Click pic to embiggen
The map is from two years ago. While the Senator’s positions (and Senators) may have changed, it’s unlikely any of the costs listed have gone down.
Is the public option dead? Liberals fear losing it. The White House is pushing ‘curve bending,’ whatever the hell that means. Republicans, on the other hand, are trying to scare the elderly and spouting other blatantly false crap which hurts their credibility. And then, out in the far reaches of the galaxy that even Hubble can’t see, is Glenn Beck.
Shows you what an election can achieve.
This map was made before the last national election. In my state, it shows both senators against. When, in fact, the conservative Dem now support the public options – and the Republican is gone.
Along with the Republican members of the House, as well. Finally.
Yup, Bush and Cheney helped achieve a wee bit.
It’d be nice to see how the numbers have changed since these numbers were current, 2 years ago, and both sides hadn’t confused the issue with misleading and sometimes outright false claims about it.
So Obama still has to get his 2 home state Senators to support his bill, while McCain is on board?
Looks like this chart is off quite a bit.
Plus total health care costs don’t reveal very much. Of course Vermont spends less on health care than California.
I’ve seen in news articles that total health care spending is 2.5 trillion dollars. According to this chart, the total is 1 trillion dollars, so costs must have exploded in the last 2 years.
“Republicans…spouting blatantly false crap…”
This discussion is dead before it even starts…
There are only two ways to control costs, 1.)ration care; 2.) ration what you pay the doctors and nurses. Nurses already don’t make very much, on average, I know my Mom is a nurse. Doctors aren’t going to work for less, period. That leaves rationing of medical care and that means letting the elderly die and putting everyone else not part of the political elite on a waiting list until they pass on. You know care Canadian style.
Now if we hadn’t gone to Iraq or Afghanistan fighting for a NEW WORLD ORDER we still couldn’t afford this crap.
How to improve the Medical Care, you could outlaw Medical Insurance and allow everyone to pay their own way? That would drive down basic medical care costs, but then it also drive away the more advanced medical care.
If it’s working, don’t fuck with it. Something a Demoncrat can’t stand, because they can’t find a new way to make money off the people.
Whatever……………
Traaxx
6 Traxxx
“That leaves rationing of medical care and that means letting the elderly die and putting everyone else not part of the political elite on a waiting list until they pass on. You know care Canadian style.”
Is that you Bill O’Reilly? Cause your lies are getting tiresome.
Canadians live longer than Americans. And are generally healthier.
#3 MikeN
This is two years old. One of those two senators on the map from IL that was against it is now our current president.
Change we can believe in.
I went to “embiggen” the pic and our filter at work says the site is blacklisted under the “illegal” category.
Oh well, back to work then.
Traxxx, the current health care system is already rationing the care. Insurance companies get to decide what tests and procedures they will accept regardless if you need them or not. Not to mention all of the precondition clauses.
The current trends in health insurance is HSAs and higher deductibles. Why does it seem logical to pay a company for a service which equates to customers paying more out of pocket for health care?
Back on the rationing discussion, as a nation, it must be decided what percentage of the citizens will actually have health care. Is 20 percent good for the nation? How about 40 percent or 80 percent? Each of these percentages will have a cost.
Admittedly, I haven’t finished my first cup of coffee yet but something isn’t right. I look at Oklahoma and Texas and it shows all four senators as “For” a public health care bill? Am I missing something? Inhofe, Coburn, Conryn and Hutchinson?
Nearly 50 years ago Canadians were having many of the same arguments Americans are having now. Insurance companies were freaking out at the thought of “socialized” health care. Fear mongering was rampant. Even many doctors were against it it, fearing the government would rule their lives. Well, it came about anyways and guess what – the sky didn’t fall. Doctors now had more time to spend with patients because they basically had one insurance company to deal with (the provincial government) instead of possibly dozens. Imagine that – dealing with the government resulted in less paperwork! Doctors in poorer areas actually got paid instead of accepting chickens in lieu of payment. The vast majority of people no longer had the fear of a catastrophic illness bankrupting them.
Now, is our system perfect? Of course not, there is always room for improvement but I personally would rather live under our system than America’s.
#11: Read the remarks under the map.
There needs to be a public option.
It is the most important aspect of the reform – because the government can provide the most efficient insurance. It has the biggest pool, and its motivation isn’t profit – it’s the more helpful efficiency.
If they can’t sort out having a public option it will be a compromise to far, and make the whole thing largely ineffective I think.
If it’s working, don’t fuck with it. Something a Demoncrat can’t stand, because they can’t find a new way to make money off the people.
Well it isn’t working. People just can’t afford health insurance. Nor can they afford the high co-pays. Nor can they afford the imposed wait times.
Almost 50 million Americans are NOT covered by even basic insurance. Another 25 million are under-insured. Health Care co-pays are still the leading cause of personal bankruptcies in America.
Yet you did get the second part correct. Those that want to see the Health Care CEOs earn mega bucks while denying their clients the coverage they paid for are “Demons”. As are those who think the whole scam of taking money and then not paying for the coverage is great.
It appears that the map is backwards. It has both Ted Kennedy and John Kerry as “Against” health care reform. Those two are among the loudest critics, as are Dick Durbin and Barrack Obama.
Nope, the map is totally screwed.
[Again, read the text under the map — UD]
Public Option = Government Controlled Health care.
Lets not lie to ourselves here, the Dems know exactly what will happen when this Government Controlled insurance is put into place.
The Government insurance will not have to make money, and can run in an infinite deficit, and make up the shortfalls through taxes. Make no mistake this will drive private insurance companies out of business, since they will be unable to compete on price with a government that never has to to make one penny of profit.
In the end, when the dust settles their will only be one option, and since by law you would be required to have insurance or get fined, it would be defacto socialized medicine.
None of the politicians in Washington care a rats ass about any of your health care, don’t ever fool yourself into thinking that they do. Get it through your head folks, this is about control. You control a persons access to health care and you control that person.
And while allot of you may not have any problem with being controlled by people like Obama, just think what someone like Bush would be able to do to you with that much control over your life.
@17
‘There will only be one option’.
No – just look at other countries what have universal health care. The Uk for example, you still have the option to get private insurance if you want.
The insurance companies will need to change. And thats good, as that’s the part thats most broke IMHO.
‘Public Option = Government Controlled Health care.’
Sigh. No read the answer above. The government will control the government option. But you still have the choice.
‘Get it through your head folks, this is about control.’
I thought it was bout trying to improve a broken system.
It’s not like its untried – the majority of the western world has it. It works and is more efficient. And yet for some unexplained reason America can’t do it. We’re incapable. If we do it, we’ll run up deficits and care will be rubbish, and rationed etc.
Try this.
How does Arkansas with a population of 2.8 Million spend $13 Billion when a state like New York with a population of 19.4 Million only spends $46 Billion?
Mr Fusion wrote: “Well it isn’t working. People just can’t afford health insurance. Nor can they afford the high co-pays. Nor can they afford the imposed wait times. ”
I’ve seen nothing from the Obama or the Democrats that says what the new cost will be or what the new co-pays will be. So how do you know that this is going to be cheaper?
The Democrat controlled Congressional Budget Office says that the program will do nothing to reduce increasing cost of health care.
15,
Things look greener on the other side.
Video of Japanese Government fining Employers for having FAT employees.
Article on said Japanese policy.
Sorry on broken link.
Article on Japanese Policy.
#17, bob
Public Option = Government Controlled Health care.
Hhmmm, is that worse than the system we currently have?
While there will always be those who disagree for the sake of disagreeing, Canadians much prefer their form of Health Care. The British prefer their form of Health Care. The French prefer their form, as does Denmark, Germany, Italy, Norway, Finland Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, . . . . They all have longer as well as healthier lives.
It seems to me the only ones that like the American style of heal care are the right wing nuts and the CEOs earning $ tens of millions annually and lobbyists profiting off of them.
@ 22 Guyver
So have you actually _experienced_ the difference?
Finding some fringe articles really doesn’t demonstrate anything interesting – other than any system isn’t perfect. But we all knew that didn’t we?
That said – from your posting you seem to be claiming the current system is perfect or close enough to. If that’s you point of view I understand, but disagree.
You even weakly claim on TV that 80% of US citizens agree. Hmmm. Might be nice to have a link there – as not all news sources are equal. Seems highly unlikely to me.
Perhaps you should look at studies and articles that cover health care in general. In all that I’ve seen universal health care, is more efficient (ie costs less) and people get better care for their money. Ie a doubly whammy of benefit.
If you can find some articles from respected sources that demonstrate something different I’d be very interested to see them.
If not, then at best all this seems like scaremongering.
24, Or there are middle-class people who are currently happy with their present form of health care and have no desire to see their benefits get taxed regardless of how much money they make or what their occupation is.
If universal health care is going to be run much like the Department of Education, then we’re all in trouble. We have a growing population of people who are less and less educated thanks to our government and these same people are competing for lower paying jobs with fewer benefits. Imagine if we improved education by eliminating incompetent teachers and eliminate the teacher’s union what that would do to the average American’s educational background. People could compete for better paying jobs with better benefits. That won’t help the people at or near retirement, but that’s a far better way than to create another bureaucracy.
Ross Perot said it best when he said Universal Health Care will have the efficiency of the Post Office, the compassion of the IRS, all on a Pentagon budget.
Guyver,
i>The news this morning cited a poll in which 80% of Americans are satisfied or are happy with their current health care coverage / plan.
I noticed you didn’t cite your information, so I took the liberty of finding some polls myself. Does four neutral polls decide anything for you?
I am in favor of a single payer system for everyone. The premiums currently paid to private insurance companies is more than enough to finance a system that covers everyone. Yes, the same money currently paid in premiums would be collected as taxes, but this would still remain revenue neutral.
24, Oh I never said the system was perfect. That would be stupid to conclude that this is what I was saying. I’m saying that I am happy with what I have and see no benefit in raising my taxes or rationing off my benefits.
And yes I have experienced the difference. I’ve lived overseas and the systems are not better. So what? I also have friends in the medical field. Not surprisingly, none of them are for it. Scaremongering? Nah. Far from it. Sort of strange that the Congress wants to get this through before they recess. Seems like they want to do the “damage” before coming home to their angry constituents.
To the youth in this country: Get a better education. Great employers seeking better educated and talented employees offer good benefits such as health care. Public education is the root of this problem IMHO. Empower parents to put their children in better schools and things will work their way out.
For those at or near retirement, suck it up. We already have medicare and medicaid. Both need to be reformed and are already a form of social medicine. There’s a lot of waste there which can be revamped to be better than what it is. That being said, the Constitution never said the Federal government’s role is to provide health care of its citizens.
But I’m not a heartless, evil, greedy person. There is ONE way I am willing to go with universal health care. The catch is, we all go to a fair tax system and eliminate income tax. I can meet you half-way. But if you are a partisan hack and want to do class warfare with universal health care by raising disproportionate amount of taxes on certain classes of people then all bets are off.
Fringe articles? The boob job link was from my recollecting a posting made on Dvorak a while back. And the beef article quoted the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I’m sure you can find a link to that quite easily. The other links are from ABC and CNN news. Good grief! Fringe indeed.
“Weakly” claim is entirely your interpretation of it. I even pointed out it was from a poll and I think most intelligent people already know that there are fudge factors and some skewing of said polls. The key thing to note is trends. As for the news, it was either from CNN or Fox. I’m guessing you’re a partisan hack and will go ape sh1t because I might have used something from Fox. 🙂
Either way, Obama has the Congress till 2010. And at the rate he and his Congress are spending, it’s unlikely he’s going to have control of Congress after the elections next year. Best of luck. 🙂
#27 Guyver,
Ross Perot said it best when he said Universal Health Care will have the efficiency of the Post Office, the compassion of the IRS, all on a Pentagon budget.
And Ross Perot is a fool. We currently have one of the best postal services in the world. Service is fast and inexpensive. But then the American health insurance industry wastes 25% of income on bureaucracy. The Canadian system is closer to 1%.
Tell my doctor about the compassion of the insurance companies that refused a treatment for one of his patients. The patient died.
As for the cost, when you can pay your CEO over $100,000,000 then yes, you have a Pentagon budget.
Yup, sure sounds like Ross Perot doesn’t know what he is talking about.
#28, Guyver,
I even pointed out it was from a poll and I think most intelligent people already know that there are fudge factors and some skewing of said polls. The key thing to note is trends. As for the news, it was either from CNN or Fox.
The fudge factor comes from misquoting a statistic that is phony. It was good enough to use earlier but suddenly when confronted with contrary facts, you don’t know anything.
The trend remains, people want affordable health care that covers everyone.
*
For those at or near retirement, suck it up. We already have medicare and medicaid.
Fuck you asshole!!! Suck it up??? Suck this!!!
A woman I know developed a serious heart problem around age 60. She was let go from her job as a nurse because they didn’t have any light duties for her. Her insurance ran out. She had another heart attack but couldn’t afford the procedure. They did it anyway and she lost her house. In those four and a half years from when she first became ill until she qualified for Medicare ruined her life.
She brought her children into the world. She worked most of her life and paid her taxes. She and her husband built their house together(he died ten years earlier). She volunteered in the community. And you want her to “suck it up”?
That is one story, there are hundreds of thousands like her. Bankrupted because of medical costs. Your mother must be proud.
27, And none of your polls covers the one I regurgitated. So what?
The poll I referenced from my rectal data bank was referencing people’s satisfaction with their current health care.
If the polls you’re citing are accurate then there’s absolutely no need for the Blue Dog Democrats to be worried about passing the bill.
Claire McCaskill Healthcare Forum 7/27.