http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/08/10/what-is-in-this-healthcare-bill-anyway/

Very nice breakdown of what the various high level issues around the health care bill, even covers the wack-a-do Sarah Palin "death panel" so that people at least know that was an outright lie.

A good summary, worth the read.

Carlos

How have you been? I know it's been awhile, but I had to lay low for awhile. (I know it's off-topic, but I saw you as Cancer-free. You doing okay)?

What do they mean "institute" a fascist government?  Honey, we took that exit 30 years ago!

:o

What do they mean "institute" a fascist government?  Honey, we took that exit 30 years ago!

:o


I hope we never actually get there.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/EnthanasiePropaganda.jpg

Carlos

How have you been? I know it's been awhile, but I had to lay low for awhile. (I know it's off-topic, but I saw you as Cancer-free. You doing okay)?


See thread in the TTT called "Carlos test results".

My fellow Democrats: We're in for the fight of our lives. I know more about what we're up against than most Democrats, because I'm married to a staunch Republican, attend a church that's 90+% Republican, and have many friends among them. I'm also a sociologist by training and a debater by practice.

Based on all this, here's some heartfelt advice:

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/08/07/opinion/07krugman.html?sort=editors-selection

My fellow Democrats: We're in for the fight of our lives. I know more about what we're up against than most Democrats, because I'm married to a staunch Republican, attend a church that's 90+% Republican, and have many friends among them. I'm also a sociologist by training and a debater by practice.

Based on all this, here's some heartfelt advice:

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/08/07/opinion/07krugman.html?sort=editors-selection




Two snaps up!

Obamacare is not gonna save any money in its current form(i.e. the House Bill.) I want to see the senate bill because the housebill doesn't mean anything really.

Obamacare is not gonna save any money in its current form(i.e. the House Bill.) I want to see the senate bill because the housebill doesn't mean anything really.


That depends on how and what you count.  Certainly the public option will be cheaper for most people than private ins.  And in the long run money will be saved.

That depends on how and what you count.  Certainly the public option will be cheaper for most people than private ins.  And in the long run money will be saved.
The Congressional Budget Office says there is no cost savings though. I tend to believe what the  Congressional Budget Office is telling us. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the Congressional Budget wasn't taking into account cost savings on "prevention" whatever that means.

The Congressional Budget Office says there is no cost savings though. I tend to believe what the  Congressional Budget Office is telling us. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the Congressional Budget wasn't taking into account cost savings on "prevention" whatever that means.


hmmmmm....you don't understand what cost savings there would be with preventive care? 

hmmmmm....you don't understand what cost savings there would be with preventive care? 


Like, it's cheaper to remove little lumps than big lumps?
???

The Congressional Budget Office says there is no cost savings though. I tend to believe what the  Congressional Budget Office is telling us. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the Congressional Budget wasn't taking into account cost savings on "prevention" whatever that means.


Prevention is one of those things you can never prove, simply postulate.  Just like security, how can you prove that something did not happen?  And did it not happen because of the procedures in place, or for other outside reasons?

And trying to account for that in budget predictions is utter nonsense.  You might as well make a budget for $1 Trillion, stating that $300 billion is for "Preventing Ebola outbreaks."  Then when there is no Ebola, you can carry on how you saved $300 billion.

Prevention is one of those things you can never prove, simply postulate.  Just like security, how can you prove that something did not happen?  And did it not happen because of the procedures in place, or for other outside reasons?

And trying to account for that in budget predictions is utter nonsense.  You might as well make a budget for $1 Trillion, stating that $300 billion is for "Preventing Ebola outbreaks."  Then when there is no Ebola, you can carry on how you saved $300 billion.


So don't bother with that prostate exam 'coz you never can tell anyway?
???

Prevention is one of those things you can never prove, simply postulate.  Just like security, how can you prove that something did not happen?  And did it not happen because of the procedures in place, or for other outside reasons?
Not so: you can see how much you're spending on something at present, then see how that changes.  Though the way that health statistics are generated, it's unlikely to be possible to get accurate figures - cancer stats are a bit like that, in that there's a huge margin of error around the amount of money spent on "cancer".  Screening programmes can save money.. but as Ben Goldacre points out it's a bit more complicated than that (<- I'd highly recommend reading that article)


And trying to account for that in budget predictions is utter nonsense.  You might as well make a budget for $1 Trillion, stating that $300 billion is for "Preventing Ebola outbreaks."  Then when there is no Ebola, you can carry on how you saved $300 billion.

Well, technically all you'd be able to say is that you spent the money wisely - you'd only be able to claim you saved $300 billion if the budget cost for dealing with Ebola would have been $600 billion if no preventative measures had been taken.

Prevention is one of those things you can never prove, simply postulate.  Just like security, how can you prove that something did not happen?  And did it not happen because of the procedures in place, or for other outside reasons?



Well then my friends, and family members, and I, should stop those mammograms and pap smears right now.  All the ones who caught their cancers early, were treated, and are alive well today, well that was just postulation.  I should also toss out the cholesterol drugs, sure it lowered my cholesterol, my parents, grand parents, and great grand parents all died of vascular strokes, some with dementia, but hey, maybe that won't happen to me and my postulating self.

I am sure Cancer Free Don Carlos has some nice things to say about preventive medicine

It probably saved my life, and has certainly improved my quality of life.  And there is no way I could have afforded it without insurance.  But whatever the cost, it would have been much higher if I had delayed treatment.

Not so: you can see how much you're spending on something at present, then see how that changes. 



Well then my friends, and family members, and I, should stop those mammograms and pap smears right now.  All the ones who caught their cancers early, were treated, and are alive well today, well that was just postulation.  I should also toss out the cholesterol drugs, sure it lowered my cholesterol, my parents, grand parents, and great grand parents all died of vascular strokes, some with dementia, but hey, maybe that won't happen to me and my postulating self.

I am sure Cancer Free Don Carlos has some nice things to say about preventive medicine



It probably saved my life, and has certainly improved my quality of life.  And there is no way I could have afforded it without insurance.  But whatever the cost, it would have been much higher if I had delayed treatment.


I never said that it did no good, I simply said that it is impossible to prove exactly how much was saved.

And face it, most "Preventive Care" is about preventing disease in the first place, not catching it early.  Things like spending money to reduce smokers, catching alcoholism early to prevent liver disease, changing diets to prevent obesity, vaccinations to prevent epidemics, things of this nature.

It is not that these things do no good, but they are the classic example of "trying to prove a negative".  And certainly not to cast a wrench into the wheels, but detection can actually end up costing a lot more money then not catching it at all.

My wife was diagnosed with thyroid cancer 4 years ago.  She had surgery, radiation therapy, and is now on drugs for the rest of her life.  Earlier this year they discovered more cancer, and had a radical hystrectomy.  More surgery, more money, more drugs for life.

If you want to be cold about this, it can easily be argued that if the first cancer was not caught as early as it was, it would have saved money.  Because she would have died, instead of 2 expensive surgeries, and medication she will have to take for the rest of her life.

I am blessed that my wife is still with me.  But it can be easily argued that catching her cancer(s) early is costing a lot more then if it had not been caught at all.  And all to often as we are discovering, saving people from one disease does not nessicarily keep them alive.  While people are living longer, the causes of mortality are just shifting.  Instead of dying from communicable diseases and injuries, people are now more and more often dying of diseases unheard of a few generations ago.

Alzheimers was an unknown disease before the turn of the century.  Mostly that is because the onset typically came after the normal life expectancy had already passed.  And as people live longer and longer, we are starting to discover more and more diseases.  Parkinsons is another that tends to strike older citizens.

Of course this is about people, not money.  But whenver I see cost estimates on imaginary savings that cover things that they claim have been prevented, my "snake oil" radar goes off.  They can say the amount saved was $30 million, $30 billion, or $30 trillion.  Any way they claim, there is no way to actually prove it since the money has not and will never be spent.  And any amount stated is only looking at a general trend, which may have other causes totally unrelated to the spending or not spending of money.

(Not my concern but...) other bloggers who feel they cornered the protesters ask: WHERE IS THE PROOF FROM THOSE SAYING IT WILL MEAN 'DEATH TO THE ELDERLY'?

As it was a mantra and 'scare phrase' for awhile and now no one is really using or showing where they get it from, so they're trying to find other reasons to vote the healthcare proposal down.

Any links or names still throwing around that 'old people will be neglected'? 

A look inside the mind of a Town Hall howler:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAGluhfKhMg&feature=related

This young woman, Katie Abram, is indicative of what I was talking about in an earlier thread.  Most people watching Ms. Abram will see a benign soul, ill-informed, with more money than brains.  She is indeed a member of the shrinking "middle class" our parents took for granted, the one in which the affordability of a gaggle of children, a nice house in the 'burbs, and enough dough to live comfy was yours for the taking if you work hard and behave.  Healthcare reform is not why she's so nervous.  She is nervous because her Miss American Pie life of smooth-sailing ignorant bliss is under attack from the vagaries of the corporatist globalization of our economy.  I can't blame her screaming about "socialism" because heretofore she had no reason to scream and no reason to learn why she might want to scream some day.  Now the fabric of the country is rotting away before her very eyes and she feels powerless.  The corporations have always told her what to think.  Today they are telling her to think the socialists are coming to take here health plan away and she should scream about it.  So she does.

There are millions of Katie Abrams out there.

I do see an ugly streak here...and a foolish one.  Ms. Abrams is quite smug about paying thousands of dollars out of pocket for healthcare because she can.  It helps her feel classier than the bums on medicaid...and more patriotic.  The corporate media tells us that the ability to spend money is tantamount to being a good American. Her $5000 deductible is a status symbol, like a McMansion in a gated to community or a fully-loaded Lincoln Navigator.  Not just anybody can afford a $5000 deductible and, in America, it's not just about what you have, it's what you have that the other fellow does  not.
::)

A look inside the mind of a Town Hall howler:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAGluhfKhMg&feature=related

This young woman, Katie Abram, is indicative of what I was talking about in an earlier thread.  Most people watching Ms. Abram will see a benign soul, ill-informed, with more money than brains.  She is indeed a member of the shrinking "middle class" our parents took for granted, the one in which the affordability of a gaggle of children, a nice house in the 'burbs, and enough dough to live comfy was yours for the taking if you work hard and behave.  Healthcare reform is not why she's so nervous.  She is nervous because her Miss American Pie life of smooth-sailing ignorant bliss is under attack from the vagaries of the corporatist globalization of our economy.  I can't blame her screaming about "socialism" because heretofore she had no reason to scream and no reason to learn why she might want to scream some day.  Now the fabric of the country is rotting away before her very eyes and she feels powerless.  The corporations have always told her what to think.  Today they are telling her to think the socialists are coming to take here health plan away and she should scream about it.  So she does.

There are millions of Katie Abrams out there.

I do see an ugly streak here...and a foolish one.  Ms. Abrams is quite smug about paying thousands of dollars out of pocket for healthcare because she can.  It helps her feel classier than the bums on medicaid...and more patriotic.  The corporate media tells us that the ability to spend money is tantamount to being a good American. Her $5000 deductible is a status symbol, like a McMansion in a gated to community or a fully-loaded Lincoln Navigator.  Not just anybody can afford a $5000 deductible and, in America, it's not just about what you have, it's what you have that the other fellow does  not.
::)
Dude, why do you want the government to take over healthcare medicare is not even profitable for doctors and you want a public option? I mean you must make profiits to stay in business. I mean medicare is in debt. I;m trying to understand where your coming from.

About socailism well if the US ever becomes a single-payer healh care system that is a form of socialism. Americans are weary of the government running anything given their track record. I mean look at Fannie and Freddie as an example.

Dude, why do you want the government to take over healthcare medicare is not even profitable for doctors and you want a public option? I mean you must make profiits to stay in business. I mean medicare is in debt. I;m trying to understand where your coming from.

About socailism well if the US ever becomes a single-payer healh care system that is a form of socialism. Americans are weary of the government running anything given their track record. I mean look at Fannie and Freddie as an example.


Doctors in the UK aren't exactly huddled together in council flats.  They do just fine, thank you very much, and people get the health care they need.  The system is not ideal, it does have some serious flaws, but Britons do not have to declare bankruptcy on account of creditors chasing them for six-figure hospital bills, and they don't pay a fortune every month to pirate insurance companies who cancel the policy as soon as they make a claim!

Now, just implementing such a system here by legislation wouldn't necessarily work.  The temper of our medico-corporate-political class is of such ill will that they will plunder, corrupt, and sabotage any program intended to better the lot of the average American.  That's why I say these haughty corporate behemoths must be dispossessed and brought low.  Get 'em out of power!

And yes, Americans should be "weary" of the way our government runs things.
::)

Dude, why do you want the government to take over healthcare medicare is not even profitable for doctors and you want a public option? I mean you must make profiits to stay in business. I mean medicare is in debt. I;m trying to understand where your coming from.

About socailism well if the US ever becomes a single-payer healh care system that is a form of socialism. Americans are weary of the government running anything given their track record. I mean look at Fannie and Freddie as an example.


Have you ever read the Hippocratic Oath?  The practice of medicine isn't suppose to be a business.  Yes, doctors have a right to make a good living but that shouldn't be the motivation for going into medicine.  In fact, though, it really isn't the doctors who clean up, it is the insurance company exec's who make the big bucks.

(Not my concern but...) other bloggers who feel they cornered the protesters ask: WHERE IS THE PROOF FROM THOSE SAYING IT WILL MEAN 'DEATH TO THE ELDERLY'?


Where is the proof that restricting "Partial Birth Abortion" will lead to women dying in backroom clinics?

What you see is 1 part hysteria, 1 part legitimate fear, and 1 part propaganda.

And what I am finding funny, is that this is the exact type of thing I have seen "Liberal Causeheads" screaming about for most of my life.  And for the first time in years, the "Conservative Causeheads" are responding in kind.  Flooding Town Hall meetings, forcing themselves to be heard.  Making outrageous claims.

And I am laughing as I watch the Liberals act all confused, with apparently no idea what to do.  And I am seeing clips of people being attacked for speaking their mind, and those speaking their minds being shouted out as nutcases.

Welcome to the looking glass.  Now you have an idea what it looks like from our side.  ;D

And what I am finding funny, is that this is the exact type of thing I have seen "Liberal Causeheads" screaming about for most of my life.  And for the first time in years, the "Conservative Causeheads" are responding in kind.  Flooding Town Hall meetings, forcing themselves to be heard.  Making outrageous claims.


Once again, The Onion proves to be America's most reliable news source.

"The legislative stalemate largely stems from competing ideologies deeply rooted along party lines. Democrats want to create a government-run system for not providing health care, while Republicans say coverage is best denied by allowing private insurers to make it unaffordable for as many citizens as possible."
  - Aug. 18, 2009: Congress Deadlocked Over How To Not Provide Health Care

Once again, The Onion proves to be America's most reliable news source.

"The legislative stalemate largely stems from competing ideologies deeply rooted along party lines. Democrats want to create a government-run system for not providing health care, while Republicans say coverage is best denied by allowing private insurers to make it unaffordable for as many citizens as possible."
  - Aug. 18, 2009: Congress Deadlocked Over How To Not Provide Health Care


Doesn't The Onion always get it right?

Doctors in the UK aren't exactly huddled together in council flats.  They do just fine, thank you very much, and people get the health care they need.  The system is not ideal, it does have some serious flaws, but Britons do not have to declare bankruptcy on account of creditors chasing them for six-figure hospital bills, and they don't pay a fortune every month to pirate insurance companies who cancel the policy as soon as they make a claim!

Now, just implementing such a system here by legislation wouldn't necessarily work.  The temper of our medico-corporate-political class is of such ill will that they will plunder, corrupt, and sabotage any program intended to better the lot of the average American.  That's why I say these haughty corporate behemoths must be dispossessed and brought low.  Get 'em out of power!

And yes, Americans should be "weary" of the way our government runs things.
::)
I understand Americans can owe thousands of dollars in Health care bills and that is a problem I agree. I would suspect the UK system suffers from the same problem as the Canadian run healh care system in that it would take a long time to get an elective surgery. I mean like I said earlier I have a heart condition I mean how long would I have to wait for a heart surgery in a government run health care system?

I understand Americans can owe thousands of dollars in Health care bills and that is a problem I agree. I would suspect the UK system suffers from the same problem as the Canadian run healh care system in that it would take a long time to get an elective surgery. I mean like I said earlier I have a heart condition I mean how long would I have to wait for a heart surgery in a government run health care system?



How long do you have to wait with insurance run health care?



Cat

Where is the proof that restricting "Partial Birth Abortion" will lead to women dying in backroom clinics?

What you see is 1 part hysteria, 1 part legitimate fear, and 1 part propaganda.

And what I am finding funny, is that this is the exact type of thing I have seen "Liberal Causeheads" screaming about for most of my life.  And for the first time in years, the "Conservative Causeheads" are responding in kind.  Flooding Town Hall meetings, forcing themselves to be heard.  Making outrageous claims.

And I am laughing as I watch the Liberals act all confused, with apparently no idea what to do.  And I am seeing clips of people being attacked for speaking their mind, and those speaking their minds being shouted out as nutcases.

Welcome to the looking glass.   Now you have an idea what it looks like from our side.  ;D


YOU'LL GET MY ORGANIC CARROT WHEN YOU PRY IT OUT OF MY COLD DEAD FINGERS!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_scratch.gif

I understand Americans can owe thousands of dollars in Health care bills and that is a problem I agree. I would suspect the UK system suffers from the same problem as the Canadian run healh care system in that it would take a long time to get an elective surgery. I mean like I said earlier I have a heart condition I mean how long would I have to wait for a heart surgery in a government run health care system?


Depending on what the condition is.

Many Americans seem to think there is a waiting list for every operation.  This just is not the case - things are prioritised as much as possible.

So when I needed my appendix out it was done the same day.  My dad is currently waiting for surgery for a hernia and it will be about 3 months on the list.  However if he develops complications then he jumps up the list to get surgery immediately.

And I am laughing as I watch the Liberals act all confused, with apparently no idea what to do.  And I am seeing clips of people being attacked for speaking their mind, and those speaking their minds being shouted out as nutcases.

Welcome to the looking glass.   Now you have an idea what it looks like from our side.  ;D


And I am now laughing even more.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/08/town_hall_talk_frank_grills_op.html?hpid=sec-politics

I heard about this the other day, and it is actually leaving me laughing silly.  We now have Democrats accused of being Nazis, and they are not sure why.  They don't understand how their wanting something that others do not agree with can get them that dreaded label.  One they have been throwing around with impunity for the last 20+ years at Republicans.

Personally, I do not agree with anybody throwing the Nazi word around, unless it deals with genocide or the murder of millions.  To me, it cheapens the impact of what the word really means.  But people do have a legitimate fear of what this may mean, and are speaking out about it.

And I even had a talk with somebody today, who is a Democrat (yes, there are a lot of Democrats in the Army) and wants to see this Health Care Reform pass.  He told me that he sees no reason why the tax payers should have to pay for long term care for people who are not productive members of society.

And our conversation was right from Alice In Wonderland.  He thought that people who were on life support should have the plug pulled.  He thought that people with terminal diseases should be euthanized.  But when trying to ask about others who were terminal (down syndrome, cerebral palsey), he said it was up to the family.

This is the kind of belief that causes the Nazi claims to come forward.  In order to save money, he has no problem with seeing people basically put to death.  Because they are a "drain on the system", and "are not productive members of society".  Ironically, he also opposes the death penalty.

There is a real fear that if this goes through, we may see a form of "Action T4".  Not done for insidious reasons, simply because some people will be seen as being to costly to support.  And while not everybody has employer supported insurance, how many of you that do would want to give it up for Government Insurance?

Not me, that's for damned sure.  I have been under both, and give me private insurance any day of the week.

It does not help that all the commentators on the major networks are millionaires.

And our conversation was right from Alice In Wonderland.  He thought that people who were on life support should have the plug pulled.  He thought that people with terminal diseases should be euthanized.  But when trying to ask about others who were terminal (down syndrome, cerebral palsey), he said it was up to the family.



Since when do Downs and Palsey translate to terminal?

Since when do Downs and Palsey translate to terminal?


Terminal does not always mean fatal.  Terminal can also mean an incureable disease.  And that was the definition I was trying to imply.

I guess I should have use the term "Chronic" instead.