Congratulations to my fellow Democrats

[Unabogie]

It's been all night. Will someone attempt to answer my question?

What should happen to poor people who cannot afford to buy insurance when they get sick? Who should pay? All of us? Or none of us?

 

[Shalamar]

It's been all night. Will someone attempt to answer my question?

What should happen to poor people who cannot afford to buy insurance when they get sick? Who should pay? All of us? Or none of us?

In what way are you asking the question?

In all other Countries with some form of Universal Health Coverage, even the poor are covered, since everyone is. You, presumably not being poor, pay your 'premium', the poor, being poor, do not, but are still covered.

So the answer would be 'everybody'.

 

[Meadmaker]

It's been all night. Will someone attempt to answer my question?

What should happen to poor people who cannot afford to buy insurance when they get sick? Who should pay? All of us? Or none of us?

I'll take a stab at it. All of us, via tax dollars.

Of course, there's a trick to figuring out exactly what "can't afford" means, but that's a different story.

 

[Thunder]

Most Republicans believe that poor people who can't afford health insurance, and don't qualify for Medicaid, are **** out of luck. They would also get rid of Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, if they REALLY had their way.

Most Democrats believe that ALL Americans should be able to afford health care.

 

[drkitten]

Pressure is already building for Obama to abandon the empty promise he made for Stupaks soul vote.

Which Obama will probably do without so much as a hiccup.

I love how Sword_of_Truth knows more about what Obama will do than Obama himself does.

That's the fundamental problem with modern conservatism. It's not even that they're out of touch with reality. They're out of touch with being in touch with reality. To the point where the actual facts of the case no longer matter, because they "know" the truth is exactly the opposite.

 

[Thunder]

Which Obama will probably do without so much as a hiccup.

wrong. Obama will most likely keep his word, and sign the executive order.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

They can say whatever they'd like. But reality is reality.

Your allegations are all over the place.

ETA: Recall that you alleged that the CBO report that estimates the bill will result in something like a $138 billion deficit reduction over 10 years is dependent on the CBO making an assumption that Medicare spending will be reduced by $500 billion. I pointed out that that's not true. The CBO didn't start out with an assumption of a $500 billion reduction; rather that was their calculated estimate of the effect of this bill on a category of spending (that was mostly Medicare). You asked if I could provide details of how they did this, and I pointed out, as the report does, that this was done in Table 3 of the report--an 11 page document that ends with the figures of around -$500 billion for the bill as it is now, and the bill with the reconciliation package.

Do you think the CBO conspired to skew the numbers? Do the Democrats control CBO?

Or do you think the CBO's job is to guess which parts of the bill opponents of it are likely to undo in future Congresses and give an estimate of the fiscal results of those potential future legislative actions?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

JoeTheJuggler
The goal of this legislation was not deficit reduction. Obama just wanted it to pay for itself. The CBO estimates that it will.

But it won't.

So again, do you think the CBO intentionally skewed the numbers? Do you think they are no longer a non-partisan entity but are controlled by the Democrats?

Do you think anything unusual or new was done in coming up with the estimates that conclude that this bill will reduce the deficit by something like $138 billion over 10 years? (Aside from the fact that the entire one year process of this health insurance reform bill has been subject to greater transparency and far more scrutiny than any legislative process in recent history, that is.)

Just saying the CBO estimate is wrong doesn't cut it.

 

[MattusMaximus]

So do you think there is some kind of conspiracy going on? The CBO isn't non-partisan and has ulterior motives in making skewed estimates? The Democratic Party somehow can have the CBO do its bidding?

I'm sure there's a magic wand or mind-control device in the inevitably lackluster response to this question... somewhere...

ETA: Note to some here - the sun rose this morning. Life goes on.

 

[BenBurch]

It's been all night. Will someone attempt to answer my question?

What should happen to poor people who cannot afford to buy insurance when they get sick? Who should pay? All of us? Or none of us?

The Tea-Bagger answer;

"If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

 

[Newtons Bit]

But up till now it seems you've been paying for a BMW and quite often getting nothing.

Dave

I've actually been paying for a level of service quite higher than what I get. This is mostly due to the fact that my private plan, like all private plans, subsidizes the expenses hospitals/doctors incur from patients who don't pay (and don't plan on it) and Medicare patients (which the government vastly underpays services).

A friend of mines mother is on Medicare. She showed me her bill from visiting her GP. It was something like $25, $5 was what she owed. My CO-PAY for visiting a GP in the same provider network is $30. My insurance companies forks over another $60. That ain't right.

Healthcare in the USA wouldn't cost the private individual so much if all the gimmicks were removed from the system. But this bill does't do that. It adds more gimmicks.

 

[Newtons Bit]

So again, do you think the CBO intentionally skewed the numbers? Do you think they are no longer a non-partisan entity but are controlled by the Democrats?

Do you think anything unusual or new was done in coming up with the estimates that conclude that this bill will reduce the deficit by something like $138 billion over 10 years? (Aside from the fact that the entire one year process of this health insurance reform bill has been subject to greater transparency and far more scrutiny than any legislative process in recent history, that is.)

Just saying the CBO estimate is wrong doesn't cut it.

No, Congress gamed the system. The CBO scores the bill itself. Everything that's in the bill gets scored. Those are the rules. The Democrats in Congress put in $500 billion of Medicare cuts in the bill with a wink and nod and implied they'll remove said cuts later. The CBO isn't allowed to take that into consideration.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Most Republicans believe that poor people who can't afford health insurance, and don't qualify for Medicaid, are **** out of luck. They would also get rid of Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, if they REALLY had their way.

Most Democrats believe that ALL Americans should be able to afford health care.

God Parky, please put a sock in it.

 

[Shalamar]

I've actually been paying for a level of service quite higher than what I get. This is mostly due to the fact that my private plan, like all private plans, subsidizes the expenses hospitals/doctors incur from patients who don't pay (and don't plan on it) and Medicare patients (which the government vastly underpays services).

A friend of mines mother is on Medicare. She showed me her bill from visiting her GP. It was something like $25, $5 was what she owed. My CO-PAY for visiting a GP in the same provider network is $30. My insurance companies forks over another $60. That ain't right.

Healthcare in the USA wouldn't cost the private individual so much if all the gimmicks were removed from the system. But this bill does't do that. It adds more gimmicks.

The 'Paying for a BMW but getting nothing' is still Valid. You still pay into the system, but get nothing out of it, causing you to pay again for private coverage.

The new bill is only marginally better, but at least you can no longer be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition.

 

[thaiboxerken]

All I can surmise from this trolling of yours is that you cannot, in fact, back up your stupid claim. Wouldn't it just be easier to admit it than keep trolling?

Is it a fact that I'm making stupid claims, or just your opinion?

I ask this because it appears to me that you can't seem to figure out the difference between an opinion statement and a statement of fact.

 

[Unabogie]

The Tea-Bagger answer;

I'd really like to hear their answer, and I find it telling that only liberals are willing to even try to address the question, since it's so fundamental to the debate.

It seems to me that the reason no GOBaggers will answer the question is because the answer is so awful as to be embarrassing.

 

[thaiboxerken]

How is it incorrect?

I guess it depends on what you mean by afford, eh? 35K/yr for a single person isn't chump change.

 

[Newtons Bit]

The 'Paying for a BMW but getting nothing' is still Valid. You still pay into the system, but get nothing out of it, causing you to pay again for private coverage.

Indeed. However there's even more "off-the-books" things that are going to raise my rates.

The new bill is only marginally better, but at least you can no longer be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition.

I actually like the idea of preventing coverage for pre-existing conditions. I don't like the implementation. That said, I'm covered by a corporate policy. It covers pre-existing conditions. Mostly because it's an isolated insurance risk pool (I'm sure there's a fancier name for that). The company as a whole pays out ~7% more than what our total medical costs were.

 

[Kodiak]

They can say whatever they'd like. But reality is reality. Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin writes about the gimmickry in today's New York Times:

Give it up, WC.

Juggler refuses to admit that though billions will definitely be spent, there is a possibility that the estimated costs savings and deficit reductions may not materialize...

 

[thaiboxerken]

Give it up, WC.

Juggler refuses to admit that though billions will definitely be spent, there is a possibility that the estimated costs savings and deficit reductions may not materialize...

That's the problem with prediction, no matter how sound they are, there is always a chance that they won't come true.

So, may as well not invest in any retirement portfolios, or winter clothing, or make any plans that the sun will rise again tomorrow.