Considering how much it doesn't do it's still pretty long.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMojoPin
I think the Republicans have zero interest in any kind of health care coverage reform. Once their turn comes back around again it will not show up on their agenda in any kind of meaningful form. This current proposal is nothing more than a paltry effort to mask that they're simply opposed to any kind of health care coverage reform presented by the Democrats. It's cute that they made the effort, but they should really just cop to not giving a damn about the issue and never conceding anything initiated by the Democrats.
Of course they have no interest. They had complete power in Washington for years and did this ever come close to reaching the agenda? No.
So the dual tract that you and your buddies have running in the last few posts is both that the Democrats should get the reform through quicker AND that they're rushing too fast to put through something so important. Gotcha.
Wrong. The dual tract has been run by you and your buddies that Health Care Reform must be passed immediately in order to avoid great catastrophe but it doesn't have to take effect until after 2013. The question that was posed is, why the great big hurry to pass it RIGHT NOW if it isn't going to even attempt to address the issue for 4 years?
We're not the ones with the doublespeak here. We're just quoting you.
I'm not one of these wishy-washy mods that can't make decisions.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 46,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by badmonkey
Wrong. The dual tract has been run by you and your buddies that Health Care Reform must be passed immediately in order to avoid great catastrophe but it doesn't have to take effect until after 2013. The question that was posed is, why the great big hurry to pass it RIGHT NOW if it isn't going to even attempt to address the issue for 4 years?
We're not the ones with the doublespeak here. We're just quoting you.
Where was I quoted?
Where did I say any of this? I've never said it "has to be passed immediately to avoid great catastrophe." I've never said it had to be passed "RIGHT NOW."
My post was talking about the posts just on the last page where we have people simultaneously slamming the initiative for both taking too long and being too rushed. Which is it?
__________________
"It ain't like it used to be...but it'll do." << EAMUS CATULI >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
No it deals with setting caps on malpractice lawsuits which don't really have any strong bearing on healthcare costs. It's about ultimately limiting liability towards corporations when they cause damage on society. Hazardous wastes too expensive to dispose of properly? Just dump them in the ground, there are only 500 people that will be hurt by it and according to this here ruling, we'll only have to pay out $250k per. Much cheaper than having it sent to Somali waters to be dumped or worse yet a proper recycling plant!
One would think the conservatives would recognize this was just "the market" deciding and adherents of Sowell would be opposed to artificially restricting the market with government interference.
TRUE conservatives would oppose restrictions on malpractice awards.....
__________________
" ...and they ask me why I drink"
Where did I say any of this? I've never said it "has to be passed immediately to avoid great catastrophe." I've never said it had to be passed "RIGHT NOW."
My post was talking about the posts just on the last page where we have people simultaneously slamming the initiative for both taking too long and being too rushed. Which is it?
Sorry, I had to post that quick cuz I had to deal with something else. I meant the general you, like "you guys" or the Democratic Party you. You are exactly right when you ask "Which is it?" and I'm asking too. Which is it? Is it an urgent crisis that must be dealt with now or can it wait to go into effect until 2013?
I wonder just how many of the House members have actually read the bill. If someone was to spend just 3 lousy minutes (for example) a page reading this 2000 page bill that’s 100 hours.
Hmmm: at 1.2 Trillion – (that’s $1,200,000,000,000) and about 2000 pages that comes to about 600 Million (that’s $600,000,000) a page.
They better read the fucking thing at $600,000,000 a page, and they should probably take more than 3 minutes a page to do it.
And then be able to look you in the eye and tell you, all the emotional bullshit aside, that it saves money. Show me the savings.
Seriously, can these people do anything other than spend, borrow, and tax; and then hide behind some ridiculous bureaucratic pile of paper? I’m pissed.
I wonder just how many of the House members have actually read the bill. If someone was to spend just 3 lousy minutes (for example) a page reading this 2000 page bill that’s 100 hours.
Hmmm: at 1.2 Trillion – (that’s $1,200,000,000,000) and about 2000 pages that comes to about 600 Million (that’s $600,000,000) a page.
They better read the fucking thing at $600,000,000 a page, and they should probably take more than 3 minutes a page to do it.
And then be able to look you in the eye and tell you, all the emotional bullshit aside, that it saves money. Show me the savings.
Seriously, can these people do anything other than spend, borrow, and tax; and then hide behind some ridiculous bureaucratic pile of paper? I’m pissed.
As for how the bill will save money you will have to take it up with the CBO. They definitely read the entire bill and made estimates and explained their reasoning behind the estimates. And they are the ones saying that the two major bills being considered will reduce the deficit.
So here is what I know about the House bill (H.R. 3962):
10 years at a total price tag of $894 billion.
96% coverage
Includes a public option
A geographic adjustment of medicare payments
A value index for providers based on quality measures
New payment mechanisms, including value-based purchasing
Its an interesting bill that deserves a serious look. Its not perfect, but I'll give the House credit for tackling the issue in a serious manner...unlike the Senate which seems to be a mess (no thanks to Harry Reid).
Its an interesting bill that deserves a serious look. Its not perfect, but I'll give the House credit for tackling the issue in a serious manner...unlike the Senate which seems to be a
mess (no thanks to Harry Reid).
The Dodd bill is a bit better: it comes in at $600b, includes a public option and hits 97% coverage. It's the only real reform bill that has a chance of passing. Anything else is a give-away for insurance companies.
As for how the bill will save money you will have to take it up with the CBO. They definitely read the entire bill and made estimates and explained their reasoning behind the estimates. And they are the ones saying that the two major bills being considered will reduce the deficit.
The CBO has some rigid constraints and assumptions it has to operate within. That said I know that I have used the CBO in the past to try to make a point in my favor, but in as far as the magnitude of this House bill goes I think it deserves some serious scrutiny. What does the price tag have to be before people say: c’mon man, show me the real deal? Is not $1.2 Trillion or thereabouts enough? What if it was $1.5 Trillion or $2.0 Trillion, or even just a measly $900 Billion as the House said it was JUST LATE LAST WEEK before the CBO did it's thing! What's $300 Billion! This thing has a POLITICAL life of it's own and...ARRRGGGHH!
Suffice to say that it bothers me when the Gov't says it has to spend 1.2 Trillion to save money!!!
“It front-loads all of the taxes and back-loads all of the spending so as to give the appearance of balance over the 10-year window,” This is very convenient say with the 2012 election and all that.
"the House bill employs budget “gimmicks” to hide its true cost and make the bill appear fiscally responsible while creating another federal entitlement program that Congress will not be able to pay for"
“The heart of this bill is to repeat two of the greatest policy errors this country has made: to create large, unfunded entitlement spending programs, and to have a tax law that is not politically viable over the long haul”
Last edited by SonOfSmeagol; 11-04-2009 at 10:06 PM.
The CBO has some rigid constraints and assumptions it has to operate within. That said I know that I have used the CBO in the past to try to make a point in my favor, but in as far as the magnitude of this House bill goes I think it deserves some serious scrutiny. What does the price tag have to be before people say: c’mon man, show me the real deal? Is not $1.2 Trillion or thereabouts enough? What if it was $1.5 Trillion or $2.0 Trillion, or even just a measly $900 Billion as the House said it was JUST LATE LAST WEEK before the CBO did it's thing! What's $300 Billion! This thing has a POLITICAL life of it's own and...ARRRGGGHH!
Suffice to say that it bothers me when the Gov't says it has to spend 1.2 Trillion to save money!!!
“It front-loads all of the taxes and back-loads all of the spending so as to give the appearance of balance over the 10-year window,” This is very convenient say with the 2012 election and all that.
"the House bill employs budget “gimmicks” to hide its true cost and make the bill appear fiscally responsible while creating another federal entitlement program that Congress will not be able to pay for"
“The heart of this bill is to repeat two of the greatest policy errors this country has made: to create large, unfunded entitlement spending programs, and to have a tax law that is not politically viable over the long haul”
If there are any tricks the CBO will find them in their final analysis. That being said the cost being thrown around is not that important if it doesn't add to the deficit. If it costs $500 billion and adds 100 billion to the deficit or $1.2 trillion and is budget neutral do you really want the $500 million plan? I think Obama made a big mistake when he put a limit at $900 billion. It doesn't matter if it is deficit neutral. You could say that even if is budget neutral you are uncomfortable with that level government spending. I'd counter that we've left this spending in the hands of private industry for quite a lone time and costs have skyrocketed. We've given them much more time than they deserve and costs keep going up and instead of the government taking the money it's just going out the door in insurance costs because of the many ways money is wasted. So I'd say that putting more of that spending in the hands of the government will help constrain costs and in the end save people money.
As for the tax issue. Obama and Congress should definitely tackle that before his term is up, and hopefully soon.
We've given them much more time than they deserve and costs keep going up and instead of the government taking the money it's just going out the door in insurance costs because of the many ways money is wasted. So I'd say that putting more of that spending in the hands of the government will help constrain costs and in the end save people money.
But as we’ve seen the costs are not the “fault” of the ins companies - they’re just not making the revenues and profits that people want to seem to claim, and they are not the sole source of “wasting” funds. The cost structure is much more complicated and to think that the gov’t can solve that is naïve. I just don’t see putting more spending in the hands of the gov’t will help as there is no track record of the U.S. gov’t ever doing so with any business venture – especially one so primarily dependent on supply and demand. As I’ve said reform is so needed but I disagree with this approach. We need to look at a comprehensive solution accepted by more stakeholders and a ramrod political approach will simply not work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HBox
As for the tax issue. Obama and Congress should definitely tackle that before his term is up, and hopefully soon.
I’m not sure what that means – the bill relies on a huge amount of new taxes and if they then retract them then the program will not be paid for and will go very negative very quickly to the tune of 100’s of billions of $.
Linear Mode
