We were told that the Tea Party was about fiscal responsibility and returning to the Constitution. Some of us kept mentioning the far right. We kept getting told no, its about the economy, stupid. No, not really. the culture warriors are being to creep out of the closet. We knew it all along. Their code words didn’t fool us.
Those of you who really have concerns about the fiscal end of things had better watch those who have invaded your movement with their far right social agenda. The American people will not stand for it once they realize what’s really happening. their economic fears will soon be replaced with the fear that ‘the right’ is right there in the bedroom with them. And once the camel’s nose is under the tent, pretty soon you have a real live camel taking over your tent.
The Republicans will unveil their agenda on September 23. Lord knows what will come out of that.
September 23 for Democrats will mark the date that kids can’t be dropped from your insurance for preexisting conditions. Additionally, no one can be dropped for having an illness. Children up to age 26 can stay on your policy if you chose and there are no more lifetime limits. Sounds like a good plan to me.
Is there a scheduling conflict?
“September 23 for Democrats will mark the date that kids can’t be dropped from your insurance for preexisting conditions. Additionally, no one can be dropped for having an illness. Children up to age 26 can stay on your policy if you chose and there are no more lifetime limits. Sounds like a good plan to me.”
That’s because like most liberals, you conveniently leave out the 239 really bad things about the Health Care plan, and focus on the 4 “good” things. I get a hearty belly-laugh every time you refer to yourself as a moderate or an independent. The vast majority of Americans have figured out how god-awful Obamacare is….what’s taking you so long? Scheduling conflict?
Tell me what’s bad about it, Slow. Enlighten me. Let’s see if we agree.
Why, good non-independent liberal that you think I am, would I bring up anything but what goes in effect today?
So today’s the Big Day for the new Culture War playbook, eh? I can hardly wait! The anticipation is unbearable!
Beating up on sick kids….that is sinking pretty low.
“Health plans in at least four states, California, Colorado, Ohio and Missouri, have announced they’re dropping children’s coverage just days ahead of new rules created by the health care reform law, according to the liberal grassroots group Health Care for America Now (HCAN). Insurance companies like CoventryOne and Wellpoint have been so brazen as to say that their inability to discriminate against sick children “poses undue risks that could undermine our ability to offer value and meet our continued obligations to existing policyholders.” “
@anona
“Beating up on sick kids?” So what you are saying is that any corporate insurance company that seeks to ensure its ability to provide high quality and affordable insurance, should not have the right to make customer or pricing decisions? You have a right to think the Goverment can make these economic decisions for industry better that these companies, but I don’t see any examples. Shifting welfare subsidies onto the corporations is a reasonable approach and has been done successfully, but only when the subsidy for the welfare portion is recognized. That is not what the Obama Administration is doing – which beleives that it can effectively drive out private insurance by imposing new welfare requirements onto them – without compensation.
You know what – we are never going to agree on this.
Y’all really think you can use government to “beat up on” Insurance companies? Or, for that matter, Credit Card companies? Right or wrong, the harder to hit them, the harder they’ll hit back. And when they can’t make a profit, they’ll go out of business and the government will run all health care. The smarter folks in the room know that’s a scary thought.
Meanwhile, you’ve got Dem leaders out there doing this:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/22/ohio-democrat-curses-voters-oppose-health-care-law/
The video is pretty good. This is what people are trying to hear from politicians right now.
TP, you just tried to rephrase what she said. NO. She meant what she said, not what you said.
One of the companies mentioned was Wellpoint. They are like a parent type company of anthem. I havent figured out the corporate structure yet…and I have been trying for quite some time now as I inherited wellpoint stock. Interesting, their CEO makes $10 million a year. Yea, they are all about profits. With that kind of salary, it makes it hard to have any pity at all for the greedy bastards.
Wellpoint is just greedy. They pay no dividends and the CEO makes $10 million annually. Now whose the dumbo to keep the stock?
Huh???
Yes, I too look forward to the day when the government regulates all entrenurialship, controls prices and both managerial and productive wages, means tests educational opportunities and elimates hard work, background and luck and – dare I say it – rewards conformance to the appropriate ideology, to assure equal outcomes for each and every one of us. Never again will children suffer or have untreated diseases. Never again will there be homlessness or hunger. AIDS victums will be compensated and abortion will be free. The goverment will be there to compensate every time shit happens.
The difference between me and you is that I dred the day. I think that you look forward to it and argue for interim compromise to achieve that goal. Its that or let’s hear some limits.
Oh and BTW, in the interim, as a stockholder of Wellpoint, you are responsible for that inappropriate $10 million salary in what is a very democratic system among stockholders.
Are you again suggesting that you should be forgiven and ask the government to instead intervene? I suggest you sell, sell, sell, now before they do.
@Moon-howler
A company that is regularly traded may indeed opt not to pay dividends in order to enhance market value. Please – its your investment decision not greed.
And many companies that are regularly traded do pay dividends, including health care providers. DOH!
The point is the CEO makes $10 million a year. How many multiple millions do people need?
Trying to dump sick kids to save company expenditures is unethical and as a stock holder I have every right to say that.
Isn’t that part of what’s wrong with society? Isn’t that part of what happened on Wall Street? People seem to have this sense of entitlement when it comes to high paying jobs.
Hmm TP, my guess would be that you do not have a sick child who as been dropped from insurance, nor, I imagine, do you have an illness that could be considered uninsurable. Being able to place oneself in someone elses shoes is a valuable evolutionary tool that enables communities to thrive.
Does a corporate exec need to make multi multi millions of dollars at the expense of not insuring sick children? I am gonna go with a resounding NO. Did you read the newest initiative by the Gates Foundation? Gates and Buffett want the most wealthiest to GIVE a portion, half exactly, to developing countries in a way that will help promote a more sustainable government.
If developing countries want sustainable government, then they need to develop governments based on liberty and freedom. We even have a plan that they can photocopy and use….
I have a child that is sick. My daughter has diabetes. She, therefore, now has a pre-existing condition. I do not believe that the government has the authority to declare that insurance companies have to use business models that are unprofitable. In fact, many companies have now stopped issuing any new child policies. Private enterprise will not just accept policies that will put them out of business. What the government can do is provide INCENTIVES that make such policies profitable.
One reform that I will accept is that insurance companies should not be allowed to drop existing customers when they get sick and expensive. If the customer paid the premiums, they get the service. If its a chronic disease, the insurance company has to bite the bullet. They agreed to the contract too.
However, an insurance company should not be FORCED to take those with pre-existing conditions. Then, its not insurance. Otherwise, why get insurance while one is healthy? Just get it when you get sick.
One thing that is needed is to decouple employment and insurance. Health insurance should be issued just like all other insurance, to the individual. Tax laws should be changed to fix that. Perhaps a flat tax with no deductibles…….
Its government involvement that has skewed the health insurance and health industries. Too many regulations, tax laws, incentives, penalties, mandates make it needlessly complex.
Do I *need* to make anything more than minimum wage? Of course not. By definition I can get by with the bare minimum, right? So, if we’re gonna lop CEOs off at the knees because they make millions and millions and millions more than the common person can we not extend that to teachers? Teachers make more (on average) than the common citizen. So, lets bring them down to minimum wage. Plumbers? Well, that service should be a right. Let’s give them minimum wage. Doctors? Healthcare is a right – lets put them on minimum wage. Let’s just make everyone equal and take out the incentive for hard work and effort.
A private company can pay any employee whatever they want. If a basketball team wanted to pay Shaq $50M/year than good on Shaq. It’s the owners money and he answers to his stockholders, if any.
Funny you should mention Gates, Elena in this conversation. MH, research how often Microsoft paid out a dividend before…say… 5-10 years ago.
I don’t understand why our venerable corporate citizens are railed on so badly.. Without them where would we all be?
If everyone had health care then they wouldn’t just buy it when sick. That was the whole point. Each piece has to go in its place for this plan to work.
Right now people don’t have health care. Lots and lots of people. They get sick, have no money to pay their bill which is sometimes in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. They walk on their bill or declare bankruptcy. No one gets paid.
Hospitals have to absorb the cost. How do THEY stay afloat? They overcharge us for all services. that makes our premiums go up.
Pay me now or pay me later.
@Elena
You know nothing of me – but lets be very clear — I have children and relatives denied and am paying more – a lot more out of pocket rather that risk it (lower quality care) or rely on society via welfare emergency room care. Take your high horse and shove it. The first question here is whether the government should impose societal welfare costs on privately owned, discretionary market based insurance companies. Each consumer makes his/her own risk decisions – which Obamacare does not allow for. Could the Government work out compensatory welfare payments with those companies to compensate for the differences in rates/exposures of the terminally ill, sick kids, the handicapped — you bet, but that would not result in a Government take-over of the industry or a higher level of public dependency on the Government. I suppose you beleive that taxpayers should subsidize adult AIDS patient drugs too. We all understand that some on this blog are eager to let others pay for their problems/shitty life deals – and believe that life – or the Government – owes them a tranfer payment for their shitty deal. There is a fundemental difference between equal access (disrimination) and equally imposed services and outcomes given nature’s own differences — but trying to shift the public’s welfare responsibilities/limits – which are political decisions – onto these companies in order to make it look like the greediness of the insurance industry is way out of line and its part of the DNC’s talking points. Again lets be clear, the average insurance company today makes only 3.3% profit – the return they earn on their shareholders’ investment (ROI).
Some might even say its part two in the Democrat’s effort to eliminate such companies so that the Obamacare single payer can replace the curent system. ln this area, life ain’t fair and I am sick of you liberals trying to borrow, spend and transfer wealth to make it so.
I know, I know, I take care of mine but somebody else gets it for free – maybe I should just be happy that I could get less but for free too. That does not make it right and we are loosing something special in America by transfering this to the Government.
As to the second question and whether a corporate exec should make so much when there are sick children is —- just crazy liberal jibberish. Who the hell are you to know what is appopriate much less suggest that you should be empowered to interfere with the private market place on wages. Your argument is essentially to replace stockholder responsbilities through a Government Commission to determine the appropriate salaries for the private sector’s executive class — and while we are at it – let’s do it to wages. Wait, there have been several such examples, but each country that has tied it has failed.
As to Gates and Buffet- I aplaud them. They are doing it voluntarilly – not through your Government fiats.
I believe the average teacher in PWC makes about $55k a year. Considering most of them have an MA or MS, they make less than othrs with the same educational level. Plumbers can make varying amounts, depending on their skill level and their pecking order in the company. If you own a successful plumbing business you can become a millionaire.
No one is suggesting that CEOs make what plumbers and teachers make. Don’t be ridiculous. We were discussing corporate pay. Teachers and plumbers rarely get corporate pay. If sick kids are ousted from the club, or not let in in the first place, while the corporation pay CEOs multiple millions, then something is wrong. Most of us call that greed.
Some people look up to sports stars. Other people feel that they are horribly over paid. Maybe a football player is more entitled. At least they often to a lot to give back to the community and often help out sick kids.
The health care insurers would be on the hot seat if they had shown ethical corporate behavior in the first place. People got tired of being screwed.
Say good-bye, TP. How dare you tell Elena to shove it. Your arrogance just landed you in moderation. You have been begging for it for a long time. You come on here all balls to the wall and think you can talk to both of us anyway you want. You still can. Only we will see it, unless of course you go directly to spam.
I know of no one on this blog who expect something for nothing. TP has been rude, crude and abusive to Elena (and in the past to me). That kind of behavior will not be tolerated.
TP,
I think that is great that you and yours can afford to pay more for cadillac insurance plans, many cannot. Furthermore, ESPECIALLY if you have been screwed over by insurance companies, I cannot fathom, how you cannot believe, that their practices are not only unethical but actually borderline illegal. I guess I am not sure I find it believeable that you have family members that have personally suffered and yet still will defend the insurance paradigm of this country?
Do people have such short memories that they do not remember the meltdown of wall street, of the almost near collapse of the banking industry? The problem was that these corporations DID not discipline themselves, they behaved like the scorpion in fable of the scorpion and the frog.
Hello????? The free market still requires some oversight and regulation or we will end up RIGHT where we were when Obama came into office.
Furthermore, do you really think, when an INSURANCE agent tells you that you are better off NOT spending the 500 dollars a month for MINIMAL coverage ,and instead saving that to go towards direct pay of doctors/hospitals WHEN you have a serious chronic illness like MS, that there is NOT a problem with health care in this country?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I may be out of step here but I don’t see any problem with what TP said. His logic is sound and an emotional arguement was used against him first.
I would encourage you to re-think kicking him or placing him in moderation as the move is not in the spirit of civil debate.
To #18, is it right to say that a union member is greedy for demanding more from a corporation or that a teacher is greedy for asking taxpayers to front a higher salary? Is it greedy for a fry cook to ask his McDonalds manager for an extra $0.25? Then why do we begrudge an executive for making what they make? Obviously stockholders and investors must be ok with the salary provided to that executive. And, if they’re not they are within their rights to change the compensation and risk losing the employee. What Company A is not willing to spend Company B will. That’s how things work in the real world.
If I ever feel that my company doesn’t appreciate me or I’m not getting what I want from my company I’m perfectly free to leave at any time I wish. I am not a slave to my company nor are they a slave to me. It’s a mutually beneficial arrangement. They pay me I work my buns off. If they told me today I’m fired — I walk on over to a competitor and offer my services. Any PWC teacher can quit and find employment in FFX, DC, Stafford, etc. Or, they could make pretty nice coin working for any private, military or religious school — they pay very well.
I just don’t understand how people can kick CEO’s in the teeth and not apply the same thinking to teachers or any other occupation. With an executive the board sets his compensation and with a teacher it’s set by a school board. Both methods still are accountable to a number of people that can vote…
You have every right to do as you wish as you have property rights over this forum and we our your guests here but in my unsolisited opinion TP didn’t cross a line.
Responding to #22,
As a consumer you can choose to speak with and engage any agent you wish to purchase health insurance. If you don’t feel you get a good deal with Agent A you can talk to Agent B.
I would not fault an insurance company for not covering an MS patient. MS is expensive and the money spent treating takes away from the other insured persons doing business with that company.
Regardless of what you think, marin, he has been pushing it for a long time. I will not have Elena being told to shove it by him. Telling one of the blog owners to shove it is not part of civil debate.
Furthermore, it is not the first strike. It is like strike 10. After a day, we will evaluate his comments like we do for others. If they are polite, they will go through. However, I don’t need people who come here just to be confrontational. Its one thing to say something that disagrees. It is another thing to be rude.
Understood. I’ve said my piece and won’t say anymore on that subject. This is your home.
As a general question to anyone here — when I say the word HMO what comes to mind?
marin, why are you defending CEO’s? Do you not think there is something wrong when an hourly worker at say McDonalds makes minumum wage and the CEO makes $28 million?
Say all you want about stockholders. Do you have any clue how many shares you would have to own to be able to change those numbers?
What person needs $28 million bucks in 2008?
Because to me there is no difference between a CEO and a McDonald’s worker. They both provide work for money. They both have a mortgage they pay. The company decides how to compensate both employees and those employees in turn decide if the compensation is fair and if they’ll take the job. I see nothing wrong with that.
If a CEO makes $28M, $35M, $200M or $250K that’s something between him/her and the company.
I don’t begrurdge that woman for making $28M. Good on her. What person *needs* 250K? What person *needs* $100K? What person *needs* 50K? I just don’t see the logic in saying that what this person makes is way too much in comparison to someone else. It’s a private company — they can set pay however they want.
I guess I genuinly don’t understand the question? The guy working at McD’s might *like* to make that $28M paycheck but does he provide the same value to the organization that the CEO provides?
Do you think Generals should be paid the same as Privates? Principals the same as teachers? Managers the same as employees?
Wellpoint and Anthem merged back in 2004. Anthem swallowed the old Wellpoint Health Networks and opted to keep the Wellpoint name.
Marin, much of MS can be controlled. So is that just one of the millions you would let die?
Just because something is expensive is no reason to refuse to treat it. How about heart attacks? Cancer? Diabetes? Lupus? Why else do people have insurance? The healthy offset the sick.
Someone has sold you a bill of goods. I am more or less amazed at how many of you all have been bamboozed into sticking up for the rich and the well.
No one has asked the govt to control ceo salaries. It is a whole different world.
To answer TP’s question from the backroom, Cargo, Rick, SA, Wolverine, and Marin are perfect safe, even though they often don’t agree with the blog admin. Why? Because they have decent manners. In fact, I have suggested that at least one person in moderation model their behavior after several of those people. They know how to disagree without being disagreeable, most of the time. And everyone has a bad day every once in a while.
I don’t recall Elena or I ever saying we were moderators. We are administrators and owners of this blog. I hope that answers your questions.
I have no control over death but if I was an insurance company that was handed down this very expensive mandate from the mountain then I have to figure out how to restructure my system to accomodate these new enrollees. One way of doing that is trimming costs. A person that is healthy will cost me less than one that is sick. And, if that person is sick with something that could cost a lot of money that will by definition take away resources from the other policy holders.
I understand you may think I’m cruel and maybe evil. I’m not. I’m actually a nice guy. But, I can’t change how math works. If I have a choice between two policy candidates; one with a chronic disease and one without — the choice to me is simple. Sure, the guy without can always get hit by a bus or go skydiving and require expensive hospitilization but as an insurance company I would have finite resources to handle the care of many people and still be able to pay my own staff. If I have to pay for that MS patient do I then tell maybe 200 other policy holders that I can no longer provide wellness checks and breast exams?
It’s a balancing act. And yes people may die because of an economic decision. It’s sad. It sucks. it’s a dang shame. But, the reality is without those companies providing these policies and paying out on them — where would we be?
I have health insurance and I feel like *crap* everytime I go to a doctor because I know deep in my heart that if I go in for an ouchy or a throat tickle or anything else ‘minor’ that *I* as a policy holder may be asking my insurance company to save me at the expensive of someone else.
Melodramatic? Maybe. But, healthcare costs will NOT go down until we understand at a gut level that prices will only go down if demand for services decrease.
Cato, Wellpoint seems to have some strange situation. Wellpoint doesnt seem to exist prior to 2004. But thanks for addressing that issue. I still thing their CEO is greedy.
Yup. Prior to 2004 WellPoint was WellPoint Health Networks Inc and traded under symbol WHN.
@Cato, I didn’t own it until 2006 towards the end of the year. I watched it prior to that.
What I found strange was that all the data didnt show up on a generic stock watcher. (as opposed to a brokerage house watcher). I don’t know if it still does or not.
@Moon-howler
Yeah what happens is that historical price data gets purged off most public facing services after the ticker goes off list. I buy raw data feeds and warehouse it myself so I have it going back to 2001. You should be able to see it through your broker (archived data varies from broker to broker) or if you’re REALLY that interested I could run a few charts for you.
CAto, no thank you. Thanks very much for the offer though. I used to watch it before I took ownership of it and I just found its behavior odd. I can see it through my broker account now. I rarely look. I should sell it. Things change.
I don’t want to jinx myself. I never did understand what had happened to it. Was it Trigon at one time? I ended up getting several hundred dollars from Trigon, I believe through the state, I never figured out why.
When does GM come out of the gate?
@Moon-howler
Trigon was actually the owner of the Blues (Cross/Shield) in Va. Anthem acquired them in 2002.
GM will be coming out sometime in November. Based on what’s in the offering documents it looks like shares will be offered between 110 – 130/share and that’s a pretty fair valuation based on where they’re getting the growth from (Brazil and China – priced at roughly 0.7 x sales). I wish they’d wait a year on the offering though. I’d rather have several successful quarters in the books and this market is just not favorable to IPOs right now. Those shares will need to trade up to 165 for us to get our money back, and that’s not likely to happen for quite some time.
Why would trigon be giving people money having nothing to do with stocks?
That seems awfully expensive for GM. Was it ever that high before the fall? Poor Ford is what? 12-13 bux a share?
What sets the IPO?
Well, based on the numbers they’re putting up and the amount of shares being offered it’s not a bad deal to get GM at 7.2 x 2010 earnings. I’m not saying it’s cheap, just that it’s fair if you believe in the company. Instutions will “subscribe” which is a non-binding committment to buy the shares but the price will not determined until the last minute and like anything else in the market it will get set by the bids.
I won’t be playing in there as I do not believe in the company as is – they’d need to fix the massively underfunded pension before I’d consider buying in.
Moon, may I suggest that some of you are allowing yourselves to be misled into believing that the so-called “Cultural Wars” are once again on the cutting edge of politics. Your own “media” outlets and blogs are doing the misleading by creating a focus which causes many of you to have your attention diverted away from the main battlefield. That main battlefield is the economy and our national and state fiscal problems.
During my recent and long road trip through the Heartland and the Rust Belt, I cannot even remember having a serious discussion about the socio-cultural issues to which some of you refer. If there was much of that, it was pretty well confined to an expression of hurt at being somehow lumped together as a bunch of “religious wingnuts” or “Right wing religious whackos” just because you were faithful adherents to a particular religious doctrine and/or denomination. My main personal references here were conservative Roman Catholic and evanglical/fundamentalist Protestant.
No, most of what I heard was about jobs; the unemployment rate; possible negative implications for planned retirement; the diminishing of planned financial legacies for one’s survivors; trying to find part-time jobs to supplement lost business income; cutbacks in city, county, and township spending (while I was there, one town cut its entire police force in half even though their crime rate was the highest in the county); the plight of the rescue missions and food banks because of increased demand and lesser charitable resources; the quantum increase in working poor; home foreclosures; and the feeling that nothing coming out of Washington was working.
We — Mrs. W and I — came to these places from a part of the country that has been insulated better than most from the current economic hardtimes. We got a personal dose of reality in the Heartland. We went to a local cemetery to visit the graves of my father and my grandparents. This is the relatively newest of the main cemeteries in the center city. It has always been beautiful and peaceful. On that day, we found the once ornate, Tudor-style gatehouse closed, abandoned, and deteriorating. We found the graves of our relatives covered with weeds and grass and blown sand and dirt to a point where you could not read the inscriptions (flat metal markers vice upright tombstones). Mrs. W and I spent the better part of an hour weeding graves and clipping grass and sweeping sand and dirt off the names and dates of our dead. We have never had to do that before — never, ever. And, then, while taking another drive out to watch the sunset on the big lake, we passed one of the few major industries left in that town, once an industrial center of importance in that part of the state. It was a paper mill which has provided employment and tax revenue for that town for almost 100 years. It was closed. Gone were the pulp logs and the railroad cars and the trucks, and silent were the great metal structures, tanks, and other equipment which I remembered from my own youth. It was like going through another cemetery.
Quite frankly, in my “Tea Party” opinion, if we do not resolve the economic and fiscal problems we now face — problems inherited from both Republican and Democratic administrations, any arguments about socio-cultural differences are not going to be, to steal a phrase from John Nance Garner, “worth a bucket of warm spit.”
I respectfully suggest that you tell those people who insist on being culture warriors just to shut up then. There are serious economic problems for sure. That’s a good reason for culture warriors to be still going to town. They are very definitely out there. Maybe it is just an east coast thing. But I sure see it every day of my life, whether it is over a legitimate business opening in Old Town Manassas or a women’s clinic that has been in operation for 21 years, there is still clamoring to stop the sin. Those are just 2 local socio/culture things. Down your way people are fighting over what belongs on the lawn of the courthouse. The Attorney General just can’t hold himself back from ruling that gays don’t have job protection and our congress zapped the defense bill, ostensibly over the repeal of DADT. Gay marriage continues to be a major issue.
I would love it if all the warriors dedicated themselves to fixing the economy, although I am not sure anyone really can. It might just be one of those things that is going to take time. The one thing I am sure of though, is that many people are so sure fired certain they are right that they have shut their minds to everything but their own opinions and ideology.
The other thing I feel certain about is that Americans need to stop with the mental civil war stuff. I wish I knew a way to find common ground. I don’t think there is any.
Marimn,
You do realize that this country pays more for health care cost than 34 other industrialized countries don’t you? You and I have a philsophical difference, I believe, in a modern and civilized society, being healthy is a right of existing. Americans do not let the least among them suffer because insurance companies are too interested in making millions off the backs of suffering people. I wholly support making a profit, a good profit for that matter, but I DO NOT suppport making ridiculous profits off of people’s suffering. I find it hard to believe that you, TP, an insurance exec, or anyone else, would allow someone THEY loved to suffer or die so some CEO could get their 10 milion dollar bonus.
Furthermore, if I were not married with my husbands health insurance, and got sick while uninsured, who would ultimately pay for my care? Ding ding ding, that’s right, YOU would. We ALL pay for those who are not insured or insured insufficently.
What is health insurance? Its a commercial product. It is a product based upon a bet that the owner will not get sick or cost more than the premium. It is not a product to pay for healthcare for everyone.
How much should an insurance company make? What percentage profit? I’m seeing all of these emotional appeals about CEO salaries, sick people, etc. So lets do this scenario. Insurance companies are told to insure everyone. Premiums cannot rise. All persons are automatically enrolled, even if the person is already sick or hurt. What happens to that company? Is it feasible that the company might close its doors and seek a new way of making money for investors? Should doctors be charging what THEY charge? Their services are quite expensive. What happens to our medical care when the state becomes the provider? Do you think that they might not cut costs in some way? Are they going to deny certain treatments? It already happens, even in this country. Medicare/Medicaid already denies coverage of certain treatments.
This is a very emotional subject. People are frustrated by the perception of greed on both sides. CEO’s run multi-million dollar companies. They get paid whatever that company thinks that they are worth and what the employer can afford. As is everybody.
I think accusing someone of no empathy without knowing anything about them will get anyone upset. This was a rude statement:
Hmm TP, my guess would be that you do not have a sick child who as been dropped from insurance, nor, I imagine, do you have an illness that could be considered uninsurable. Being able to place oneself in someone elses shoes is a valuable evolutionary tool that enables communities to thrive.
I happen to have a sick child subject to all of the unfairness and problems associated with the way health insurance is set up right now also. If that statement had been directed at me, I would have also been angry. I also agree with PWC and other’s opinion that insurance companies are private enterprises and deserve to make a profit. Otherwise they go out of business. Of course the structure of today’s health care market is directly attributable to the same government that wants to now control even more of it.
What is it that you want the insurance companies to actually do? How do you want them structured so that you would be happy? Of course, there is nothing preventing the government from opening their own hospitals and providing care. As long as they do not try to remove the private system, I have no problem with that. But, if the government is running things, what recourse will you have when THEY say no to a treatment?
@Moon-howler
You do realize that YOU are a culture warrior. Just one on the other side of those that you disparage. The culture war never went into the closet. Your side just keeps winning through attrition. It has the weapons of mass media and human weakness.
Is it only the opposition to abortion that makes you so hostile to what are very normal, very common place opinions of at least half of the population of the US? Why should they shut up? Why are their opinions less valid than yours? Abortion for them is murder. Should they not be just as outraged as you are about their supposed tyranny over women’s bodies? Why is their opinion that the 10 commandments on a courthouse lawn be allowed so offensive? It is what a majority of Western Culture and law IS based upon. The exercise of religion in public is not offensive or unconstitutional. As for the sex-based store, can’t you understand some people’s concerns over common propriety?
Sorry, Moon, but, as focused as I may be personally on the economy, our fiscal problems, and what I perceive to be a malfunctioning federal government, I have absolutely no right to tell the “cultural warriors” to knock it off. You and I would get the same response: a full-fledged lesson on the First Amendment, where in one brief paragraph was established not only the freedom from the imposition of religion by the state but also the full freedom to join and participate in a particular faith and to preach and advocate its doctrines and views in the public forum. I would get the same treatment if, for example, I told the Socialist Workers Party to shut up and go away. As a believer in the First Amendment almost to the max, I would not do either because I believe it would be right to bring me up short on that in a constitutional sense.. Moreover, since the Tea Party is not a “party” per se and really has no organization, despite the claims of some that they are leaders of this or that wing, I have even less of a practical leg to stand on
If I believe that the current issues I outlined are the critical ones which need priority attention and “first resolution”, about all I can do is continue to preach my own brand of political “gospel” whenever I get the chance and hope that it is persuasive. When I find an opportunity to opine that this, as opposed to that, is what will ultimately prove to be the winning strategy in the precise contemporary sense, that’s what I can do. But I have no power to force the issue. Quiite frankly, if I did, I would be afraid for the future of my own freedom of expression.
I spent almost my entire working life on battlefields of various sorts, either in uniform or in mufti. The oath I swore every time was to protect the American people and their rights regardless of who they were or what they thought. In so doing, I undertook a committment to guarantee the right of the “cultural warriors” on the Left to use their constitutional freedoms for purposes of issue advocacy so long as all this was within established law. I think the “cultural warriors” on the Right have to be accorded the same freeedom. If I were to compromise my principles in either direction, then I posit that the oaths I swore really meant nothing. Some things you just have to swallow and accept.
There was one time not too long ago when I was sorely tempted. Somebody told me angrily that, if I owned a penis, I had no right to speak out on the issue of abortion. I started to prepare a hopefully witty counterpunch but then began laughing so much that I started to choke on my coffee. I had visions of that person so pissed off that she was denting the keyboard and spitting on the computer screen in her anger. My next thought was: “What the Hell. You know you like people with a lot of spunk, even if you don’t agree with them.” But I am thinking of sending her the cleaning bill for the coffee stains on my shirt.
Wolverine, They are deluting your cause. I disagree with you that they aren’t the cutting edge. There is too much merging and cloning of ideas to suit me. They have the right to say whatever they want. They aren’t hurting my cause.
Let me put this way….if you are trying to see me on a fiscal notion and you have someone from Concerned Women trying to sell your idea along with theirs, my ears are going to shut down.
You have the right to speak out and I guess she has the right to think your opinion on said subject is irrelevant.
I would be the first person in the world to tell some strange man it was no business of his how I felt about abortion. I would probably say the same thing to women.
And the for the record, my public policy opinion is quite different than my personal opinion.
Cargo, no, I actually cannot understand someone’s objection to the free market if it is done tastefully and it is legal. I have said many times, if there are glowing neon lights with XXX and naked women wearing pasties in the window, then yes, I can understand it. However, if something is just in a store, you don’t have to go in to the store. What really pushed me over the edge on that subject is one particular woman getting up to speak. I am not quite cruel enough to call her out by name.
Now, moving on to abortion…it is a flagship issue. If I know someone’s opinion there, I generally can tell how a person feels about 100 other topics. I am right 95% of the time.
You know, I don’t really care who likes what. I don’t want someone’s religion dictating public policy. I don’t even want my own religion dictating public policy.
If I am a cultural warrior then good. I am not telling people what to believe or what to do or what to read or where to shop or how to have sex or with whom to have sex or where to go to church. Too many other people want to dictate morality and tell me and others how to live their lives. I am tired of people using their religion to be pains in the ass. Shall I tell you about some of the letters I have gotten, the insults my children have tolerated or email I have gotten questioning whether I am a Christian or not?
What kind of freaks of nature do that? I used to not want to hurt people’s feelings. Now I don’t care because the warriors hurt other people. I grow very weary of it all and take long breaks from it. Of course that requires me to not listen to the news, etc because the PITAS all have to rise up and again, try to put their religion up as public policy.
My big issue would probably be the establishment clause. Barry Lynn is one of my heroes. People may believe anything they want or worship any way they want. They can handle snakes for all I care, smoke peyote, and bite the heads off chickens (don’t tell Elena). I just don’t care. but the minute that behavior or those beliefs come to the public square as part of government, I will rise up.
It is perfectly understandable for people to think abortion is immoral. That’s their right. Many people do not feel it is immoral. That’s their right. So if a woman feels it is wrong, then don’t have one. I think having 10 kids is immoral. That doesn’t give me the right to run around and attempt to keep people from having 10 kids. Where do we draw the line on what is our business and none of our business? (for people who can afford and take care of 10 children, I don’t think it is immoral, btw. I just see no need in doing it.)
I would prefer to never have to think of these things. Everyone just needs to mind their own business. That would take care of a lot. An awful lot of energy is expended on things that just aren’t anyone’s business.
Insurance companies are in the business to make money – and because of the structure of our healthcare system, they are a necessity for most. This nonsense of negotiating for care, and choosing to pay cash is totally bogus – (yes, Mr. Hospital, I was just in a car crash…) or (Yes, Dr. I now that you removed my appendix, I have a heart problem). The insurance industry sets the rates.
Currently, they can turn you down for a pre-existing condition – I do agree with the current policy for the reason that if you wait until you get sick to seek a policy, you should not be able to get the policy. What I do not agree with, is that you can have insurance for most of your life, and loose your insurance (through no fault of your own), get sick, and you now have a pre-existing condition that is not covered.
To make this fair, the Healthcare reform is requiring coverage for all, by requiring a policy for all. This is how they are requiring insurance for all – get more people into the pool, and cover all. This is the only way to make it fair.
Healthcare costs are the stealth tax – it has been increasing more than any other cost – if we leave it to the R’s – they have shown that they have no intention of doing anything about runaway healthcare costs. What is your solution?? The status quo will not do. And to be fair, can you point me to where we get all this for free – a common misconception, is that this is free – you still have to pay for your insurance policy. Imagine how much we could save if we just removed the insurance company out of the equation altogether. The insurance company currently dictates your care – they choose the Dr’s you can see, the facilities you use, and the treatment plans – drugs, etc.
The non existent death panels should become a reality – there are many elderly people who are just not allowed to die because the children want heroic efforts made at any cost – people die, that is life – and they should die with dignity, not on life support for months in a hospital. The Healthcare reform had $$ allocated so that a patient could talk to their Dr about how they wanted their terminal care handled, but that was removed from the reform package – I think the elderly should talk to their Dr, and let their thoughts be known.