General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUgh, I just read ANOTHER post calling for single payer
Last edited Wed Jan 1, 2014, 09:32 PM - Edit history (1)
Look people, grow up. Only two-thirds of Americans want Medicare for all. Only two-thirds!
Sure it would lead to better medical care at a fraction of the cost, but until a majority of Americans want it, there's nothing we can do. We're powerless, veritable baby seals beneath the Republican's club. You forget that Bush couldn't get anything passed without majorities in both houses too. OK, don't look that up, just trust me.
So stop talking about single payer - it's just an attempt by Republicans to divide Democrats for the 2014 elections.
Happy New Year,
Third-Way Manny
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
niyad
(132,442 posts)
Kennah
(14,578 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
- And it has cats! Everybody loves cats!Kennah
(14,578 posts)
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Give it a little time, and this should spread. Note that the VT governor is a small biz owner who realizes the business benefits this would bring. Note as well the last paragraph, with the history of how it happened in Canada.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Suckers.
Hillary, with a lifetime of experience and many policy wins under her belt (don't look that up, just trust me) knows that this would be a very bad thing. The lobbyists told her so. And lobbyists represent real people, people like you and me.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I just watched Al Jezeera do a piece this morning on Colorado's new law, and will add this to what the majority of silly Americans think wise.
Tax the shit out of pot and adjust tax the rich while instituting single payer cradle to grave… This would free up money to take the homeless off the street and free up so much cost with the employed.
I could go on…
tblue
(16,350 posts)Just difficult to get through a petrified (as in wood) Congress.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)1. Proof?
2. I trust that she's a politician, who knows how beyond stupid it would be not to approve this, assuming what you say is true. Even the right would point & laugh: states' rights, you know.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)that forces everyone to buy a product they can't afford from the Private Insurance Corps. Imagine owning a business and having so much influence over Congress that you get them to pass a law that everyone has to buy your product or face consequences?? I could be a billionaire too, if I had that kind of infuence, or friends like Rahm and his doctor brother.
But you know what? I couldn't do it. I would be thinking of those poor people who would now have another bill to pay that they cannot afford and who couldn't even use the product they are forced to pay for.
Just wanted to remind you where Hillary stood on this issue. 
merrily
(45,251 posts)She supported an individual mandate, while he supposedly opposed an individual mandate and supported a strong public option. I don't recall now where she stood on the public option in 2008, but I don't think that is important after passage of ACA.
Of course, Billarycare is a fairly good indication of where she and her husband both stood on health care.
blue14u
(575 posts)but supporting big insurance, wall street, and the 1% are not
any of them!!!!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)and Canada never had mandatory for-profit health insurance. What's your idea of "a little time"?
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Once business figures out the cost savings, a thing which the auto companies have already brought up repeatedly, it'll move fast. Even if it doesn't wind up at the Federal level, the entire Northeast (perhaps minus a state or two just because there are so many here) and on the West CA, OR, and WA will convert quickly. IL and MI will probably go too. Once that happens you'll see businesses start to relocate based on not having to pay for their employees' health insurance, and then the rest of the states will follow suit out of sheer self-preservation.
Critical mass, or the tipping point, if you prefer, won't be more than five years away, I'd bet.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)as if 50 years is some big success. I don't see Big Insurance letting go of their guaranteed 600 billion dollars per year for many decades. It will take them that long to figure out another way to get that money from working Americans.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)perhaps beyond reasonable imagination.
Meanwhile, the CBO doesn't even have 10% of the population even in the exchanges after twenty years.
We may see your picture play out but it will be over a much longer time frame and such an outcome is far from assured.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)What y'all are missing is that if the savings really are something like 25% - anything 10% or greater will turn heads - and it leads to VT having a much healthier economy (both of which are very reasonable outcomes) then the pressure for other states to do the same will be enormous. At minimum, most of New England and at least one big state outside of there will do it. After that the dominoes will fall pretty fast because then you'll have stiff competition for new business that these states will use over other states, and no sane governor is going to let that situation continue for long.
Not allowing single payer by a Repub prez (a viable possibility) would allow the left to justifiably scream "States' rights!" That would be an interesting change.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)overestimate the rationality of market forces.
They know good and we'll they would save, most are multinational and already operate with workers under universal health care.
Don't hold your breath awaiting any enlightenment of self interest to drive broadly beneficial societal advancement. I think the control and the drive to consume the commons will counter the bottom line especially as the drive to get out of societal responsibilities of any sort continue to run amok.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)A governor next to a state benefiting from single payer will find his companies moving over the border to avoid health insurance expenses. That's a powerful incentive.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)GM explained in the early Nineties that one of the biggest things to push them into outsourcing the auto worker jobs was how much money they had to spend on health insurance for the unionized workers. If it was something that the government was covering, they would have either not been able to use this excuse, or they would perhaps have stayed in the USA.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)But, um, it has indeed resulted in more lax marijuana policy and the ultimate decriminalization in Colorado. 
Kennah
(14,578 posts)
delrem
(9,688 posts)introduced it.
Canada has more than two parties and when one party doesn't beat 50% the different parties vie to form coalitions, usually with the Liberals joining with the NDP to get the majority. Universal health care over the whole of Canada was pushed through the Liberals in a minority gov't backed by the NDP, which packed considerable punch at the time. It's questionable whether the Liberals would have dared to do it alone.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)Manny is always good for DU.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Two-thirds isn't nearly enough to get anything done.
And, despite my snark, that's true so long as the Rs control the House, but I have to wonder if it would be any different if Speaker Pelosi held the gavel again. The world may never know.
-Laelth
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)things would have been different. Don't look that one up either, OK, we need more trust on DU.
In any case, we must look towards the future.
reACTIONary
(7,162 posts)...say what you will, you can't lie about the future.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The House wasn't the problem then. The Senate was. No plan would pass without Lieberman's vote. And the "Senator from Aetna" wasn't exactly going to vote for single payer.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Thanks in advance.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Well, technically a bill and then amendments to the bill.
The bill went through normal passage, and needed to in order to pass most of the regulations. The House passed that bill, and then passed amendments to the bill for final implementation details. Those amendments were passed through reconciliation.
merrily
(45,251 posts)That may seem like a distinction without a difference, but it is not.
Remind me of the efforts made to persuade Lieberman to vote for cloture. Threatened to take away his prized Homeland Security Committee chair, did they
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The Senate had no real mechanism to do so. The seats were handed out when the session started. Sure, the majority leader could do something unusual through the rules, but the most likely way to implement that punishment would be for Lieberman to lose the seat next session - that's what actually happens when Republicans want someone to toe the line, for example.
Problem is Lieberman was well aware he would lose the next election and thus lose the seat anyway. Not much of a threat.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Cave-ins, appeasement, triangulation.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)then wouldn't approve the bills for CBO scoring, then would let the bills come to the floor for debate or a vote. The theory was that she wanted save the issue for Obama, so we got not action and the debate was suppressed for an additional two years prior to the crafting of the largest corporate giveaway in history.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)
The limitation was the Senate, not the House. The Senate barely got it's shit together for the ACA as it is currently designed. Passing a far more liberal bill in the House would have just let Lieberman get on more Sunday shows talking about his "principled opposition".
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)off the table in 2007. If there was EVER a "president" whose impeachment would have been good for the country, it was the stupid sociopath from Connecticut. Even if it failed the process of impeaching that POS would have revealed so many GOP and Bush Family crimes that we would have been rid of both cancers for at least 30 years.
We need to face facts - at this point our party leadership stands for absolutely nothing. Their entire election platform is, "Not Quite As Bad". That is a losing strategy.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)So.....Senate was the problem for the ACA then?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)were speaker. She was speaker from 2007-2010. What we got for the entire four years were a far right republican agenda, beginning with letting bush and Cheney continuing their reign of terror, then when we had the White House and huge majorities in both houses of Congress, more Republican laws passed. Laelth put forth that if Pelosi is speaker again, something new will happen. That is complete bullshit. Nothing changed last time and nothing will change if it happens again
postulater
(5,075 posts)It has to be a majority of the 1%.
Until they figure out how to suck the profit out of a non-profit system, they will resist Medicare for all.
They will tell us that we don't really want it after all.
We should just shut up and argue about +/-gay issues or +/-abortion or +/-clean water or any other social issue they can get us to argue about.
Any way they can distract us from confronting their greed.
It is much more profitable for them to have us fight among ourselves over social issues than to allow us to unite and confront them about their rape of the middle class.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)Sid
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 1, 2014, 04:56 PM - Edit history (1)
President Hillary will have to grant them a waiver in 2017 if their little scheme is to be legal. And Hillary, with a lifetime of experience of fighting for working Americans and winning tough battles (please don't look those things up, just trust your gut), knows how divisive that would be, just a way of reducing Democratic turnout in 2018.
Regards,
TWM
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)And it would not be in the HHS's favor to stop a state from becoming more efficient.
Your argument is literally a troll. "Hillary won't grant Vermont a waiver because that would be divisive and reduce Democratic turnout in 2018." I suppose you're still in Third-Way Manny mode but you aren't signing your posts so it's impossible to tell.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I updated the post with the TWM seal.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Not all Americans live in Vermont or don't they teach you that in Canada?
handmade34
(24,017 posts)
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... amazing huh?
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Because it's a fucking straw man.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)how fucking awesome Obamacare and Insurance Mandate Care really is. Fools.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Kennah
(14,578 posts)
iandhr
(6,852 posts)If we use the terms single payer we get hit with "socialized medicine"
Most people in this country are unaware that medicare is single payer.
CTyankee
(68,202 posts)I love that quote...not sure where it's from, tho...
iandhr
(6,852 posts)
SharonAnn
(14,173 posts)Kennah
(14,578 posts)Kennah
(14,578 posts)blue14u
(575 posts)it medicare. I had no ideal that single payer=medicare...
Why in the world was this not made clear to me sooner. I am all for that!!!!
Now I understand everything!!!
Thank you...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)stop talking about single-payer ... and work to elect a Congress that will vote for single-payer!
And Manny ... stop with the myth promotion ... Democrats never have the majorities in both houses, sufficient to pass single-payer.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)We never could have passed ACA without Republicans coming to our side so we had 60 votes in the Senate. I won't look that up, because I trust you.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)We did have the votes to pass single-payer ... they just chose not to put it on the table.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Evan McMorris-Santoro
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) reminded the progressive media gathered on Capitol Hill today that single-payer health care reform was dead before it started in the Senate.
“It would have had 8 or 10 votes and that’s it,” he said, addressing a topic central in the minds of many who the bloggers and left wing talk show hosts gathered for the 4th annual Senate Democratic Progressive Media Summit in Washington reach everyday.
Sanders is among the few in the Senate not afraid to say he supports government-run, universal health care. But his calls for such a program have gone unanswered, much to the chagrin of progressives who still feel it is the best way to solve the nation’s health care crisis.
Sanders said it was still possible for single-payer to come to the U.S. eventually — but he said the road will not begin in Washington. If a state like California or Vermont ever instituted a single-payer system on its own, Sanders said, it would eventually lead to national adoption of universal coverage.
Sanders has put forward an amendment to the current health care bill in the Senate that would allow states to use federal funds to create their own single-payer plans, he said.
- more-
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-single-payer-never-had-a-chance
Really is important. As Senator Sanders stated, it will come state by state. Obamacare opened that door.
Single Payer movement in the era of Obamacare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024090281
Obama just launched single-payer in America
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024088437
Happy New Year: ‘Over 6 million’ and counting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024259698
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)It had EVERY chance had President Obama, Reid, and the party leadership come out and said, "You will vote yes or we will pull all your funds, primary you, and send your sorry ass home."
Obama got what he wanted. He got the MANDATES his insurance company buddies told him to get.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"It had EVERY chance had President Obama, Reid, and the party leadership come out and said, 'You will vote yes or we will pull all your funds, primary you, and send your sorry ass home.'"
...quote Senator Sanders:
"Obama got what he wanted. He got the MANDATES his insurance company buddies told him to get. "
Yes, he did. Not everything, but a lot of what "he wanted."
Happy New Year: ‘Over 6 million’ and counting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024259698
by teacherken
in an interesting piece at Reader Supported News dated yesterday and titled Obamacare: What's in It for You? Plenty, So Take Time to Find Out.
He notes a number of things that most Americans do not seem to know, in large part because of how the media has covered the roll-out, starting with this: the average increased in premiums of 4% much lower than the average of the past decade.
Here's a few more things people don't seem to know:
- 3.1 million young adults have been added to the insurance rolls because they cabn stay on their parent's policy until age 26
- $1.2 billion in rebates in 2011 and $2.1 billion in 2012 from insurers who did not spnd the requisite 80% of premiums upon benefits
- $7 billion saved on prescription drugs by Medicare beneficiaires as a result of closing of the "Doughnut Hole" in Part D
- > 25.4 million people on original Medicare program receiving at least one preventive service at no cost to them during just the first eleven months of 2013
We know the numbers of those enrolling are surging.
It is unfortunate there have been glitches in the rollout, in the sign-up procedures.
But the Affordable Care Act is working, and providing real benefits.
Now, if only the media would do its job and tell the WHOLE story.
Peace?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/25/1265241/-Wendell-Potter-on-Obamacare#
Really sucks that tens of millions of people will gain access to health care, and all Americans will benefit.
Thanks Obama!
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)We had the House, we had a Supermajority in the Senate (and Reid COULD have changed the rules in any case), and we had the White House. Our party hasn't had as much concentrated power in basically forever and yet even so all they even tried to deliver was a GOP / Heritage Foundation plan.
Did they even try? They did not. Did the President or our party threated to pull funding and primary the hold-outs? They did not. Did our party do ANYTHING to attempt to advance Universal Healthcare during this period of unprecedented power? They did not. They went with a renamed GOP proposal.
So the question is this: If our party wont even bother when they have a supermajority in the Senate, a majority in the house, and the White House -- in other words, when they have absolute power and the GOP cannot do a damn thing to stop them -- then when ARE they going to do it? How much more do they need?
And why should anyone waste their time and energy working to send them back to Washington again?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)I raised a bloody good question:
If they cannot get it done (or even TRY) with a Supermajority in the Senate, a majority in the House, and the White House -- in other words, when the GOP can do absolutely nothing to block any legislation we propose -- then why are we bothering?
WHAT'S THEIR PLAN?
Where's the Democratic Party's Contract With Liberal America?
I really want to know, and no more bullshit excuses. I want a plan that says: If we have this many Democrats THIS is what we promise to deliver.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"If they cannot get it done (or even TRY) with a Supermajority in the Senate, a majority in the House, and the White House -- in other words, when the GOP can do absolutely nothing to block any legislation we propose -- then why are we bothering?"
...was no "supermajority" in the Senate. Also, no matter how hard you wish it were so, Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson and Mark Pryor were not the same as Bernie Sanders.
"I really want to know, and no more bullshit excuses. I want a plan that says: If we have this many Democrats THIS is what we promise to deliver. "
First, it would help to stop pretending that every Senate Democrat is the same. Secondly, you say "no more bullshit excuses" like anyone here owes you an explanation.
I mean, look at the Senate, then and now, and figure it out for yourself. If that leads you to believe that a Democratic majority means nothing, that's on you.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)And if we have Senators refusing to go along with the party on major pieces of legislation they should face a primary challenge and have their election funding pulled. Again, they had 60 Democrats. If that's not enough, what is? Do they need a hundred? Do they need every seat in the House and Senate, as well as the Oval Office, before they will TRY to pass Liberal legislation?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"And if we have Senators refusing to go along with the party on major pieces of legislation they should face a primary challenge and have their election funding pulled. "
...support party unity?
Senator Sanders' statement on the budget
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024198275
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Nope, though if I were an insurance or banking or oil exec I damn sure would. "
...even they don't get everything they want.
What follows is a PARTIAL list of Obama’s accomplishments so far. Unlike many such lists, there is a link to a citation supporting every single one.
<...>
Wall Street Reforms and Consumer Protection
Ordered 65 executives who took bailout money to cut their own pay until they paid back all bailout money. http://huff.to/eAi9Qq
He pushed through and got passed Dodd-Frank, one of the largest and most comprehensive Wall Street reforms since the Great Depression. http://bit.ly/hWCPg0 http://bit.ly/geHpcD
Dodd-Frank also included the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau http://1.usa.gov/j5onG
He made it so that banks could no longer use YOUR money to invest in high-risk financial instruments that work against their own customers’ interests. http://bit.ly/fnTayj
He supported the concept of allowing stockholders to vote on executive compensation. http://bit.ly/fnTayj
He wholly endorsed and supported the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2009 that would close offshore tax avoidance loopholes. http://bit.ly/esOdfB http://bit.ly/eG4DPM
He made a deal with Swiss banks that permits the US government to gain access to the records of criminals and tax evaders. http://bit.ly/htfDgw
He established a Consumer Protection Financial Bureau designed to protect consumers from financial sector excesses. http://bit.ly/fnTayj
He oversaw and then signed the most sweeping food safety legislation since the Great Depression. http://thedc.com/gxkCtP
- more -
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/15/a-long-list-of-president-obamas-accomplishments-with-citations/
Ally Bank To Pay $98 Million For Charging Higher Interest To Non-White Borrowers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024208931
By Emily Stephenson
(Reuters) - U.S. officials on Thursday ordered the largest nonbank mortgage servicer to provide $2 billion in help to underwater borrowers to resolve allegations of misconduct that led to thousands of people losing their homes.
Ocwen Financial Corp must reduce loan balances for struggling homeowners and refund $125 million to foreclosed borrowers under an agreement with the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and officials from 49 states and the District of Columbia.
Ocwen failed to account for borrowers' payments, gave false reasons for denying loan modifications and robo-signed legal documents, the consumer bureau said.
In many cases, after Ocwen began servicing loans, it did not respect trial modifications that had already been agreed to by the lenders, consumer bureau Director Richard Cordray said.
- more -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/19/us-financial-regulation-ocwen-idUSBRE9BI0ZT20131219
Elizabeth Warren:
When I worked to set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I pushed hard for steps that would increase transparency in the marketplace. The crisis began one lousy mortgage at a time, and there is a lot we must do to make sure there are never again so many lousy mortgages .
CFPB made some important steps in the right direction, and I think we’re a lot safer than we were .
There is no question that Dodd-Frank was a strong bill—the strongest in three generations. I didn’t have a chance to vote for it because I wasn’t yet in the Senate, but if I could have, I would have voted for it twice.
Even so, the law is not perfect. And so it’s important to ask: Where are we now, five years after the crisis hit and three years after Dodd-Frank?
<...>
Powerful interests will fight to hang on to every benefit and subsidy they now enjoy. Even after exploiting consumers, larding their books with excessive risk, and making bad bets that brought down the economy and forced taxpayer bailouts, the big Wall Street banks are not chastened .
They have fought to delay and hamstring the implementation of financial reform, and they will continue to fight every inch of the way .
That’s the battlefield. That’s what we’re up against. But David beat Goliath with the establishment of CFPB and, just a few months ago, with the confirmation of Rich Cordray .
David beat Goliath with the passage of Dodd-Frank. We did that together – Americans for Financial Reform, the Roosevelt Institute, and so many of you in this room. I am confident David can beat Goliath on Too Big to Fail. We just have to pick up the slingshot again .
Thank you .
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/AFR%20Roosevelt%20Institute%20Speech%202013-11-12.pdf
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) took to Twitter on Tuesday in praise of the Senate's vote to advance Richard Cordray's nomination to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, calling it a "historic day for working families."
Elizabeth Warren ✔ @elizabethforma
I couldn't be more pleased that Rich Cordray will finally get the vote that he deserves. This is a historic day for working families!
1:11 PM - 16 Jul 2013
47 Retweets 26 favorites
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-cordray-vote-historic-day-for-working
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau gets busy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023372682
SEC Will Require Companies To Report CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratios
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023694931
Regulators Finalize Stricter Volcker Rule - Reuters/HuffPo
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024158305
NLRB to Prosecute Wal-Mart For Violating Workers’ Rights (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024053560
I got Obamacare. Yay!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)have to admit that some Democrats vote with the Republicans (the Lieberman Wing). So the "super-majority" included a number of DINO's.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)I am well aware that the votes were not there under the traditional "make promises, make excuses" Democratic party way, but sometimes the lie built into the game is clear enough that anyone who chooses to do so can see it. So again I ask:
If they cannot get it done with a supermajority in the Senate, a majority in the House, and the Oval Office, then when can they get it done? And we can even forget that supermajority BS, since Reid could have changed the rules at any time.
They never tried, and no one threatened the hold-outs because they never wanted any of that left wing radical stuff anyway. The battle between the GOP and the DNC is over which group of millionaires will get to represent and work for the Billionaires and the global corporations.
solarhydrocan
(551 posts)Mandated corporate insurance was wanted by both parties, but if the Republicans did it the Democrats would have marched on the capitol.
If the Republicans really didn't want it they wouldn't have run Romney. In addition to the fact that he's a liar and no one liked him, he was, after all the one Gov that actually initiated mandates to buy insurance.
These people get away with this stuff because most Americans have the memory retention of a Gnat.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts) Max Baucus wouldn't even allow a discussion of single payer. But we know what Max Baucus is. Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)how some cannot see through this betrayal is astounding to me.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)never recognizing our conceptions are often invalid. I mean, we all do this to one degree or another. But some, caught up in the adulation of a charismatic "leader", seem to be especially prone to making mistakes. And we all suffer for it. Sucks, BIG TIME.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Ms. Toad
(38,641 posts)Isn't the same as being willing to pass anything which is put on the table.
Progressive dog
(7,603 posts)We had 60 votes because Lieberman was still a Democrat and still supported medicare for all. I won't look that up because I trust you.
That liberal Senator from Massachusetts didn't die and get replaced by some Brown guy either. I won't look that up because I trust you.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)It passed with 51 votes through reconciliation.
We only needed 51 votes. That's it.
For example, we had 59 votes to allow 55-year-olds to buy into Medicare, but the White House made that proposal disappear because they had made a secret deal with Pharma and Docs to kill anything like that. Apparently, promises to rich people are way more important than promises to shitheads like you and me.
ctsnowman
(1,904 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Part of the program passed with 51 votes.
Other parts passed with 60 votes.
51 votes also requires passing the bill again in 10 years. Not a terribly good plan, since in 2020 we may have a Republican Congress and President.
Wrong, but lovely Obama-bashing.
The 55-year-old buy-in was proposed by Lieberman as an alternative to the ACA. Guess who went from the 60th "yea" to the 41st "nay" when they started moving towards a vote? Lieberman. The bastardtude of the guy can not be underestimated.
However, the main benefit of the ACA is it moves the battle from the Republican-favored Federal government (Low-pop R states get extra representation) to the state legislatures. Blue states will go single-payer, or de-facto single-payer via public option. Those successes will spread and destroy the FUD at the Federal level.
Political battles are never won for all time. The battles always continue, on every subject. If you want an example, Social Security didn't cover that many people when it first passed in 1935. We've been expanding it ever since and Republicans have been fighting to shrink it ever since. Guess what we're going to do with the ACA and exchanges.
WowSeriously
(343 posts)Someone who has been on DU before there ever was a DU told me the purpose of DU is to elect more Democrats, independent of policy. So electing Dems based on policy is strictly against the DU TOS, or so I'm told.
And as someone who's only posted a month or so, I can only do as I am told, or so I'm told.
But Happy New Years to all, I can't wait until November!
SHRED
(28,136 posts)...however when you step back and look at the tentacles capitalist health has in our economic system I truly think a gradual transition is needed.
In 2016 the ACA allows for individual states to experiment with their own single-payer systems.
I am confident we will get there.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"So stop talking about single payer - it's just an attempt by to divide Democrats for the 2014 elections. "
Republicans, that is.
Why nearly 5 million people would have health care if they lived somewhere else.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024260084
Why? Republicans.
Single Payer movement in the era of Obamacare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024090281
Obama just launched single-payer in America
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024088437
Happy New Year: ‘Over 6 million’ and counting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024259698
Demeter
(85,373 posts)unless you were talking about the people who count...the top 10%.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but there a maybe 100 in Congress (the house and the Senate) that might vote for it ... and they are the ones that matter.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)One part of the 1% - insurance executives - tells another part of the 1% - congress and the White house - what laws they'll pass.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Liberals like you just don't understand that "math" has no place in today's America. "Math", "science" and "reality" are how we lose elections.
Regards,
TWM
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)You have to see the small picture. Focus on the tree, not the forest.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)ctsnowman
(1,904 posts)
paleotn
(22,218 posts)Snark.
I'd bet much of that third that doesn't want Medicare for all is on Medicare. No wonder much of the rest of the world looks at us and scratches their heads in confused amazement. Americans....the richest, dumbest people on the planet.
madokie
(51,076 posts)This is the first step. I truly believe that.
What we need to do is get rid of a big majority of the asshole republicons in the house and senate. We can do that too if we work at it.
kath
(10,565 posts)Then you have a real problem.
Somehow we have to fumigate the huge Trojan Horse infestation (from top to bottom) in our party. Either that, or somehow establish a party that actually gives a shit about working women and men and the poor.
treestar
(82,383 posts)The filibuster is a big part of it, too. Allows minorities to stand in the way.
Thus we need even more Democrats, and how do we get them when the ones there get blamed for everything not being perfect now?
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)
Logical
(22,457 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)Third Way Manny is always right.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And quit passively non-voting and then complaining. Geez.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)and then figuring out by 2010 that they'd been lied to on many fronts. It will be difficult to get those people back to our side - a big shout out to the 3rd way Dems for destroying the party for a generation or so.
treestar
(82,383 posts)What an overly simplistic way of looking at things. If they'd rather suffer more and longer because they didn't get everything by 1020 I don't know what to say. Some people just prefer being victims, I guess. It doesn't give you much real power though. Just temporary emotional payoff.
Fine, be victims the rest of your life. Want something but complain that others stop you from getting it.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)office with anything other than the greatest mandate in 30 years is disingenuous, at best.
Instead of taking it to and working for the overwhelming majority of people that put him in office, he installed the architects of the disaster in positions to protect themselves and their cronies. Instead of taking the fight to the guilty, he sided with them and told the rest of that there is nothing else to be done.
The republicans didn't win the House in 2010, it was handed to them by the Democratic Party.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It doesn't make sense to say the Democratic Party is all powerful. It's bad enough claiming the President is.
There have been better mandates, too. And whoever was in the Senate was there. If some of the Ds are too conservative, it's kind of because they are from Montana, etc., and that's something we have to live with. But just blaming others in the party won't do anything.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)As usual, you've assigned claims to me that were not made. I can only suppose that is because you can't argue with the claims that were made.
But please feel free to continue backing people for whom your losing is their win, I'm sure that eventually it will all be just fine.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Had bigger majorities in Congress at a time when the filibuster was not abused and invoked for everything.
How am I "losing" if a conservative state like Montana send a conservative Democrat? I "lose" more if they send a Republican.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)he managed to completely reverse the course of this nation.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)They got mandatory marriage to insurance profiteers
They were promised re-negotiation of NAFTA - they got TPP
They were promised support for labor - they got the president cheering for the wholesale purge of RI teachers.
They were promised support for teachers - they got Arne Duncan and Michelle Rhee pitching Jeb Bush's education scam
They were promised that candidate Obama would specifically not support chained CPI for SS - they got president offering chained CPI for SS.
they were promised that the Bush Billionaires' Tax cut would expire - they got an extension.
They also didn't get prosecution of the banksters, instead getting Tim Geithner back again.
And, then, as a final kick, they were told that the huge majorities and mandate they'd given the Dems in 2008 "wasn't enough - we can't do anything with 60 Senators and 250 House members. The Repukes still run the show".
Like I said, the 3rd way Dems cost us an entire generation of voters. I hope your personal crush on the president is deep enough to overcome that
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The Third Way tries very hard to keep these discussions free of actual history and policies.
Thank you for putting in black and white the lies and betrayals that Third Way infiltration and corporate ownership of our party now perpetrate on us as a matter of course.
It will not stop until Democrats stop tolerating it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)in the face of opposition from other branches of the government.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)duplicity hurt the party in 2010. and of course there is the ongoing torture, the wars, the failure to raise the minimum wage, drones, the NSA, Don Siegelman, and so forth.
We don't have the media backing that the Repukes do. We actually have to earn the votes by doing what voters want done. Harry & Nancy & The Prez failed at this in 2009-2010, through either incompetence or complicity. That was extremely costly.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Democrat get through, you know.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It does not rule over us. The party is the vehicle for getting somewhat like minded people elected. We have to work for those candidates, not wait for the party to provide them. Passivity brings about candidates that represent the people who do the stuff to get the candidates put forth.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)know how the game is played and who writes the rules.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Then it seems best to attempt to become the dictator or part of the elite yourself, doesn't it? What are the rest of us to do about it if our votes don't really matter? It it's a game, then learn to play it to win instead blaming the people who don't play it so well.
Frankly I don'ts subscribe to that much cynicism. It may be temporarily emotionally gratifying, but that's it.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)When the law is against you, argue the facts.
When the facts are against you, argue the law.
When the law and the facts are against you, call the other lawyer names.
treestar
(82,383 posts)What law? None of it is working, per you, so why aren't you planning a revolution? You seem to claim our elections don't matter, so what are the rest of us to do? What you tell us? We seem, as a group, to be voting wrongly or unable to control our votes.
If it's all a game and we have no democracy, how to you propose we get one? Just complaining on DU does not appear to be working.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And I promise never to look it up.
Ignorance is strength as we all know.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)plans; no out-of-pocket caps; deductibles; co-insurance; have to buy a supplement; not as cheap as folks think; limited nursing home care; private insurance companies administer claims at local level; etc.
While I think it would be an improvement and would support it, I think people would still gripe.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)I (because it's easy for me!!) love the plan. It's all inclusive (HMO style)...I picked the doctors group and that was it...easy...includes everything and meds.
We are VERY lucky that the group is really large...she has 5 doctors in the group and are all around the primary hospital's medical complex.
It got my goat when Prez O was bashing the Advantage plans...I never thought that he even understood what they were.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)SharonAnn
(14,173 posts)While started as a "privatization", they lobbied to receive an extra 15% to cover their costs (and pay their executives highly).
If they were truly competitive, or better than Medicare, they would've done it for the same cost as Medicare.
The issue was that the U.S. taxpayer was paying them more than for Medicare and the companies thought they were entitled to it.
There's nothing wrong with Medicare Advantage as long as they do it for the same cost as Medicare. If they can't, then they should accept Medicare costs and charge the subscriber the difference. Let people pay the difference if they want that "extra " coverage.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)caps, expand coverage in rural areas, and the like.
They also handled claims that private insurers handle for traditional Medicare.
Fact is, in less than 10 years of being in existence, over 28% of Medicare beneficiaries voluntarily choose to enroll in Medicare Advantage.
I think studies will show that by coordinating care -- which traditional Medicare does not -- that Advantage plans will show better outcomes (that is the main reason Obamacare includes incentives for Accountable Care Organizations in the legislation).
In fact, those Advantage Plans that improve quality will receive more. I think that is an important incentive.
http://kff.org/medicare/fact-sheet/medicare-advantage-fact-sheet/
iemitsu
(3,891 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)
truth2power
(8,219 posts)I read this about a week ago. Can't remember where.
We need single payer. The problems with the ACA will be massive, and will surface in time (I'm not talking about the website problems).
A While back I posted a link to an article from Truthout, (10/30/2013) titled "Obamacare: The Biggest Insurance Scam in History", by Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers. It was a cogent article about what the pitfalls ACTUALLY are, and caused me to conclude that many people who are enrolled are going to suffer buyer's remorse. It's only a matter of time.
Predictably, it was attacked by those whose job it is to support the unsupportable. AFAIK no one actually addressed any of the points in the article, but instead engaged in attacking the messenger and/or leaving drive-by comments that contributed absolutely nothing to the conversation. That this passes for 'discussion' here is really shameful. I would have liked to have someone refute the claims made in the article, if possible.
I can be patient, though. It will all come out in the wash, and then maybe a real discussion can be had.
mdbl
(8,650 posts)That's where you can start cutting overhead.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)that's what they can keep legally. I good guess would be that they will devote 50% of their revenues to health care. 20% will go to legal profit, 10% to skimming, 10% to bureaucratic attempts to deny their members care, and 10% for lobbying costs to make it more corporation-friendly. Of course only 97% of medicare bucks go for health care, proving beyond a doubt that "government-run health care" doesn't work.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)same old material. sort of evocative of the later Elvis years when he became a boring bloated parody of himself.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
FatBuddy
(376 posts)then we are well and truly fucked.
Response to FatBuddy (Reply #57)
Name removed Message auto-removed
FatBuddy
(376 posts)it was a handout to the insurance lobby.
people need healthcare, not insurance.
it's called double dipping. those taxes we pay? yeah, they would more than cover programs similar to Britain's National Health Service.
anything else is corporatist propaganda and insurance industry apologia.
it's true. More than 17 million people become eligible for Medicaid.
The bottom 26 percent of income earners are eligible for Medicaid under the expanded rules. That's nearly 17 million newly eligible people, and millions more will qualify for subsidies.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024227754
FatBuddy
(376 posts)not good enough
"there are approximately 313.9 million people in the US"
The majority of Americans have employer-based coverage. In 2010, people got a taste of the furor when Republicans started pushing that Obama was going to take away people's employer-based coverage.
Think the outcry over losing junk policies was anything?
Obamacare targets the 47 million uninsured. As a result, 17 million gain access to health care via Medicaid, and tens of millions more are eligible for subsidies.
I know, that's something to be pissed off about when one needs to be outraged by something.
FatBuddy
(376 posts)water carrying
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Deal with it.
Happy New Year: ‘Over 6 million’ and counting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024259698
"US health reform's Gettysburg moment"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024260968
FatBuddy
(376 posts)yawn
Thanks to all Democrats who stood by and supported the health care law.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024227754
FatBuddy
(376 posts)propaganda is tiresome because it is bullshit
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127832
FatBuddy
(376 posts)or just a link posting algorithm?
get back to me when you have a personal opinion.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)I got Obamacare!
Yay!
Thanks Obama!
FatBuddy
(376 posts)cool post bro
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Seems like projection.
FatBuddy
(376 posts)just an opinion. i'm not smart enough to use internet psychology.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)it's called sarcasm, but they can't program THAT into a link posting algorithm, now can they?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)
...and this (my favorite)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Since you have all the info,
[font size=3]How many $BILLIONS$ of Taxpayer Dollars will we NOW be shoveling into the Private Pockets of the Health Insurance Corporations EVERY YEAR?[/font]
Did you know that this "Industry":
*Manufactures NOTHING
*Creates NO Value Added Wealth
*Maintains NO inventory
*Performs NO useful service
*Is the incestuous 1st Cousin of Wall Street?
Are you aware that the Taxpayers are NOW subsidizing this worthless, Black Hole Money Pit for the RICH and well connected?
So How many BILLIONS are we now pouring into their pockets every year?
Great work... if you can find it.
BILLIONS for NOTHING...now THAT is "The Uniquely American Solution".
Please don't get upset if I can't join your 3rd Way MISSION ACCOMPLISHED parade.
marble falls
(71,932 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Just what trust are you trying to save?
valerief
(53,235 posts)polichick
(37,626 posts)that makes sure the economy, through insurance companies, does well.
We're lucky to have insurance companies!
FatBuddy
(376 posts)polichick
(37,626 posts)are true patriots - they'd never steer us wrong!
part of the heritage foundation plan included a pathway to nationalized healthcare.
/sarcasm
Response to polichick (Reply #59)
Name removed Message auto-removed
polichick
(37,626 posts)"the cornerstone of Obamacare, was originally a conservative idea. It was first proposed by the Heritage Foundation in 1989"
A Dem idea is universal, single-payer healthcare.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Your posts light up my life and help me keep a flicker of hope burning.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Hopefully the new year will bring you much-needed help, so you can become more sensble.
solarhydrocan
(551 posts)
Baucus’s Raucous Caucus: Doctors, Nurses and Activists Arrested Again for Protesting Exclusion of Single-Payer Advocates at Senate Hearing on Healthcare
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/13/baucus_raucus_caucus_doctors_nurses_and
Karen Ignagni estimates the size of one of her balls:
Max Baucus, after calling Obamacare a "Train Wreck" skated out of DC. But it looks like he'll still be able to feed his family:
In December, President Barack Obama nominated Baucus to be the U.S. ambassador to China.
http://billingsgazette.com/sen-max-baucus-nominated-for-ambassadorship/article_ce8a3aff-d623-5f0f-beda-5f89830b9d20.html
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Thanks for the reminder about Baucus and the Senate Hearing.
The whole Health Care Reform game was rigged from the start,
but aside from that, did you enjoy the Political Kabuki Theater that year?
They had the scripting down pat,
and the casting was great.
Lieberman had nothing to lose, so he Took One for Team DLC by playing Judas, and was well rewarded.
For his performance, he was welcomed back into the Club of Democratic Party Establishment Elites with open, loving arms.
Did you hear what happened to the Wicked Witch from Arkansas who killed the Public Option?
The Arkansas Democratic Primary was a heart breaking eye opener for the Grass Roots and Organized LABOR. We were given a Look Behind the Curtain, and it wasn't very pretty.
[font size=3]We did EVERYTHING right in Arkansas in 2010.
We did EXACTLY what the White House asked us to do to "give the President Progressives in Congress that would work with him."[/font]
We organized and supported Lt Governor Bill Halter, the Pro-LABOR/ Pro-Health Care challenger to DINO Obstructionist Blanche Lincoln.
Halter was:
* Polling BETTER against the Republicans in the upcoming General Election,
*was popular in Arkansas in his OWN right,
*had an Up & Running Political machine,
* had a track record of winning elections (Lt. Governor)
*Had the full backing of Organized LABOR and The Grass Roots
*was handing Blanche her Anti-LABOR ass in The Primary until the White House stepped in
*Blanche was actually CAMPAIGNING on taking credit for stopping the Obama Agenda!
Guess what happened.
Our BIGGEST enemy to bringing "change" to The Senate was NOT The "Obstructionist" Republicans.
NO!
Our BIGGEST obstruction to bringing "change" to The Senate was The Obama White House!
The White House stepped in at the last minute to save Blanche's failing primary campaign with an Oval Office Endorsement of The Witch that Wrecked the Obama Agenda,
and Bill Clinton was dispatched on a Campaign Tour for Blanche around the state bashing Organized LABOR and "Liberals" at every opportunity.
President Obama's smiling Oval Office Endorsement of DINO Blanche Lincoln played around the clock, 24/7 in Arkansas in the week leading up to the Run Off Primary Election. The Democratic Party spent some serious money to protect Lincoln in this Democratic Primary.
White House steps in to rescue Lincoln’s Primary Campaign in Arkansas
* Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure.
*Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests.
*The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln — a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just don’t have the votes for.
<snip>
What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse we’ve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesn’t have 60 votes to pass good legislation, it’s not Obama’s fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face.
Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you don’t support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but we’ll support a primary challenger against you. Obama’s support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"
<much more>
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/
When the supporters of Pro-LABOR Lt Gov Bill Halter asked the White House WHY they had chosen to throw their full support behind Lincoln at the last minute, rescuing her failing campaign, the answer was ridicule and insults to Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots.
Ed Schultz sums up my feeling perfectly in the following clip.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ed-schultz-if-it-wasnt-labor-barack-obama-
After the Arkansas Democratic Primary, many Grass Roots Activists working for a better government concluded that the current Democratic Party Leadership preferred to GIVE this Senate Seat to a Big Business Republican rather than taking the risk that a Pro-LABOR Democrat might win it.
This was greatly reinforced by the Insults & Ridicule to LABOR from the White House after their Primary "victory" over Organized LABOR & the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Democratic Primary.
Of course, as EVERYBODY predicted, Lincoln lost badly in the General Election, giving that Senate Seat to The Republicans.
So what did the White House gain by Stomping Down Labor and the Grass Roots?
We don't know.
The White House has never responded to our questions with an explanation, only insults and more ridicule.
...and NOW Baucus gets a plum Ambassadorship.
I'm glad that he is out of our country,
but would prefer to see him in Turkmenistan.
Do you find it odd that those who obstruct the Traditional Democratic Party Agenda are rewarded with wealth & power,
while those who work to advance the agenda of the Working Class are marginalized, exiled and shunned?
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises or excuses.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)he actually gave away a Senate seat to a right-wing Republican, rather than have a pro-labor Dem get it. Maybe I shouldn't have wasted my vote in 2012. this is actually worse than I thought.
solarhydrocan
(551 posts)Remember what Keith Olbermann had to say about this?
The definition of "hardcore".
ctsnowman
(1,904 posts)Haven't watched MSNBC much since he was canned.
TFTP
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Can someone tell me what single-payer advocate "is involved in health care reform in the United States, working to benefit all Americans"??
bvar22
(39,909 posts)All the Smart Money on Wall Street believes that the ACA gold mine for the Insurance Cartel.
*Mandated "customers"
*Automatic $BILLIONS$ from the US Treasury
*Guaranteed 20% Skim of the Top.
Great Payday for an Industry that manufactures NOTHING
and performs no useful service.
In fact, that IS the "Uniquely American 3rd Way Solution"!
However, to be fair,
this WILL Stimulate the Economy of the
*Builders of private Executive Jets
*The Housing Market for Summer Homes in Aspen
*The builders of luxury Yachts.
...so the ACA has THAT going for it too!
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)...which is why we're in the spot we're in, Manny.
Screaming that if you can't get the whole loaf people should have nothing at all, is fine when you're some rich over-entitled ideologue who is well off enough to have hours of spare time to write screeds on the D.U. However, when you're someone who is literally starving for healthcare (as in, choose between food and doctor), half a loaf looks pretty tasty.
And that's what millions of people have now, and are absolutely overjoyed for the President and Democrats giving it to them.
Happy 2014, you old screaming hater. Happy New Year.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Absolutely! And you can show us the polling for that so we can shut these moonbat lefties up! Right?
Regards,
TWM
PS:
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)So if you like single payer just sit down and STFU. You should be happy the insurance companies give you heath care. Some people are never satisfied.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)
The ACA is good, but single payer, no restriction health insurance would be so much better.
KG
(28,795 posts)or something!
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...than the rest of the civilized WORLD takes for Granted.
We should be HAPPY to subsidize another parasitic Industry with BILLIONS from our treasury every YEAR!.
YAY ObamaCare!
Which Way to the 3rd Way Mission Accomplished Parade?
Karma13612
(4,982 posts)to a work colleague the other day.
I explained that it finally breaks the link between employment and healthcare.
I explained in broad strokes that all working people will pay into the system so that it is funded.
I explained that it won't matter if you are working or find yourself unemployed, you are still covered.
Her response:
How do you pay the premiums when you are unemployed?
I then explained that you wouldn't pay if you were not employed. (at least that is how it worked in England when I lived there)
Her next response:
Then, there won't be an incentive for people to work.
I explained how it meant being free to decide what you want to do for work, not having it be dictated by the quality of healthecare the employer offers. But, it didn't get thru.
I know I was weak on my explanation, but fear that in this country, people are so brain washed that we are only valid human beings, if we are employed.
Really sad.
pacalo
(24,857 posts)
Good post!
Zorra
(27,670 posts)subsidized healthcare plans and are gonna want to get some of that good Obamacare pie for themselves.
I mean, this is a democracy, after all.
I got mine, and I want you to have yours too.
H2O Man
(79,053 posts)when a tiny majority wants to impose its will on those making a fortune off human suffering. Is nothing sacred?
Recommended, and thank you!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)profits. When the two clash, profits rule every time.
pacalo
(24,857 posts)The snark makes it impressively effective. You made me smile!
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Now I understand why the distraction.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Hopefully we can keep this between the two of us?
Regards,
Unmasked-at-last Manny
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)It's only now that we get vindicated by people like Michael Moore and then we're still subject to the pointless derision.
Can't win for losing. Or winning, for that matter.
Kennah
(14,578 posts):non sequitire:
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)How is Elizabeth Warren's Single Payer bill coming along?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)The LAST thing we need is for that difficult woman to run off, half-cocked, with some new notion in her noggin'. DO NOT GIVE HER ANY IDEAS.
Dear God, Jamie and Lloyd should have left her at the White House!
TrollBuster9090
(6,129 posts)This is AMERICA, dammit!
GO BIG OR GO HOME!
We demand 15-20% overhead costs, like the PRIVATE HMOs have!
marble falls
(71,932 posts)a living wage!
W.J. McCabe
(74 posts)Whenever I try to begin a debate on how universal healthcare is a necessity for a country of our wealth my conservative family members jump to illegal immigrants and say they don't want to pay for them to get healthcare. It immediately jumps to that topic. They are hardwired to take a position that is not in their own interest because of hatred and fear of others (the two key ingredients in their political ideology). Talk about a bunch of selfish assholes who would rather risk becoming sick and financial ruin because they don't want others who may need the same level of healthcare to be able to get it.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Medicare for all has been introduced in Congress every two years since 2003.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act
Whether House leadership has been Republican or Democrat, Medicare for all has never been brought to a vote, I suspect because no one, Republican or Democrat, wants to be on record as having voted against it.
At one point, Pelosi promised Anthony Weiner that she would allow a vote, but then reneged on the ground that a vote on HR 676 would hurt Obamacare.
http://pubrecord.org/politics/3105/pelosi-allow-floor-single-payer/
Democrats did have sixty votes in the Senate.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
However, that is irrelevant.
As Prosense posted upthread, in the opinion of Senator Sanders, Medicare for all would not have received 10 votes. (There were certainly more than 10 Democrats in the Senate.) Yes, Lieberman, who was not going to run again anyway, became a convenient scapegoat as to the public option..
Lieberman lost a committeee chair for having campaigned against Obama in 2008. What efforts were made to change his mind about voting against cloture? What was his punishment? He kept his favorite chair, Homeland Security, until his term ended, so I am guessing nothing. Campaigning against Obama cost him a chair. Taking a stand against the best interests of the American people (in the form of at least a strong public option) cost him bubkes. Why?
And, btw, the final version of Obamacare passed by reconciliation, requiring only 50 Senators plus the VP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But only one of us uses personal insults. Why is that?
Maybe can work through this.
As you point out, Democrats only needed 51 votes. How many votes did they have for Medicare buy-in at 55... before the option suddenly vanished?
For extra credit, perhaps you can comment on LBJ and the Civil Rights Act? Why didn't he even try to pass it?
merrily
(45,251 posts)Did you assume that I was saying that you personally were confused? I wasn't. That was my comment after reading the back and forth on this thread about Democrats never having had 60 votes and other misconceptions. Did you click on the link that I provided to show Democrats had had 60 in the caucus for over five months? To the contrary, I was agreeing with you (or so I thought).
I happen to be a fan of both Medicare for all (and many of your posts). Not that it should matter. Either my post misstated facts or it did not. If you think that my post misstated facts, please point out which ones so I can address your specific issue with my post, if any?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Sorry for the paranoia.
In any case, what your saying is accurate but I don't think it captures the thing. Perhaps you could tale a look at my questions and you'll see what I'm thinking.
merrily
(45,251 posts)"You," as used in my prior post did not mean Manny Goldstein, but "you" the general public.
Since it was a reply to the OP, it may have seemed to refer to MG, but it was used collectively.
Would have cleared up in two seconds if the conversation were face to face.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)but they have a word - y'all - that we need to officially adopt for our language.
merrily
(45,251 posts)So, I am not sure it would have averted any problem.
But, more importantly for me, I hope you have taken another look at my post and seen that it seeks to support the proposition that failure to get either a public option or medicare for all was not a matter of only Lieberman or just a small group of Blue Dogs.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)In any case, thanks for setting me straight on your post. More than anything, we lost the public option to Responsible Adults.
santroy79
(193 posts)how will people know?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)