Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Published on March 22, 2010 By Draginol In Politics

People tend to project their hopes and dreams onto things based on their name.

They hear “health care reform” and they see their ideological allies supporting it and they assume it does all kinds of magical things.

For those of you glad that the bill passed, be aware that what was passed resembles nothing like what is in Europe or Canada. 

Here’s what it does (you can read the details at CBS News):

1. It “provides” insurance to 30 million Americans. How does it do this? They made it illegal not to buy insurance. Voila.  Seriously. That’s how they did it. If you don’t, you’re fined $695 annually.

2. They make it illegal for insurance companies to deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions. So the person with basic math skills who figures out that $695 annually is a lot less than $6,000 annually ($500 X 12 months) can wait until they get pregnant, diagnosed with diabetes or gets into an accident and THEN buy insurance.  Thus the cost will go far up.

3. They provide subsidies to make insurance cheaper. In theory.  Since the insurance companies are barely regulated monopolies per state who now know they everyone has to buy insurance, they can raise rates (this is what happened with car insurance when it became mandatory).

The right-wingers are going crazy about it because it socializes health-care.  The left-wingers are currently happy because they don’t realize just how much they got screwed. If/when this program starts to get implemented, I think they’ll start to realize how badly they got screwed.

People on the Internet who are from overseas tend to have no real understanding of America’s healthcare system. They don’t realize that the poor already get medical coverage for free (Medicaid) and that the elderly already get medical coverage (Medicare). 

So in effect, all this bill really does is make it illegal to not have insurance. 

Maybe they should use the same system to eliminate poverty. Just make it illegal to be poor.


Comments (Page 9)
11 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11 
on Apr 01, 2010

Cikomyr - speaking of the devil (the H1N1 Vaccine) this just hit the wire.  Pretty much sums up my opinion (except their stupid statement about it being a sucess) - Report: More Than 70 Million Doses of H1N1 Vaccine May Have to Be Discarded

on Apr 01, 2010

Thanks for the laugh

Just returning the favor!

on Apr 01, 2010

Dr Guy
Cikomyr - speaking of the devil (the H1N1 Vaccine) this just hit the wire.  Pretty much sums up my opinion (except their stupid statement about it being a sucess) - Report: More Than 70 Million Doses of H1N1 Vaccine May Have to Be Discarded

"Did we (the government) do as well as we would have liked to? (HELL) No, not at all," Dr. Anne Schuchat of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. "But the country (private heath care) did an extraordinary job of responding (even with poor government handling).

Note: My additions in RED to annotate what Dr. Schuchat couldn't say.

on Apr 01, 2010

Note: My additions in RED to annotate what Dr. Schuchat couldn't say.

Tell me. Why is your government so inneficient?

Seriously, what makes it so impotent compared to other countries' who managed to have a very efficient and universal distribution of the vaccine to anyone who wanted it? And I am not talking at the federal level, but also at the local levels.

I think that instead of having people who would work to make things more efficient, you have people who work to simply get rid of the government's potency (with little result). So you end up with a clumsy central government.

For a confederation, you sure are centralised. *sigh*.

on Apr 01, 2010

Tell me. Why is your government so inneficient?

It was designed that way.

on Apr 01, 2010

But speaking of eating their young it will be interesting to see how the teabaggers will fare versus more normal Republicans and how well either side will emerge from what appears will become some very bitter primaries for you. Remember NY23?

Calling people "Teabaggers" really makes you come across as pretty uncivil Mumble.  Is this the perception you want to express to others?

If I started referring to pro-universal healthcare people as parasites how do you think people would start thinking of me?

It's up to you on how you want to comport yourself but I can say that everytime I see someone use the term "teabagger" when they know the connotations of it, it makes me lose a little respect for the person using the term.

on Apr 01, 2010

Tell me. Why is your government so inneficient?

Compared to what?

Our state governments are relatively as effective as their equivalents elsewhere.

I'm not aware of any federal system as large as the United States to compare it to. 

 

on Apr 01, 2010

It was designed that way.

That explain so much

on Apr 01, 2010

I'm not aware of any federal system as large as the United States to compare it to.

China

/burn

on Apr 01, 2010


Tell me. Why is your government so inneficient?
It was designed that way.

The founders feared a strong central government so tried to make sure it would not get strong.  We were never supposed to have a royal class, but Reid and pelosi sure are trying to create one.

on Apr 01, 2010

Cikomyr

I'm not aware of any federal system as large as the United States to compare it to.
China

/burn

I smell the singed flesh from here.

on Apr 01, 2010

I smell the singed flesh from here.

I am SO banned from this forum any future game Beta

on Apr 01, 2010

Tell me. Why is your government so inneficient?

It was designed that way.

Exactly, because it was never designed to be the monstrous bureaucracy that it is now. No European government "manages" near the amount of people, yet I wouldn't call them the epitome of efficiency. The largest Democracy, India, is corrupt and unwieldy.

on Apr 01, 2010

It's up to you on how you want to comport yourself but I can say that everytime I see someone use the term "teabagger" when they know the connotations of it, it makes me lose a little respect for the person using the term.
Of that I have no doubt.

But when the equivalent is said in the other direction not a word gets spoke.

But then I'm sure you see no evidence of the double standard that exists in pretty much every thread on this site.

Well just because you won't see it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

on Apr 01, 2010

But when the equivalent is said in the other direction not a word gets spoke.

I'd be interested to know what term 'said in the other direction' you consider to be the equivalent.

11 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11