Vibrant Nation

Your link isn't fact - or what's in the bill - it's commentary about the Democrats. If you read the laws that were passed they don't say they penalize work, etc. That's a conservative viewpoint - not a fact of actually what's in the legislation. Lots of things are take out of context. Lets remember - there weren't any death squads but people believed it. These right wing interpretations of the legislation are for one purpose only - to kill reform. Folks putting this out have no desire to get it right - it's their desire to kill reform and they do it by riling up folks with info that's not factual. We don't have a system of government that puts program totally intact into place. That isn't going to change no matter who is in charge. I know so many women who need health insurance reform. Sadly, those who have insurance are preventing others from gaining access to quality health care because of inaccurate information that causes fear they will lose their own insurance. If we don't pass reform now - we will only get little bits and pieces (piecemeal) of reform - we need to take the packages put forth and come to an agreement. Lets stop people from going bankrupt due to lack of health insurance, or worse, dying because they lack proper insurance! 

Thishealthcare reform is going to bankrupt people--our children and our grandchildren.  Our own govt' financial arm -- the CBO -- is warning is of this:

Congress' budget watchdog warned Thursday that Democrats' health care bills would not lower skyrocketing costs and would drive up government spending, undermining one of President Obama's chief arguments for the overhaul.

The problem with BOs plan is that it does little to reduce costs and merely expands converage.  It is badly structured.  Until he tackles the real and underlying financial platform of healthcare delivery--this is the Titanic and we and future generations are going down financially.

The fundamental and very real question of how we are going to pay for this current proposal has not been answered.  We are tinkering around the edges, expanding coverage, and raising costs ......  and changing nothing else therefore we are making the current situation even worse.

I have posted many times on what needs to happen; won't repeat myself here.

I disagree totally. Unfortunately, our Pres has tried to bring republicans into the legislation by making changes and taking much out of the bill that would reduce costs, provide coverage, etc. with the use of the public option. You can post all you want on what you think needs to happen but some will agree with you and some won't. Sadly, no program reform will be accomplished as long as one political party wants to see the pres fail by saying no to everything. It's amazing how the republicans say they have a program to deal with the problems in health care and its never been passed before - until we stop listening to the insurance industry, and stop allowing them to use the middle class to fight their battle to keep profits high, by making things up and scaring folks into opposition, we will not accomplish any reform or deal with budget problems of the future. It's sad that a country as great as ours can't provide health insurance coverage for all - no one should go bankrupt because of medical bills. Women should not be penalized by a health insurance industry that doesn't respond to our needs. 

Your response is largely about politics and choosing political sides.....and demonizing Republicans and demonizing insurance companies.

It doesnt really address the specifics of  healthcare financing or real healthcare reform at all.

I am not a fan of insurance companies (not by a long shot) and I actually think healthcare should largely be non profit.  Hacing said that, they (insurers) have been almost solely demonized by the liberal left and many others too as it relates to the healthcare woes in the USA....and many other contributors largely ignored.

Do they contribute to the problems?  YOU BET.

But they arent it solely.  ANd by the way:  They aren't reaping profits the way it is portrayed.  At least not in comparison to other for profit industries. 

Health insurers posted a 2.2 percent profit margin last year, placing them 35th on the Fortune 500 list of top industries. Other health sectors did much better - drugs and medical products and services were both in the top 10.  The railroads brought in a 12.6 percent profit margin. Leading the list: network and other communications equipment, at 20.4 percent.

HealthSpring, the best performer in the health insurance industry, posted 5.4 percent. That’s a less profitable margin than was achieved by the makers of Tupperware, Clorox bleach and Molson and Coors beers.

UnitedHealth Group, reporting third quarter results last week, saw fortunes improve. It managed a 5 percent profit margin on an 8 percent growth in revenue.

The latest annual profit margins of a selection of products, services and industries: Tupperware Brands, 7.5 percent; Yahoo, 5.9 percent; Hershey, 6.1 percent; Clorox, 8.7 percent; Molson Coors Brewing, 8.1 percent; construction and farm machinery, 5 percent; Yum Brands (think KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell), 8.5 percent.

Now, does all that sound like an industry that’s reaping obscene, immoral and unfair profits and are willing to let the bodies build up" to protect them??

Again--I'm not for them and I blame them for their part.  I'm not crazy about any industry that makes its profits off of the misery and misfortune of others....I think it should all be non profit.

But as long as it is...dont demonize them when they aren't the ONLY ones with a piece of this.

I also blame the self dealing doctors who own their own hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers and self refer thereby double dealing.  

And I also blame the phamaceuticals for pushing drugs in front of uninformed consumers when a pill doesnt solve the underlying issues.

ANd I blame the fat, obese, drinking .smoking, lazy Americans for their part.  60% of our costs are due to poor lifestyle choices that just add up over time.

DId you notce that the Hersheys (think chocolate!) made more moenty than health insurance?  Did you notice that  COors & Molsom beer make more money than health insurers?  Did you notice that the fast food companies did? 

Get real about the real contributiors to the problem.  It is multi factorial and it requires serious, complete and utter overhaul.

Passing what is on the table just makes this Titanic sink all the faster.

You said my response was about politics - this is about politics - totally about politics. One party proposing to do something - another refusing to participate in any negotiations - Republicans have united against all legislation - even against legislation they sponsor - the "just say no" antics of the Republican party are affecting everything. Legislation is give and take, back and forth debate. But this is purely political gaming on the part of the Republican party - so Yes, I talk about politics because that's what it is - Washington at it's worst being demonstrated by the "just say no" Republican party. 

I talked about the specifics of healthcare reform, what it needs to be  and why what BO proposed isn't going to work.  You answered in political rhetoric and partisan pablum. 

I talked about politics because it's reality. This is all about politics - that's how the system works whether folks want it changed or not, that's the system, and voting people out and new people in won't make it different. You can call what I said what ever you want By the time the bill would have passed - much would have been resolved to work better for everyone,  (except for those who totally oppose any reform) had the republican party not wanted the bill to fail no matter what - they weren't done negotiating and no bill was yet set in stone - the House and Senate had different versions and what needed to be worked out had not been completed so you don't know what the final bill is (or was going to be). What I do know is that many, many women in need of health care reform lost out because folks wanted to see the Pres fail and this was purely political - it had nothing to do with what would or wouldn't work - it was all about politics - opposition to the Pres being in office is what killed the bill. 

Healthcare is too expensive--that's the bottom line.  The cost is exorbitant, the profit is minimal, and fewer peple have access.

Passing a bill that only increases costs and doesnt fundamentally change the way healthcare is actually financed and delivered is re arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.  It wastes evcen more time, makes a situation even worse, and accomplsihes nothing in the end.  Its ridiculous to claim it should be passed just to get someting done.  Take the time to change the fundamental financing platform and the fundamental way healthcare is delivered in order to achieve real progress.

The first link is an opinion piece based on a policy analysis of the individual mandate. If you had clicked on  the link provided in the opinion piece, you would have gotten the actual policy analysis:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11108   You will have to go to the bottom of the page to see the attached policy analysis paper. If you read it, you will see that it is an analysis of impact of the individual mandate which is IN THE BILL at this time.

You have dismissed an entire body of information based on your opinion of a source, rather than counter with contradicting information. The Cato Institute is Libertarian, which, according to dictionary.com is "One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state" as opposed to the definition of 'conservative', which is "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change." As long as information is fact based, it should not be dismissed because of the source.

From your statements, I assume you know what's in the bill. I am more than willing to go to any link you provide which, based on factual analysis, states how what is IN THE BILL actually 'reforms' health insurance. I provided the Cato Healthcare link so that you could read actual fact based studies, not to provide opinion. Yes, they have sections of opinion, but they post the policy analyses which back those opinion.

It's a slanted policy analysis. You can be as libertarian as you want based on the definition in the dictionary. We will not have adequate health care coverage by advocating to minimize the role of the state in this issue and in our country the state is very involved in regulating many industries that would be contrary to your definition of what you want as a libertarian - but I like those regulations - they protect us - now we need health care reform so that the insurance industry is properly regulated thru the involvement of the state - if not, there will be no reform. 

Did you even read it? It was calculations based on IRS marginal tax rates. I don't see the 'slant' in it. Now, if by slant, you mean they proved that something in the bill was harmful, then every article that brings up a problem in the bill is slanted.

I am not against some regulation. THAT is the role of the govt. The role is NOT to prescribe how an industry should be structured and run (as we see the govt. already doing with GM).

Actually, there are those who believe that too much regulation is what has created some of the mess. The argument being that when you regulate an industry to the point of hampering it's functioning in a free market, then you take away the power of said market to put pressures on the industry to change. The prime example in the insurance industry is the laws that don't allow consumers to take their money across state lines to a company that suits them best.

As I said before, if you have information that supports your claims, I am more than happy to read it. Otherwise, it's just more of the same.