, while the Democrats seem intent upon "deeming" the laws unnecessary (like they deem the Constitution as non-existent) and ignoring all parliamentary procedure, including not taking votes (Slaughter rule). It reminds me of this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ecn0BgX-hg&feature=related - Ignore the vote, ignore the law, just shove it through.
Anyway that's my view from the sidelines.
Bottom Line: I expect this Pelosicare government Welfare-style program to be as corrupt as the non-legal corrupt process that produced it.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
> Funding will be used to kill human fetuses. I did not have the choice to opt out of paying for your idiotic war on Iraq. Screw you and your right wing fetus obsession.
Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
>>> Dimihsing Productivity Graph - http://market-ticker.org/uploads/2010/Mar/Diminishing-Prod.jpg
.
"But we have to KEEP SPENDING because we're in a depression! Now is not the time to cut spending." - typical Democrat or Obama supporter. To me this is equivalent to my family carrying a $130,000 credit card debt and saying that I need to go buy a new roof for my house, when in reality I should be canceling my cable/cellphone/internet and other extraneous expenses to pay-off the debt & weather the current storm.
Like this guy wisely said: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lW6Y4tBXs
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
fuck off eurotrash
>>>If i understand the US-founders correctly they had a country in mind where everybody is equal and even the poorest have right to a respectable life in America.
"The best thing that can be done for a poor person is to make being "poor" painful, so they will seek to be industrious rather than slothful, as I did when I was a poor man." - Benjamin Franklin.
I would also add, no matter how poor you are, you don't have a right to your neighbors' money. THEY earned it, not you. They are not your slaves who work for your benefit. Do I think a safety net is a good idea? Yes, but safety nets are for a last resort: To prevent starvation or to help those who can't help themselves (mentally or physically handicapped). Safety nets are NOT for you to smoke/drink/eat yourself into illness, runup an expensive doctor bill for lung or heart surgery, and then expect your neighbors to pay for it.
YOU chose your destructive lifestyle; now it's your responsibility to pay the cost. Not mine. Not your neighbors.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
> You get your kraft dinner and a shack paid for, you don't get a nice meal and a house
> with a large screen tv and high speed internet and fancy clothes paid for.
Gee, that's really unfair. Think of all the poor children who don't have a large screen tv or high speed internet! Wait! I have an idea! Let's create an individual large screen tv mandate legislation, requiring by law for everyone to buy a large screen tv. Anyone refusing to do so, will be subjected to a fine. Subsidies will be provided to low-income families. And finally, after so many years, a high standard of living will no longer just be a privilege of the rich, but will become accessible to all. Isn't that something worth fighting for?
And let's not forget the pony! Millions of children in the country are suffering because they don't have a pony! It's time for the individual pony mandate! Bring a smile to your children's faces with the priceless (literally) gift of pony ownership. Isn't your children's happiness worth a measly extra 5% in taxes?
>>>This bill tries to get the people who earn more help the people who earn less get a healthy life.
What is this? They year 1000? It sounds like the same moral dictatorship the Catholic Church imposed on everybody. "Help the poor voluntarily, or else we'll simply TAKE your money and do it for you."
While I think it's a good idea to help people, I don't think holding a gun to their heads (or vacuum to their wallets) is the way to do it. They are free citizens, not Serfs to be ordered around.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>Oh Fox... will you ever be more than a conservative mouthpiece?
Or CNN being a liberal one? I've heard twice today people saying that Tea Partiers are all racists as a result of this story. (Hint: they're not. Nor are they any of the other things the idiot children of MSNBC say they are.)
It's silly to pretend that any of our major media outlets aren't biased. Yahoo news reporting the new bill will save billions of dollars. (Oh, and it will - in the same way that Enron was profitable till the end... accounting malfeasance.)
Not that I'm defending Fox - they're almost as bad as CNN when it comes to bias.
There is nothing civilized about requiring medical practitioners to administer care.
By putting in place a system where people do not fall on hard times, you exchanging charitable opportunities for entitlement (you are exchanging gifts for obligations). Furthermore it's bad to shield people from adversity because it prevents them from learning and growing.
The only good things to come out of this are that it pretty much guarantees Obama will be a single term president and that the outing of Democrats will continue in November elections. I'm not sure that the $5 trillion cost is really worth it.
It isn't messed up. Your friend Tom doesn't belong here and should go back to Japan when his Visa expired, instead of living as an unwelcome intruder. Does it suck? Yes but life is not fair. Deal with it.
My turn:
My friend "Huck" is from China. He was not born here, but he and his father were naturalized and lived here the rest of their lives. He met a Japanese girl (let's call her "Becky") on a temporary education Visa, engaged her, she went home when the Visa expired, then came back a few months later and married Huck.
Now both Huck and Becky are both full Americans. Why? Because they followed the rules. Tom, per usual, did not obey the rules, so now he's playing hooky. He should go home rather than continue playing hooky.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
As I said idiot, the data in the UK and other socialized countries is controlled by the same who dole out the care and if you dont fucking get what I am saying, then your a fucking idiot.
Your stats are fucking bogus and the cia factbook, please. Do you think they got the info themselves or derived it of the UK's own data. Did they fucking count it themselves haah aha!
Additionally, the infant mortaility rate in the US like student performance follows racial demographics with every major metro urban area dragging down the overall average and who lives in the urban centers?
If you dont know that answer then you dont have a fucking clue
Remove them from the equation and mortaility rates and school performance rises to the top in the industrialized world.
Bottom line, we cant control what the fucking idiots in the welfare crowd do with their personal lives and then the illegit babies they father and abandon and the kids they fail at home who then fail in school
As I said, spare me the fucking libtard rationale
Freedom of speech and resistance of government is not the only freedom.
In the united states you need permission from the government to do most anything. Drive, fish, and yes, even to protest against or sue the government. Everything is tightly regulated and tracked and more and more onerous laws are successfully enforced everyday.
In many ways, most third world nations enjoy more freedom than the people of the United States.
A few weeks ago, I was talking to a co-worker of mine who grew up in Canada. He told me that he was going door-to-door in high school, selling something or other (I guess they torture kids that way in Canada, too). So he ended up going to the "poor" section of town, where most of the people lived on welfare. He said that when he started knocking on doors, and they opened up, he would peek inside - and the welfare people seemed to have all the same stuff he had. Same video-game consoles, same TV's, same type of furniture... he said he made up his mind then to move to America, where work actually pays off.
That was, of course, until now. Oh, well. I guess it was nice while it lasted.
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Give the dude a break. Glenn Beck or o'reily said it so it must be true. Like all the fantasies, i mean fair and balanced stuff, the Fascists on Faux News say.
Because there is no threat of insolvency. Zilch, none, nada, zip, ninguno....
See this article for a nice debunking of the propaganda you've been suckered into. These meme that there's a Social Security "crisis" or that "it wont be around for me" is a bunch of Cato propaganda called the Leninist Strategy.
Because really, how is a system that's funded directly out of paychecks ever going to go "insolvent"?
Fuck you asshole, I am self made. I dont fucking need you or fucking anybody to dictate to me any fucking thing. Nothing was handed to me, I made it from nothing and you should do the same.
You and yours are the enemy or real progress, and I define progress beings served when the individual is the foundation of a society not the fucking govt and now the individual will be subject to another piece of govt intervention and income confiscation because as we all know, this legislation is just the begining of redistribution from the producer to the moocher.
The difference between me and you, I see the fucking truth where you fucking deny it
So enjoy your fucking ride on the welfare train idiot, you will soon learn what it feels like to get a reach around from your govt with no happy ending dumbass!
A coop with your own doctors is a great idea until one day you have a heart attack or get into a car crash and they rush you to one of OUR emergency rooms. Then the rest of us are going to be footing your bill, because you're a kook who refused to buy insurance. Either way, we pay. You're "freedom" is nothing of the sort.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
No, that's the scary thing about the bill: stealing is no longer against the law. And the ACLU and ACORN are in on it; they've been plotting it for years, ever since Elvis and the Illuminati told them to advocate health care reform shortly after they plotted 9/11 in an attempt to control how much salt is in your food (which they pretty much accomplished, you have to admit). So now some random poor person, who already gets free Social Security and Medicare and will never work a day in his life, can have your big screen TV and it's perfectly legal. Don't even try to stop him, or a liberal will call you politically incorrect. Meanwhile some guy who says "Jesus" out loud gets arrested for it. (Probably.) I'm telling you, the sky is falling since the House vote last night. I don't even recognize this country ... except the Slashdot bits of it which admittedly look like they did before.
Hey guess what? My wife has an aunt who has diabetes and it's totally under control without medication. Diet and exercise only.
I'm sorry you have cancer but does that give you the right to force me, at the point of a gun, to pay for your care?
Because that's the point that people seem to want to gloss over. They don't want to think of it that way but that's the cold hard truth. You want the government to take my hard earned money from ME and give it to you. There's simply no other way to look at it.
But you kindly neglected to look over my original point. Is it possible that you could have saved up enough money to cover your expenses? Maybe. Maybe not. How much money DID you have saved up for emergencies? I'll wager not a goddamn penny.
This is the point I'm trying to make. It is simply impossible for an individual to provide for their own health care in this country. We've somehow grown accustomed to the fact that it's the responsibility of our employer, and now our government, to take care of us from cradle to grave.
You know what kind of legislation would have made sense?
- Remove the tax on personal medical plans like your company has had forever.
- Allow you to buy insurance across state lines.
- Allow you to have a tax-free savings account with no ceiling and no forfeiture
Medical costs are artificially inflated because the insurance companies have no competition in a given state (because only the biggest can afford to operate) and because of government pricing intervention.
Unless you're cursed by the gods, all three of those things haven't been going on all your life.
I'm sorry about your situation, I truly am but even with all of these hurdles nothing was preventing you from saving money for a catastrophic event. Regardless of that, you're still asking the people with the guns to take from me because you think you need it more. Forgive my lack of compassion.
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
>>>Get off my internet, it was invented by the Government in case you've forgotten. I can only imagine what the corporation created internet would look like. AOL but worse?
>>>
As per usual with extremists, you take my viewpoint all out of alignment, and setup a Strawman argument. I said your neighbors should not have to pay YOUR bills (for a new car or new computer or doctor's bills or whatever), because they are not your Serfs and you are not their master.
I never said your neighbors should not have to pay for their OWN bills, such as using the net, or the post office, or the army (to protect their home). Although I think taxes should be as close to 0% as possible, there are still some legitimate, constitutional services that need to be paid for (the previously enumerated ones).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>>Your life wasn't thrown into utter turmoil, you didn't have to short-sale your home or default on your mortgage, your family didn't go hungry
Bzzz.
I had about half-a million at my time of layoff.
I really didn't need government assistance at all.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall