dagblog - Comments for "The Mandate Stinks Anyway"

I've never understood that at

Michael Maiello — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 20:20:55 +0000

In reply to Currently it is one. It is

I've never understood that at all. Or people who don't want the government to tax them more in order to provide health care but don't mind a private company taking money out of their checks every two weeks (and for the amount of money they take to go up every year while services are cut... presumably the government could do that to but it's easier to take out your frustrations on your congressional rep than on the executives of a private company... oh... I can't stand it anymore...)

Currently it is one. It is

Elusive Trope — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:39:29 +0000

In reply to I'm with ya. The only answer

Currently it is one. It is just that it is the private sector funding a non-profit/government partnership. It is incredibly an inefficient, duct-taped system where so much of the energy is directed at finding and filling the gaps (when there are enough resources) because there is no overall coordination and comprehensive planning. One of the bizarre facets of American society is the individual who will fight to save $500 on his or her taxes (and balk at nationalized health care), but then turn around and write a check for $5,000 to the local free health clinic.

Howard Dean was on Keith O

Oxy Mora — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:27:07 +0000

In reply to As luck would have it,

Howard Dean was on Keith O last night saying the experience in Vermont and Massachusetts was that the mandate was mostly irrelevant. He said, however, that in the new bill the ones that like the mandate the most are the insurance companies, for obvious reasons.

Also, Hudson the right wing judge did establish the severability of the "mandate" from the entire bill itself.

Another interesting point about fines, etc. Many of the people who don't enroll are the young, but many of those will continue to be covered until they are 26.

They tried that right after

trkingmomoe — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 07:02:45 +0000

In reply to I was listening to a local

They tried that right after SS was passed. The courts didn't go along with it. There are conservatives that would love to see SS declared unconstitutional as it administrated now. It does pop up from time to time on talk shows. This deal that includes a FICA payment holliday is as close they have come to fufilling that dream.

As luck would have it,

we are stardust — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 04:24:23 +0000

In reply to I haven't followed the health

As luck would have it, someone at FDL is discussing this subject, and some possible remedies.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/12/13/pay-for-delay-to-stay-more-proof-congress-doesnt-care-about-the-deficit/

I'm opposed to online poker

Dan Kervick — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 03:32:46 +0000

In reply to See Dan, the problem is that

I'm opposed to online poker too :)

All gambling - as a matter of fact. I particularly despise lotteries, one of the most regressive revenue gimmicks ever devised.

See Dan, the problem is that

Michael Maiello — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 03:16:32 +0000

In reply to No, we demand it not be given

See Dan, the problem is that our government is too intrusive into people's social arrangements, but in the wrong places. There are mant victimless social arrangements that the government should get out of. If the government showed more restraint when some one wanted to smoke an effin' joint or play online poker, maybe people wouldn't be so suspicious when the government wanted to, say, impose a reasonable tax for public benefit.

I was listening to a local

AmiBlue — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:22:36 +0000

In reply to The Mandate Stinks Anyway

I was listening to a local fellow on progressive radio this afternoon and he says that this same tactic might be one avenue used by the cons for killing Social Security, i.e., get it declared unconstitutional to make people contribute to the SS trust fund. And that they would then make it a welfare program based on need. He said cons are considering it.

That's a new one on me and wondered if anyone has heard talk of it?

I don't think that's fair to

kgb999 — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:20:12 +0000

In reply to No, we demand it not be given

I don't think that's fair to say in this context. It's one thing to ask me to throw in with society and pay a tax and get a benefit and have it administered and controlled by an entity that ultimately can be checked through a democratic mechanism.

You are arguing that the arrangements of society that in America typically are constitutionally bestowed on our democratic institutions can be made into a hybrid beast of indecipherable distinction between private-sector free-market corporatism which can only work in a situation where all parties are free to take a deal or leave it and institutional organs that exist for the exclusive purpose of servicing a shared need of society in which we all participate. That is the republican dream. And now by some twisted double-jedi-mind-fuck Obama has every liberal in America frothing at the mouth trying to ensure it's solidified.

But ... it can't possibly be the Republican dream ... it's being opposed by Republicans!!! [gaaaagh.]

I haven't followed the health

we are stardust — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:19:15 +0000

In reply to The Mandate Stinks Anyway

I haven't followed the health care issue much, as we don't go to doctors almost ever, and won't buy the plan in any event. But I do keep hearing that it's health care costs, not insurance overage, that needs to be addressed. It might have been on Dylan Ratigan's show guests were talking, for instance, how many docs build brick-and-mortar buildings for their groups of surgeons, say, and the costs of employees, the cost of the building, insurances (including malpractice) seem to have the effect of causing many of them to perform unneccessary surgeries and expensive tests, even if the same tests have been performed previously by other docs. Don't know what fixes there might be, but...it's apparently a problem.