Obama Health Care Press Conference

[akoff 0]

I ****ing hate youpeople like you complain to me that they can never get in touch with me via email. no shit, your signal to noise ratio is so bad that I have created a filter to automatically trash everything you send me.can't explain how much the political FWD: FWD: FWD: RE: FWD: FWDs piss me off.

As far as hating me...well you have company from many othersAs far as my email habits out side of the 300 or so work emails a day....well they typically don't include political...they are lean towards golf, porn clips, poker chatter from our Thursday night game, more golf talk, more porn, more golf...rinse and repeat.

[strategy 4]

As far as hating me...well you have company from many othersAs far as my email habits out side of the 300 or so work emails a day....well they typically don't include political...they are lean towards golf, porn clips, poker chatter from our Thursday night game, more golf talk, more porn, more golf...rinse and repeat.

I consider myself fortunate to not be on any work email lists.

[Nimue1995 1]

I fucking hate youpeople like you complain to me that they can never get in touch with me via email. no shit, your signal to noise ratio is so bad that I have created a filter to automatically trash everything you send me.can't explain how much the political FWD: FWD: FWD: RE: FWD: FWDs piss me off.

THIS is what I'm talking about when I say that true threats get lost in the sea of false alarms. I've seen so many things fwd fwd fwd etc to me which all it takes is going to snopes and seeing that they've been proved false. But people are too lazy or paranoid to check it out. Then there's those that are so invested in believing something paranoid that they won't accept the truth no matter how much evidence is shown. To them whatever evidence is shown is just part of the conspiracy. That's why I want to know what exactly is said in this thing, not what someone extrapolates MIGHT happen under it. In other words, I'd like to see an analysis from someone without a particular ax to grind. That way we might be able to make an intelligent decision or write an intelligent letter to our congresspeople. But when we throw in a bunch of stuff that either isn't true or is overblown, we dilute the effect of our protests or letters. Henry, I respect your opinion because it seems like you actually take the time to look at things logically and don't throw a bunch of paranoid rhetoric into it. It's why I'm coming more to your point of view every day. Anyway, anyone have a link to the actual bill. And Henry how about looking it over with a more logical, reasonable eye and let us know what the REAL threats are, not just the rhetoric of the Republican Right. I know a number of us who are less well-versed in politicalese would appreciate it.

[brvheart 1,752]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6739615.ece

[Nimue1995 1]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6739615.ece

Relevance?

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

And Henry how about looking it over with a more logical, reasonable eye and let us know what the REAL threats are, not just the rhetoric of the Republican Right. I know a number of us who are less well-versed in politicalese would appreciate it.

I see three replies since your last big post that specifically address the main threats. The first threat is a lack of choice. Your choice of procedures, doctors and coverage (or optional lack thereof). When you cannot choose, that means someone else is choosing for you - someone who doesn't know you, your needs, or your preferences. Someone who cannot be held responsible for their decisions by private citizens (no suing / no judicial review) having this type of power makes me extremely uncomfortable. The second threat is the devastating effect this will have on the quality of care. Every single day i hear or read a new interview with a doctor who says this will increase the burden on their practice (financially) and their patients (through a reduction in the quality of care they are allowed to provide, the reduction in incentives for innovation or specialty medicine, etc.), while at the same time offering tons of common sense ways to lower the actual cost of the care. The most notable is medical tort reform, something I don't believe the bill even touches but would bring down the cost of healthcare more than any other single change. There are so many amazing ideas for reducing cost in books like Innovator's Prescription but no one in the government seems interested in even talking about them.The third threat is the further damage to our economy. Beyond putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work in the insurance industry (which, despite what nancy pelosi wants you to believe, has an extremely low profit margin as an industry already, somewhere around 2-3%), we simply cannot pay for it. We cannot pay for their conservative, backloaded estimates of cost on the current bill. Not even close. There's not a single feasible way to pay for it being even proposed. I don't mean it's not feasible because it will piss people off, there just simply isn't enough extra money in our economy that you can siphon off through taxes and still have functioning businesses.

[dapokerbum 0]

So, is there a way to refuse the healthcare? Say you don't want the govn't plan ... can you just save your money and spend it when you want to? Are they going to outlaw all private practices? What about plastic surgeons? Are you telling me that there is going to be a black market for boob jobs? This all sounds udderly rediculous to me!

[CaneBrain 95]

As if the health care debate was not ridiculous enough.....hello giant can of worms:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul_abortioncliff notes: government run health care would cover abortions for all mothers not just victims of rape, incest or mothers whose lives are threatened by pregnancy issues. This should be good....

[El Guapo 8]

As if the health care debate was not ridiculous enough.....hello giant can of worms:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul_abortioncliff notes: government run health care would cover abortions for all mothers not just victims of rape, incest or mothers whose lives are threatened by pregnancy issues. This should be good....

This is great news. This just killed the bill.One thing that is not being discussed is health care 20+ years from now. If we have socialized medicine, which dramatically reduces what physician can make, especially specialist, we are going to have a shortage on Medical providers down the road. Medicare and Medical are already cutting doctors income dramatically, if you do it anymore you are going to reduce the number of people who want to enter the profession.I have a very good friend and client who is a Podiatrist. He make ~300K a year, net. He is a good Doctor and kind of a prick. If he only had the potential of making 120K a year, he would not have spent 10 years in school and residency and however many hundreds of thousand of dollars for that education. He would probably have gone into business or some other field with a large earning potential.I know people hate to hear this, but many people become doctors to make a great salary. You will always have your philanthropists that do it for the love of saving people, but you will be tremendously limiting the player pool.

[SAM_Hard8 50]

This is great news. This just killed the bill.One thing that is not being discussed is health care 20+ years from now. If we have socialized medicine, which dramatically reduces what physician can make, especially specialist, we are going to have a shortage on Medical providers down the road. Medicare and Medical are already cutting doctors income dramatically, if you do it anymore you are going to reduce the number of people who want to enter the profession.I have a very good friend and client who is a Podiatrist. He make ~300K a year, net. He is a good Doctor and kind of a prick. If he only had the potential of making 120K a year, he would not have spent 10 years in school and residency and however many hundreds of thousand of dollars for that education. He would probably have gone into business or some other field with a large earning potential.I know people hate to hear this, but many people become doctors to make a great salary. You will always have your philanthropists that do it for the love of saving people, but you will be tremendously limiting the player pool.

podiatrists are on the same run of the ladder as chiropractors. odds are neither will be effected by any health care plans unless they outlaw such practices.

[Jeepster80125 0]

THIS is what I'm talking about when I say that true threats get lost in the sea of false alarms. I've seen so many things fwd fwd fwd etc to me which all it takes is going to snopes and seeing that they've been proved false. But people are too lazy or paranoid to check it out. Then there's those that are so invested in believing something paranoid that they won't accept the truth no matter how much evidence is shown. To them whatever evidence is shown is just part of the conspiracy. That's why I want to know what exactly is said in this thing, not what someone extrapolates MIGHT happen under it. In other words, I'd like to see an analysis from someone without a particular ax to grind. That way we might be able to make an intelligent decision or write an intelligent letter to our congresspeople. But when we throw in a bunch of stuff that either isn't true or is overblown, we dilute the effect of our protests or letters. Henry, I respect your opinion because it seems like you actually take the time to look at things logically and don't throw a bunch of paranoid rhetoric into it. It's why I'm coming more to your point of view every day. Anyway, anyone have a link to the actual bill. And Henry how about looking it over with a more logical, reasonable eye and let us know what the REAL threats are, not just the rhetoric of the Republican Right. I know a number of us who are less well-versed in politicalese would appreciate it.

Did it ever occur to you that you engage in the very behavior that you pretend to despise?You're asking Henry to look over this bill with 'a more logical, reasonable eye' and respond with truthful analysis, and not 'republican right rhetoric'. Do you realize that anything negative views regarding this bill will be seen as 'republican right rhetoric"? There is already plenty of research out there that shows a single payor system has too many problems to work. It's just troubling that this administration is so hellbent on using smoke and mirrors to 'scare' us into acting out now. Nim, do you not see that obama has to take care of his voting block, the people who got him into power? All of those campaign contributors are now knocking down his door, looking to shore up their industries.For example, bush enacted these tax advantaged health savings accounts. These are wonderful, because YOU as the consumer get to choose how your health care dollars are spent. People are so unaware of how much their health care costs with our present employer sponsored healthcare. With the current situation, we as consumers don't really have a clue about the true costs of healthcare, and our current model encourages overconsumption and overutilization. With these health savings accounts (HSAs), people are encouraged to seek out the lowest price and enjoy certain tax advantages. All of these choices that we enjoy as consumers will go away with a national plan. Providers will have no choice but to ration care. Do you see how rationing care is negative for everyone?

So, is there a way to refuse the healthcare? Say you don't want the govn't plan ... can you just save your money and spend it when you want to? Are they going to outlaw all private practices? What about plastic surgeons? Are you telling me that there is going to be a black market for boob jobs? This all sounds udderly rediculous to me!

As I understand it, you'll be able to waive out if you have other coverage, but if you want to make the choice to self insure or go uninsured, you'll get fined or penalized.I don't think there would be a way to 'opt out' of the public plan without incurring some sort of penalty.

[hblask 1]

So, is there a way to refuse the healthcare? Say you don't want the govn't plan ... can you just save your money and spend it when you want to? Are they going to outlaw all private practices? What about plastic surgeons? Are you telling me that there is going to be a black market for boob jobs? This all sounds udderly rediculous to me!

LOL at bolded...No, under this plan, there will be no way to refuse the government plan. If you don't take it, you will be taxed for it anyway. You are certainly free to not use it, but you will pay for it.The bill itself is not clear as to how they will outlaw private practice. Basically, it sets up a new department to decide what will and will not be paid for. Generally, when the government does this, they outlaw anything that is not covered. Would they outlaw plastic surgery? Who knows! That's part of the problem with the plan. They are asking for a trillion dollars (really at least 1.8 trillion per ten years, the trillion is fake accounting) and saying "trust us, we'll cover you...". Then, in 5 years when they stop covering the medicine you need, and make it illegal to have a competing private system, you are screwed. Their stated goal is to stop wasting money on unnecessary procedures. Well, it wasn't their money in the first place, so WTF should they care? But once you accept their premise -- that it's bad for individuals to spend money on care that some bureaucrat somewhere doesn't think is cost effective -- the only way to solve this non-problem is to ban private care.

[Jeepster80125 0]

LOL at bolded...No, under this plan, there will be no way to refuse the government plan. If you don't take it, you will be taxed for it anyway. You are certainly free to not use it, but you will pay for it.The bill itself is not clear as to how they will outlaw private practice. Basically, it sets up a new department to decide what will and will not be paid for. Generally, when the government does this, they outlaw anything that is not covered. Would they outlaw plastic surgery? Who knows! That's part of the problem with the plan. They are asking for a trillion dollars (really at least 1.8 trillion per ten years, the trillion is fake accounting) and saying "trust us, we'll cover you...". Then, in 5 years when they stop covering the medicine you need, and make it illegal to have a competing private system, you are screwed. Their stated goal is to stop wasting money on unnecessary procedures. Well, it wasn't their money in the first place, so WTF should they care? But once you accept their premise -- that it's bad for individuals to spend money on care that some bureaucrat somewhere doesn't think is cost effective -- the only way to solve this non-problem is to ban private care.

This is the fundamental problem between dems and everyone else. That dems think policymakers have some sort of magical wand and they know how we should spend our health care dollars better than we can. It's insulting and I don't understand how people are okay with their elected leaders acting so arrogantly.

[hblask 1]

Anyway, anyone have a link to the actual bill.

Good luck wading through this:http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.3200:I spot checked some of the claims in that email that's going around, and they look realistic.

And Henry how about looking it over with a more logical, reasonable eye and let us know what the REAL threats are, not just the rhetoric of the Republican Right. I know a number of us who are less well-versed in politicalese would appreciate it.

I'm not sure what you mean, I have no respect for the Republican right. I get my information from a wide variety of publications and articles, and weigh the information based on expertise of the author, political inclinations of the author, and common sense. I've also tried to wade through much of the bill.The biggest problem with the bill (and there are many) is referenced briefly in EG's post (a couple above this one), and that is the future of medicine. It's the same problem with all central planning. Economies are not made up of a couple decisions made by experts. They are made up of a million people making a million decisions every day. Central planning can work for a short time by imitating the free market. So it's very likely that Obama's plan would be good for two or three or five years, because all they have to do is look at a Blue Cross or Prudential or Health Partners plan and imitate it. But those plans became what they are not because of some central planners making up their mind but because of a million decisions by consumers and HR Departments to either choose one plan or another. In other words, people vote with their feet about what is optimal for society at any given moment.But once Obama removes that option, what will the government imitate? How will they control costs? What central planning ALWAYS results in is technology lock -- unless they have a free market to imitate, then they can always be just 2-5 years behind.I like to give a theoretical example to illustrate the problem. Let's say that Obama's plan goes through, and we have single payer and all other medicine is illegal. The next day, someone invents a new drug that adds 3 years of excellent health to whoever takes it. Should the government pay for it or not? Oh wait, there's a catch. It costs $10,000/month, and you have to take it for life. So, does Obama care cover it or not? If it does, we've just added $120,000 per year per person to health care costs. If not, we are letting people die needlessly. Which will it be? In a single payer plan, that is your choice.So how does it work in free markets? The same as it does with any technology -- the early adopters pay for the development costs. So Bill Gates and Warren Buffet buy it, and next year it's only $100K per year. This gets about 20 other CEOs to buy it, and the cost drops again. Meanwhile, because the company is making a profit off of it, they continue to work on it, and now it adds 3.5 years. In 10 years, it costs $10K per year. In 20 years, it's $1K per year and adds 5 years to life. This is the way technology works. By the way, when I first invented this example, it was total fiction. Now, scientists think it will be possible in our lifetime.That's just one example. Now, multiply that by the tens or hundreds of thousands of medical decisions that are made each day, for the thousands of medical breakthroughs that are exorbitantly expensive when they first come out. What does our medicine look like in 20 years? Under single payer, it looks like 2009 medicine. Under free markets, it looks as amazing to the people of 2009 as our medicine now would look to someone in 1989.

[Jeepster80125 0]

Fantastic post Henry.

[dapokerbum 0]

LOL at bolded...

Hey you're not supposed to bold that and make it readily available for EVERYONE to get the joke. That was a cleverly disguised joke only to appeal to those that read it correctly.Also, I agree with the above post of yours. However, it seems to me that RICH people are not going to buy into this plan. And I guess this is where I was going with this all along. Private Practice will still thrive in this country, but only the wealthy that can afford the penalizing taxes will be able to keep these alive. Do you really think Tiger Woods or Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are going to go to the same Dr's that we will be seeing. They want to see the best in the field and the best in the field cost more money! If I am a heart surgeon and I am the best there is, can the governemnt FORCE me into working for a piddly 120K year. No, I am going to set up my own practice and I will get the rich people who want the best heart surgeon, irregardless of the cost to work on them.

[Jeepster80125 0]

Hey you're not supposed to bold that and make it readily available for EVERYONE to get the joke. That was a cleverly disguised joke only to appeal to those that read it correctly.Also, I agree with the above post of yours. However, it seems to me that RICH people are not going to buy into this plan. And I guess this is where I was going with this all along. Private Practice will still thrive in this country, but only the wealthy that can afford the penalizing taxes will be able to keep these alive. Do you really think Tiger Woods or Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are going to go to the same Dr's that we will be seeing. They want to see the best in the field and the best in the field cost more money! If I am a heart surgeon and I am the best there is, can the governemnt FORCE me into working for a piddly 120K year. No, I am going to set up my own practice and I will get the rich people who want the best heart surgeon, irregardless of the cost to work on them.

What's even more funny is that Congress won't be covered under this public plan, they'll continue to enjoy their rich benefit private plans while we suffer on a public option.

[hblask 1]

Hey you're not supposed to bold that and make it readily available for EVERYONE to get the joke. That was a cleverly disguised joke only to appeal to those that read it correctly.Also, I agree with the above post of yours. However, it seems to me that RICH people are not going to buy into this plan. And I guess this is where I was going with this all along. Private Practice will still thrive in this country, but only the wealthy that can afford the penalizing taxes will be able to keep these alive. Do you really think Tiger Woods or Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are going to go to the same Dr's that we will be seeing. They want to see the best in the field and the best in the field cost more money! If I am a heart surgeon and I am the best there is, can the governemnt FORCE me into working for a piddly 120K year. No, I am going to set up my own practice and I will get the rich people who want the best heart surgeon, irregardless of the cost to work on them.

What you are describing is something similar to what is going on in Canada, where politicians and the wealthy get one level of care while the rest get descending levels of care depending on where they live and the political clout of the area. The Canadian equivalent of Democrats are trying to eliminate this two-tiered system by eliminating private practice. They are unlikely to succeed, because that would require politicians to vote to accept the care that they have forced on everyone else.It's not clear how it would play out in the US, but it is unlikely that an average person would be able to get a private treatment -- and we won't have a neighboring country to run to, like the Canadians do now when faced with 18 month waiting lists.

[Sal Paradise 57]

ok that's it, if I see any more questionable claims about our supreme leader's health care plan, I'M REPORTING YOU.

[JoeyJoJo 18]

ok that's it, if I see any more questionable claims about our supreme leader's health care plan, I'M REPORTING YOU.

For the record...

[grimtaash 0]

One thing that is not being discussed is health care 20+ years from now. My question is this also, only disregarding the doctor factor. In 20 years, we already have no way to pay for social security or medicare. How in the hell can we add universal health care on top of this problem?????

[hblask 1]

I saw a couple of articles from the news services over the last two days where Democrats are complaining that people are *questioning* them when Congress comes home for their break.Their response is to trot out the old discussion-ending excuse: it's a vast right-wing conspiracy.If you can't defend your plan, don't try to force it down our throat. If you can defend it, then do so -- something none of them seems inclined to do except in the vaguest of soundbites.Blaming the citizens anger over a government takeover of 1/7th of the economy on imaginary conspiracy theories just ensures a short stay for Democrats as a majority in congress.To Democrats: Read the bill, all of it, and then explain to us why putting a health czar between us and our doctor is good for us. If you can't do that, bury this bill as quickly as possible and go back to funneling money to the UAW.

[El Guapo 8]

Henry, I honestly would not worry. It's already had a touch time getting anywhere, and if they want to include paying for abortions for anyone and everyone in this thing, it will never pass.Most people I know who are conservative, but are pro-choice, are fine with a womans right to choose, but they sure as hell don't want to pay for it. I imagine at this point, as many things being passed are, this would be an almost completely partisan bill.

[hblask 1]

Henry, I honestly would not worry. It's already had a touch time getting anywhere, and if they want to include paying for abortions for anyone and everyone in this thing, it will never pass.Most people I know who are conservative, but are pro-choice, are fine with a womans right to choose, but they sure as hell don't want to pay for it. I imagine at this point, as many things being passed are, this would be an almost completely partisan bill.

I'm starting to wonder if this abortion thing is a political ploy. They know it will get people worked up about that rather than talking about how bad the rest of the bill is. Then, all they have to do is say "OK, we don't have any abortion funding in here, now you vote for it." It's the old "offer something horrendous then stick us with terrible" ploy.I don't believe this bill will pass, as people learn more it is becoming less and less popular. I think healthcare reform is like the mythical third-party candidate -- everyone wants it until they see the specific example being offered.

[El Guapo 8]

I'm starting to wonder if this abortion thing is a political ploy. They know it will get people worked up about that rather than talking about how bad the rest of the bill is. Then, all they have to do is say "OK, we don't have any abortion funding in here, now you vote for it." It's the old "offer something horrendous then stick us with terrible" ploy.I don't believe this bill will pass, as people learn more it is becoming less and less popular. I think healthcare reform is like the mythical third-party candidate -- everyone wants it until they see the specific example being offered.

I wish they put this much time and effort into SS and Medicare reform. They real Pink Elephant.