Why the Rush to Overhaul Health Care?
I dd not watch the President’s press conference last night, but did see part of it when it was rebroadcast on FoxNews later in the evening. He didn’t look very good. Hugh, who saw the whole thing, wasn’t too impressed, thinking the Democrat dodged and dissembled.
Jim Geraghty, sort of echoing Howard Fineman, thought the president’s “a particularly awful appearance.”
In line with the questions that Nick posed, I’d offer one of my own, “Given the need to get this right, particularly when we’re addressing reform of a large segment of our economy, why the rush to complete health care reform this summer?”
Over at Powerline, Paul Mirengoff seems to echo that concern, contending “President Obama is going about overhauling our health care system in a strange manner“:
One would expect a leader, particularly one who is considered highly cerebral by many, to carefully craft a health care reform plan after a period of intense study. One would expect further that the leader would fight for his plan, compromising only around the edges and under extreme duress. One would not expect a leader to defer to others in his party simply to get a plan, any plan, passed by a certain date.
But Obama is, in the words of David Brooks, deferring to the Old Bulls in Congress on health care reform. He appears to be engaged in an ad hoc process whereby proposals are being cobbled together more or less on the fly and then adjusted in response to the political circumstances as they appear on a given day.
There is a great danger in cobbling together legislation with such sweeping impact “on the fly.” This may well serve to make our health care system more complex and increase the power not of doctors but of federal bureaucrats. That is, a hastily written plan will more likely than not fail to achieve the desire end–and instead make things worse.
Yes, I agree the “system” needs reform, but a reform which preserves all that is good about it. We have the best health care in the world, with people coming here from all corners of the world for treatment, and with a disproportionate number of medical innovations coming from our labs and research hospitals.
I recently experienced (and will blog about this later) the great choices available to us, having cut my health insurance costs by 40% in moving from an HMO at one carrier to a PPO at another.
46 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Andy McCarthy and Yuval Levin are wondering why he went into a lengthy diatribe of the Gates case including calling the police “stupid”. What kind of president does that?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWM0NjNmYWNjMzA4YmVkOWNiODAwMzE0YWU2MTkwMTQ=
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 23, 2009 @ 6:24 am - July 23, 2009
As someone said, the guy who took six months to pick out a dog for his daughters demands that health care “reform” be passed in two weeks. WTF?
Americans want health care reformed. Particularly, they want it to cost less. They don’t want the Government to take it over. That’s the disconnect.
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2009 @ 7:00 am - July 23, 2009
And attacking doctors as greedheads who perform tonsillectomies just to get more money was also not a classy move.
And that bit about how the Government is going to save money on unnecessary tests. Picture an ObamaCare bureaucrat answering a phone call from a doctor and saying, “I am sick of hearing about ‘malignant’ this and ‘emergency surgery’ that. Just give the kid some Tylenol and stop bothering me.”
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2009 @ 7:03 am - July 23, 2009
[...] here: GayPatriot » Why the Rush to Overhaul Health Care? Arts, Business, Computers, Health, Home, Internet, Music, News, People, Science, Sports, Tech, [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » Why the Rush to Overhaul Health Care? @ WETONG Blog — July 23, 2009 @ 7:23 am - July 23, 2009
If this had been Hillary, with majorities in both houses, we would have had health care reform, like it or not, the first week. She wouldn’t have doddered around about it. She’d know it would initially be unpopular, but believing it to be essential for the country, she would have strong-armed it through, no questions asked. If the Democrats had truly wanted change, they should have voted for someone with the backbone to do it.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 23, 2009 @ 7:56 am - July 23, 2009
Even the normally supine AP found it necessary to Fact Check Obama’s Ass because of the lies he tried to pass off in the press conference.
He lied about keeping the Government out of health care decisions.
He lied about not attacking Republicans.
He lied about OcamaCare not adding to the deficit.
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2009 @ 8:26 am - July 23, 2009
Ashpenaz, I’m not so sure Hillary Clinton would have been successful. She’s the one that lead the charge as First Lady, and had difficulty even though, in the first two years of her husband’s presidency, they had majorities in the House and Senate. Forgetting for the moment whether Obama’s health care proposal (whatever it is) will be good or not, ethical or not, socialism or not, there are just too many special interests out there who want to either derail it completely, or change it in such a way that it only helps those who spent lots of money to elect those who are deciding what kind of health care reform there will be. Even Hillary Clinton, after she ended her advocacy of health care reform, received money from those who don’t want health care reform. Sucks all around, doesn’t it?
Comment by Pat — July 23, 2009 @ 8:35 am - July 23, 2009
Wow, am I hearing right? His best arguements are that one guy woke up suddenly with 10k in debt and another woman had mystery insurance that wouldn’t cover her mystery treatment? Way to trot out the case for health care.
Here’s a flash, I’m home recovering from cellulitus in my leg. I went to the urgent care sunday my portion was about $70.00 They sent me to the ER (Bill pending) I paid 240 for my antibiotics (partner was horrified, her coins would have been $30) Might have to go back to the hospital, this time for an inpatient stay.
Because I take responsibility for myself, I went to the urgent care to control costs (well that didn’t work, ended up in the ER anyway) I have an HSA that will soak most of the bills, but might still end up having to pay 1 or 2k out of my own pocket. Why? Because I’ve chosen to take a job with benefits and chosen to become educated.
Is the chosen one saying that the guy’s life isn’t worth 10k and he shouldn’t have to pay? How much is my leg worth?
Comment by The Livewire — July 23, 2009 @ 9:35 am - July 23, 2009
I had wondered how low his poll numbers would have to go in order to see the race card played. Well, now I know.
The speed of this legislation is tied to the economy. I suspect predictions within the WH aren’t looking so good for the next year or so; the strategy is to ride what’s left of the honeymoon (force all legislation) before things get any worse. The window between inauguration and the beginning of the campaign season for 2010 is beginning to close and seeing the rather lame defense of private health care given by Republicans and others (lack of vehemence and lack of philosophical or even common sense content, lack of ad campaign, etc.), I’m grateful our economy isn’t in better shape. In a good economy, the boasting of the administration via a complicit media and the public business of going about making a living and not paying attention would be a far better climate for such far-reaching change.
Considering HillaryCare (closed door negotiations, unelected First Lady heading up the proceedings, etc.) and now ObamaCare, the Democrats have been wonderfully flat-footed re. strategy because they’ve tied success to Congressional complexion (number of seats in Congress) rather than the number of stupid Republicans always willing to go along with Democrats in the event of a GOP majority (media fawning and interviews due to bucking the GOP leadership, etc.).
Comment by Ignatius — July 23, 2009 @ 9:58 am - July 23, 2009
No one has a clue what’s in the legislation. Heck, the President can’t even explain Obamacare to the American people even after all the speeches and interviews with the State run media. It’s just amazing. The Anointed One can not explain the plan. Hence the White House and Dems need to rush this through before everyone finds out the details.
Comment by NebraskaPatriot — July 23, 2009 @ 10:11 am - July 23, 2009
Increasing the power of federal bureaucrats is the desired end.
Comment by Matteo — July 23, 2009 @ 10:49 am - July 23, 2009
No one has a clue what’s in the legislation.
This is an excellent rundown. It’s scary as Hell, and only gets through the first 400 pages. Some highlights:
- Pg 21-22: SEC. 113. INSURANCE RATING RULES of the HC Bill MANDATES the Government will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
- Pg 30: SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE of HC bill – THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
- PG 203: SEC. 441. SURCHARGE ON HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUALS Line 14-15 HC – “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax” Yes, it says that!
- PG 272: SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS – Cancer patients – welcome to rationing!
- Page 280: SEC. 1151. REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOSPITAL READMISSIONS The Government will penalize hospitals for what Government deems preventable readmissions.
- PG 429: SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION Lines 10-12 “advance care consultation” may include an ORDER 4 end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2009 @ 10:56 am - July 23, 2009
It must have been difficult for Obama to be required to answer “tough” questions without the aid of TOTUS. I imagine that his “handlers” tried to persuade him not to have this press conference. The government should be engage in promoting its citizens’ prosperity and not the expansion of its power (my platform statement for my polititical future). The people that typically get hired to perform the tasks of any newfound government program reflect the same kind of people who are employed at security checkpoints in airports – scary, huh??? From my understanding, only 18% of the citizens of the USA dont have health insurance. Obama wants the other 82% of the citizens to foot the bill for this idea??? WTF???
Comment by Duffy - Native Intelligence — July 23, 2009 @ 1:03 pm - July 23, 2009
First, does anyone else get the feeling that Obama has little or no idea whats actually in the proposals he’s trying to Rahm through congress? Is he spending too much time on his little world tour junkets to stay informed… or is he just not much into learning the details of this subject? The one thing that I find remarkable in his first six months in office is his lack of curiosity about the detail of the legislation he has been promoting. It’s almost as if he were “Intellectually Incurious” or something.
OK. On to the speech.
Loved it when he sneered that insurance companies “Made Profits”, even during the recession. Oh No. How Hurrible!!!! Yes he did try to smooth the edges of that comment by pulling the Seinfeld “there’s nothing wrong with that” bit.
This is basically the Obama stance:
- We have a problem and something must be done
- THIS is something
- Therefore, THIS must be done
Left out of the equation is whether THIS will do much if anything to fix the problem. Government bureaucrats – the more they CHANGE the more they stay the same.
What is one of the biggest expenses that contributed to the downfall of the American auto industry?…. Run-away health care cost. So what is Obama’s solution????? Restructure health care coverage mechanisms to mirror that of the already failed GM model! The worst thing is that I don’t think he sees it. Having business shoulder even more cost to pay for health care DOES NOT reduce the actual cost of health care, it’s just transferring the payment burden from one party to the other. Having the government pay for health insurance for the uninsured DOES NOT reduce the actual cost of health care, it’s just transferring the payment burden from one party to the other.
Obama did get one thing right. The spiraling cost of health care is a looming disaster waiting to happen. The problem is, increases insurance is not THE solution to the problem. Why can’t Medicare cover more than 20% of the bills, as Obama stated, as opposed to the 60 % forty years ago? It’s not because Medicare coverage has decreased by that amount, it’s because the inflation rate of medical costs has gone up that much.
Lets look at the insurance model in a different venue – disaster relief. In the last fifteen years, we’ve had a few nasty hurricanes hit the coast of the US – Katrina, Andrew, Rita. In each of these cases. People who were insured found themselves uninsured because either the insurance companies wouldn’t cover the expenses to rebuild (sorry, that wind blown damage is actually water damage, you’re not covered), or worse, the insurance company doesn’t have enough money to cover all the claims and goes bankrupt.
This is nuts! There is very little in this thing that reduces actual health care costs. Most of it is just a way to expand insurance coverage, which we business owners will have to pay for. My point is, the main focus of reform should be on cost reduction, not coverage for all. If you attempt to increase insurance without drastically reducing the inflation rate we’re currently seeing in the health care system, you’ll sooner rather than later end up with the same results.
I know this is a rambling response. I’m trying to hurry and get out the door and get my pools done before it gets too hot, I have heat stroke, landing my uninsured ass in the hospital.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 23, 2009 @ 1:32 pm - July 23, 2009
Fortunately for Obama, I doubt all that many people watched. (Anyone seen any ratings for it?) He seems lost when he’s not on a campaign trail, and judging by how quiet my Obamaphile friends have become about politics (granted, it’s no long an election season), Obama can no longer expect large crowds when he goes places. It must make him feel a bit lonely considering the huge crowds he got last year. It seems to me primetime press conferences are his way of dealing with it. However, there seem to be diminishing returns with each one. Last time, Fox chose not to run it. This time, if I understand correctly, he had to shift the time since one of the networks refused to preempt one of its shows. No one thinks these press conferences are interesting. Ultimately, Obama has the political skills of a campaigner, not a leader.
Comment by chad — July 23, 2009 @ 1:44 pm - July 23, 2009
Of course there are things wrong with health care in this country. Nothing in life is perfect but at least the wise strive to achieve it. But if you live in a mansion you do not tear it down over your head to build an outhouse and it seems to me that while health care is not optimal what Obama is trying to do is destroy it in its present form. It needs to be reformed in places but certainly not transformed into another government debacle.
Comment by Not Always Right — July 23, 2009 @ 1:45 pm - July 23, 2009
Didn’t they move the press conference because NBC didn’t want to move “America’s Got Talent”, showcasing Susan Boyle?
At least that is what the Hoff said on the view. So it has to be true.
Comment by TnnsNE1 — July 23, 2009 @ 2:41 pm - July 23, 2009
why the rush? because it’s been in the making for decades, despite the obstructionist and repugnant republican party. it’s IMMORAL and UNPATRIOTIC for insurance companies to profit by denying, delaying and defending their horrible policies in court. it’s IMMORAL and UNPATRIOTIC for insurance companies to profit on the backs of the sick and infirmed.
face it. elections have consequences, as that traitor george w. bush once said. the consequences of obama’s landslide victory in november will amount to an overhaul of our healthcare system, though it won’t go far enough for the fear being generated by the filthy right.
Comment by buckeyenutlover — July 23, 2009 @ 2:57 pm - July 23, 2009
#18… so all the government employees in charge of the health care system make the median wage for their area of the country or do some make more than that? after all anything over the median wage for your area is considered profit. they will be profiting on the backs of the ill. profit in the private sector = bad, profit in the public sector = good.
i can also assume from your post that you use all your disposable income to help the sick and the infirmed. if not you are a hypocrite. i am just saying…
Man, it was hard to type without using caps. Mrs. Daigle, I am sorry.
Comment by TnnsNE1 — July 23, 2009 @ 3:27 pm - July 23, 2009
#18 That was your version of sarcasm I have to assume.
Comment by Not Always Right — July 23, 2009 @ 4:15 pm - July 23, 2009
#18 now that a leftie liberal Democrat has finally showed up don’t scare him away. I need some answers.
Watching the Obama show last night I was struck by how different the President looked. He seems to know that he has lost this fight already, not being able to convince even his fellow Democrats to tear down the existing health insurance system. Less than 24 hours after his appeal to stick with his proposals, he tool Harry Reid declares Obamacare dead til at least the fall. All of this is the direct result of these boobs getting the pork bill horribly wrong and the public losing confidence in the Dems ability to do anything right. Trust Pelosi and Reid, you gotta be kidding. They spent $800 BILLION on a “stimulus” to create jobs and we are still losing 400,000-600,000 jobs a month during the Obama depression. WHy have faith in these same boobs to redo America’s health insurance system. The corupt Democrat pols are not giving up thier health ins system. Until they do, I’m not taking any reform they propose seriously. If the waters warm, you jump in too.
Back to Obamateleprompters performance last night. He looked odd to me, and the two examples of how our current system is broken, seemed disjointed and made up out of the thin air. He bumbled and stumbled thru his discription of a blue and red pills and un necessary surgery. Did anyone else notice how scared, and nervous the press was as well? They seemed out of their depth and young and rambling like the President. When it was all over I just sighed and said “jjeesch”.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 4:37 pm - July 23, 2009
Oh and not one “journalist” thought it was important enough to ask the President why the CBO chief said Obamacare was going to cost us money, not save us money over the next ten years. No one asked for an explaination. No one asked why, for the first time, a CBO chief was called up to the White House for a talk, implying unpresidented pressure being placed on the CBO to go along with or adjust their forcasts to mirror the rosey Obama forcasts. Nope, not important enough to ask the President. Instead the state run press asked about a Cambridge police incident. That’s when the former community organizer really kicked into gear, and got passionate about something he knows about. White police abuse.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 4:41 pm - July 23, 2009
Say JAFO, what’s moral and patriotic about rationing healthcare? What’s moral and patriotic about running up trillions in debt in a few short months?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 23, 2009 @ 5:23 pm - July 23, 2009
Even Bill Clinton handled health care better than Obama has thus far. I must say that I’ve been quite surprised at how much he has botched politically over the past 6 months. He has charm but lacks the politican suave of Clinton and if he continues like this next year will be costly to his party.
Comment by John — July 23, 2009 @ 6:00 pm - July 23, 2009
#20: Sadly no, Not Always Right. buckeyenutlover’s comment at #18 is perfectly consistent with every other comment he has made in the past: exclusively emotional; pathetically simplistic; wildly ignorant; obscenely stupid; and categorically delusional. Of all the different groups of victims, criminals, douchebags, elitists, freeloaders, grievance-mongers, and ignoramuses that the liberals can count on for “slam-dunk” support in the voting booth, buckeyenutlover is the gold standard–a totally uninformed, America-hating hysteric that will not only vote for liberals, but is willing to self-righteously scream all of their usual talking points (even the ones that are so delusional Obama himself can’t get away with them anymore).
Hence, the following doozy: “it’s IMMORAL and UNPATRIOTIC for insurance companies to profit on the backs of the sick and infirmed.” Even the most ardent leftist would detect the overreaching silliness of such a statement and think better of publishing it. But buckeyenutlover is so far gone that he is impervious to the cognitive dissonance that even a five-year-old is innately equipped with.
Comment by Sean A — July 23, 2009 @ 6:43 pm - July 23, 2009
Someone doesn’t understand how insurance works. They don’t make a profit on the sick and infrimed…. They make a profit on the backs of the healthy, who they don’t have to shell out any money to BECAUSE they’re healthy. That’s why the drop the sick and infirmed, so they can keep making a profit! Duh!
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 23, 2009 @ 6:50 pm - July 23, 2009
TGC, at least the Clintons actually personally researched the problems and the options before they threw their cards on the table. Obama doesn’t seem to have a clue about any of the details. He has shown the same lack curiosity with both the stimulus package and the cab and trade bill. As I said before, he seems awfully “Intellectually Incurious”.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 23, 2009 @ 6:57 pm - July 23, 2009
The reason Obama’s going so fast is that Democrats’ perceived trust level on health care compared to Republicans has been plummeting for the past few months. By the time Congress gets back from the beach, Republicans will be trouncing Democrats.
http://www.scottspiegel.com/?p=728
(“Everybody Gets Health Insurance! Everybody Gets Health Insurance!”)
Comment by Scott Spiegel — July 23, 2009 @ 8:19 pm - July 23, 2009
Likely voters now trust the Republicans more than the Democrats on 8 of 10 crutial issues. Thanks to Obama Pelosi and Reid. Boobs all. 2010 can’t get here quick enough.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 8:25 pm - July 23, 2009
Judging from todays reaction to last nights “press conference”, I kind of hope Obama has these almost nightly hehe. Except for race relations of course.
“Obama calls police ’stupid’.” okay for a community organizer, not so much for the President of the United States.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 8:27 pm - July 23, 2009
Was wondering today, what would you guys think of some plan that worked like this.
Doctors (and nurses and physicians assistants) would be allowed to form medical cooperatives… sort of like private practices, with a few incentives to get them to care for those who can’t afford insurance.
1. 20% of their care must go toward providing basic services to those who can’t afford insurance (who would be issued Federal Medical cards confirming program eligibility). The cost of routine office visits, check-ups, pre-natal care, tests, and so forth is fully deductible from their business taxes. The Federal government starts a program to pay for more involved treatments.
2. In return for keeping at least 20% of their practice focused on the needy, they receive immunity from malpractice suits, except in cases of gross negligence. Suits involving allegations of gross negligence must be cleared by a panel of independent doctors.
This is in addition to my previous idea where the Federal Government creates a public insurance plan to care for certain high-expense, catastrophic health events like cancer and organ transplants.
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2009 @ 8:30 pm - July 23, 2009
V the K I think President Obama has all this worked out. He doesn’t need any advice or suggestions from “outsiders” to muddy up the waters. He is doing fine on this stuff all by himself. hehe
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 9:20 pm - July 23, 2009
Apparently, bnl doesn’t have a problem with denying treatment as long as it’s a gummint functionary doing the denying.
People seem to be ignorant of some factors in medical costs. One important reason for cost inflation is that many more injuries and maladies can be treated. In the good old days, a diagnosis of cancer (or AIDS) meant that you needed to get your affairs in order PDQ. Since patients didn’t live very long, the cost of treatment was lower.
Ditto for trauma. It used to be that severely injured people (e.g. burn victims) didn’t survive; the only cost was burial. Now many are successfully treated and resume a mostly normal life with friends and family. I think that’s worth the cost.
Some trauma costs are due to social issues like inner city crime. A couple of gang bangers injured in a shootout can easily costs a couple-hundred thousand to treat. A teenage girl giving birth prematurely will run up an enormous bill in the NICU. Given that the government’s reimbursement for these expenses won’t cover the actual costs, they get added to other peoples’ bills.
Michelle Malkin mentioned the other day an illegal immigrant who had two liver transplants at UCLA (and he was bitching about some reimbursement issue). I looked it up: the cost of a liver transplant runs between $100,000 and $400,000 depending on the complexity of the case. The MONTHLY cost of medications to manage tissue rejection run between $700 and $1000 (and I think those are for life).
And didn’t I read that octomom ran up a million-dollar tab?
The biggest problem, however, with government-run medical care isn’t that it would cost far most than estimates (like every other government program) nor is the problem that politics would enter the rationing equation… it’s that the fundamental relationship between citizens and government would change. We’d no longer be free-born citizens who have a consensual government; we’d all be clients of the state.
Comment by SoCalRobert — July 23, 2009 @ 9:55 pm - July 23, 2009
So Cal makes a good point. People are coming to America for their extraordinary health care because this is where amazing things are happening. Not too many years ago a broken hip meant an aged person would live the rest of thier lives in terrible pain. And very often they died immobile and sad. Now even knee and ankle replacements are becoming common. If you listen to our young President, the goal is all about loweriing costs and equalizing benefits. Nothing is said about American excellence. And American leadership in health breakthrus. Obama would rather apologize for America instead of praising American excellence. Yesterday he slammed American doctors, American insurance companies, American police. But he’s a Democrat. It’s what I expect.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 23, 2009 @ 10:12 pm - July 23, 2009
he took more time picking a dog than he did on Healthcare. That should tel lyou what he thinks of the American people
Comment by Toby — July 24, 2009 @ 1:06 am - July 24, 2009
Notice how Insurance companies were the greedy bad guys that were the reson healthcare is so expensive since the start of his obamacare lies . Now it’s the greedy doctors, not insurance that are the cause. Shouldn’t be more than a week or 2 until it’s the greedy patients fault for wanting to live
It’s everyone elses fault! Never me and my stupid marxist plan!
Comment by Suzy — July 24, 2009 @ 1:08 am - July 24, 2009
It sounds like buckeye is quoting some of the characters from Atlas Shrugged who think the Profiteers are “vicious bastards with dollar signs stamped on their hearts”!
Since food and shelter are also necessities, should grocery stores and landlords also be forced to give up profits from their sick, infirmed, aged or lower income customers?!
I like the idea of reducing the role of health insurance altogether by paying doctors directly for regular services and saving insurance for emergencies with provisions/protection for people with chronic illnesses. Lower income people should at least pay a minimum amount for their services based on a sliding scale above a certain base income level. I also like VtheK’s idea to offer incentives to Docs for servicing low income clients.
Comment by Annie — July 24, 2009 @ 1:41 am - July 24, 2009
bnl, maybe you’d be willing to explain why it is those ‘evil and amoral’ health care companies that the President is bashing cover him, and every federal employee. Why aren’t they already on Medicare? President Obama has expressed no desire to give up his insurance, so apparently we aren’t that evil.
Sonic. I’m sure you’ll be able to provide multiple examples of ‘denying coverage to the sick’. I’ll wait.
Comment by The Livewire — July 24, 2009 @ 8:10 am - July 24, 2009
I’m sure you’ll be able to provide multiple examples of ‘denying coverage to the sick’.
Here’s an example. Say some irresponsible barebacking gay dude with no insurance finds out he’s HIV positive, and decides he wants to make others responsible for paying for the treatment of his condition. So, he goes out to buy insurance. A normal person would say, this is like buying car insurance the day after you get rear-ended. (Pun-intended). But to the soft-headed anti-capitalist crowd, it’s the fault of the greedy insurance companies for rejecting his pre-existing condition.
Comment by V the K — July 24, 2009 @ 8:46 am - July 24, 2009
#39: “But to the soft-headed anti-capitalist crowd, it’s the fault of the greedy insurance companies for rejecting his pre-existing condition.”
Well, that’s correct, V the K, but it only paints half the picture. You left out the fact that to the soft-headed, anti-capitalist crowd, it’s the fault of right-wing, religious, homophobic capitalists and their bigotry and hatred that the gay dude engaged in self-destructive behavior and contracted the pre-existing condition in the first place.
Comment by Sean A — July 24, 2009 @ 11:26 am - July 24, 2009
Jeez Live, read my comment again. I was being sarcastic.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 24, 2009 @ 11:58 am - July 24, 2009
Sorry, Sonic. Just a little too trigger happy. I told a friend today my sense of humour must have been damaged by the cellulitus.
Comment by The Livewire — July 24, 2009 @ 1:58 pm - July 24, 2009
Spoken like a true nutty, bullsh*tting leftist. I call bullsh*t.
What’s immoral and unpatriotic is for the government to try to extend its takeover of health care, preventing free markets – that is, PEOPLE – from meeting human needs effectively.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 24, 2009 @ 4:07 pm - July 24, 2009
Liberal Democrats never took Econ 101. They are upset that Oil Companies make a profit, Big Pharm making a profit is criminal, Auto companies should sell small cars that don’t garner profits, now health insurance companies profiting is immoral. Who exactly, according to liberal Democrats is “allowed” to make a profit?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 25, 2009 @ 9:53 am - July 25, 2009
If organizations do not profit, they cannot employ people. There are no new jobs, and even the existing jobs evaporate.
This is as true of government and of so-called “non-profit” groups as of private business, btw. Show me a government or a “non-profit” group that spends more than it takes in, and I’ll show you an organization headed for disaster, though it might take awhile to get there.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 25, 2009 @ 11:06 am - July 25, 2009
I’d also point out that the ‘record profits’ he likes deriding are 4%.
Comment by The_Livewire — July 25, 2009 @ 12:09 pm - July 25, 2009