top primitive doesn't have a conscience

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5828336

Oh my.

First, the silly primitive:

SoCalDem  (1000+ posts)        Thu Jun-11-09 05:58 PM
Original message
 
Define "affordable". Define "quality". Define "accessible".

We need NUMBERS. Every family "out here" has a FINITE amont of money.

This is the major stumbling block I see for the health care plan. The legislators..ALL OF THEM are avoiding any mention of the cost to PEOPLE. We hear big numbers being tossed around, GOVERNMENT costs, but nary a mention of an amount likely to be borne by US.

That's the ONLY number that most people care about.

We need to know IN ADVANCE, what criteria will ned to be met. What percentage of income we will have to pay. What co-pays will be necessary.

We need to see EXAMPLES of what other countries have. We need to see a French family making $50K (our equivalent) with 2 kids, and what they pay vs what they get.. and a Canadian family, and Japanese family, a German family, etc.

This data exists, and yet nowhere on the "news spectrum" is any of this comparative reporting. All we get is the occasional "you have to wait FOREVAH, to get a hip replacement" nonsense.

We get amorphous sound bytes here and there, and code language, with NO numbers.

Would you buy a car, if you were told "it's affordable, it's blue, you'll like it...but I can't tell you how much it will cost you every month... now sign here.."?

redqueen  (1000+ posts)        Thu Jun-11-09 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
 
1. Obama wants an exemption for people who can't afford it.

If congress balks, it's them we have to push on this.

SoCalDem  (1000+ posts)        Thu Jun-11-09 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
2. But.. who decides "affordability"?

It cannot simply be based on income, and imagine a system's size necessary to review EVERY family's affordability issues.

It's the same problem we have now , with wages. Every municipality is different, "prices may vary". A family making 100K in Manhattan NY will have very different circumstances than a family in Manhattan, Kansas, making $100K

redqueen  (1000+ posts)        Thu Jun-11-09 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. Maybe it's in Kennedy's bill somwhere.

Haven't read it.

In Sweden they have local councils. Perhaps it's something like that.

Bluenorthwest  (1000+ posts)      Thu Jun-11-09 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
 
6. Did you say 'family'? Define 'family' as well.

According to the law, my family is not a family. Our household is just strangers. Or not. I'm already confused. Is our household income our household income, or is his his and mine mine? Will they count us as a family if it costs us more, and not if it saves us money or what?

So. We need to define 'affordable' 'quality' and 'family' so far. Next?

Jane in Texas (22 posts)      Thu Jun-11-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
24. We will not be able to pay for families who can't afford it 

AND keep the government plan affordable enough so that all of us who are uninsurable will be able to purchase it.

This is a disaster in the making.

We seem to be talking about taxpayers picking up the tab for the poor (including working poor) and sick in addition to the elderly. This isn't going to work.

WE NEED SINGLE PAYER NOW.

A long, tedious discussion, and then the top primitive, Pedro Picasso, shows up, pretty much dousing the bonfire, putting it out:

Atman  (1000+ posts)        Thu Jun-11-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
 
23. A fundamental stumbling block. What's "affordable" to the millionaires making the laws?

It's that simple. I have a couple of wealthy Republicans in my life -- my brother and a long-time friend -- and both of them, I'm sure, would tell you something like this this: "People who can't even pay their own way shouldn't be taking part of MY paycheck while they sit on their asses!"

It's as if the mentally disabled or otherwise out-of-mainstream Americans would simply go away if we refused to support them. That's what gets me; sure, I can see your frustration, but how the **** are we, as a society, supposed to deal with the real live people who will be left totally unassisted? Will it have to get to the point where you're stepping over homeless, disabled vets on your white picket fenced lined sitewalks? [sic] Literally, what are we as a society supposed to do?

Ignoring problems as long as you're benefiting personally is a Republican trait, or so I always thought. How can any Democrat with a conscience NOT be out there with the numbers the OP suggests, advocating for an emergence from the health care dark ages?

[Carl]

Jane in Texas (22 posts)      Thu Jun-11-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
24. We will not be able to pay for families who can't afford it 

AND keep the government plan affordable enough so that all of us who are uninsurable will be able to purchase it.

This is a disaster in the making.

We seem to be talking about taxpayers picking up the tab for the poor (including working poor) and sick in addition to the elderly. This isn't going to work.

WE NEED SINGLE PAYER NOW.

I have read this several times now and wonder what the eff this person thinks "Single Payer" is.

Maybe I am just dense this morning and am missing something.

[Celtic Rose]

I have read this several times now and wonder what the eff this person thinks "Single Payer" is.

Maybe I am just dense this morning and am missing something.

No, I think the DUmmy is the one that is dense, and that he or she really just likes throwing around the word single payer healthcare, but doesn't actually know what it means 

[Lord Undies]

No, I think the DUmmy is the one that is dense, and that he or she really just likes throwing around the word single payer healthcare, but doesn't actually know what it means 

I have seen no evidence any of the Little Goons understand anything about "health care".  They try to cover this lack of knowledge in some noble crapola about "the poor".  In reality, each and every one of the Little Goons care only about #1, and "health care" better be an on-demand Christmas present, or they are going to be sick-sick-sick and bitchy-bitchy-bitchy.

[jtyangel]

**** Pedro Picasso. I'm a conservative actually raising someone who is mentally disabled. Stop trying to pass your greedy bullshit on the back of my son's disability. Most Americans are not disabled in this way or at all so don't act as if those who don't have healthcare are. I've never met a single person either who begrudges caring as a society for individuals who TRULY can not care for themselves and that doesn't include what most liberals paint as incapable. I'm tired of truly needy people being USED to forward the agenda of the corrupt, greedy, and lazy.

[JohnnyReb]

"In Sweden they have local councils." ....Hey DUmmie, I hear it's a wonderful place, move there, let us know how you like it.

[Lord Undies]

"In Sweden they have local councils." ....Hey DUmmie, I hear it's a wonderful place, move there, let us know how you like it.

Sweden is roughly the size of the state of California and has a population roughly the size of the Houston metropolitan area.  That makes it the perfect model for the US of A.

[lastparker]

I have read this several times now and wonder what the eff this person thinks "Single Payer" is.

Maybe I am just dense this morning and am missing something.

This post jumped out at me as well, but because of this line:

This is a disaster in the making.

It has a mere 22 posts, but gets closer to reality than any of them.

And I notice that the OP starts by saying

Define "affordable". Define "quality". Define "accessible".

but never actually explores "quality" and "accessible".  Kinda of like the Messiah.

[Celtic Rose]

Sweden is roughly the size of the state of California and has a population roughly the size of the Houston metropolitan area.  That makes it the perfect model for the US of A.

Oh, yeah.  We can model our health care system off of that one with no problems! 

[Traveshamockery]

The dummies just want SOMEONE ELSE to be responsible for taking care of them in all ways and have the millionaires (like me - NOT!!) pay for it. 

It comes down to the fact that they don't want to work and/or be responsible (I do realize some of the dummies do work but apparently have trouble managing their money), and pay their own way.  Because of the liberal politicians in this country, they have been led to believe they are entitled to housing, food, clothing, and now health care for free while they spend their money on crapola like big screen TVs and cruises. 

Oh, so not only do us "millionaires" have to take care of our own families, we will now be forced to take care of someone else's families as well.  Isn't that something we used to do at Christmas time voluntarily?  Now King Obama is going to force us to do it year-round whether we like it or not. 

Disclaimer - I'm not a millionaire but for some reason I play one in the eyes of the Obama administration for the purposes of wealth redistribution. 


 

[Ree]

The dummies just want SOMEONE ELSE to be responsible for taking care of them in all ways and have the millionaires (like me - NOT!!) pay for it. 

It comes down to the fact that they don't want to work and/or be responsible (I do realize some of the dummies do work but apparently have trouble managing their money), and pay their own way.  Because of the liberal politicians in this country, they have been led to believe they are entitled to housing, food, clothing, and now health care for free while they spend their money on crapola like big screen TVs and cruises. 

Oh, so not only do us "millionaires" have to take care of our own families, we will now be forced to take care of someone else's families as well.  Isn't that something we used to do at Christmas time voluntarily?  Now King Obama is going to force us to do it year-round whether we like it or not. 

Disclaimer - I'm not a millionaire but for some reason I play one in the eyes of the Obama administration for the purposes of wealth redistribution. 


 

Millionaire now means anyone who works, pays taxes and takes care of their own family....

[jtyangel]

The dummies just want SOMEONE ELSE to be responsible for taking care of them in all ways and have the millionaires (like me - NOT!!) pay for it. 

It comes down to the fact that they don't want to work and/or be responsible (I do realize some of the dummies do work but apparently have trouble managing their money), and pay their own way.  Because of the liberal politicians in this country, they have been led to believe they are entitled to housing, food, clothing, and now health care for free while they spend their money on crapola like big screen TVs and cruises. 

Oh, so not only do us "millionaires" have to take care of our own families, we will now be forced to take care of someone else's families as well.  Isn't that something we used to do at Christmas time voluntarily?  Now King Obama is going to force us to do it year-round whether we like it or not. 

Disclaimer - I'm not a millionaire but for some reason I play one in the eyes of the Obama administration for the purposes of wealth redistribution. 


 

I'd love to see how many heads exploded if our side said fine, I'll pay for another family, but I get a say so in how their lives are run, how their children are raised, and they have to put in 20-30 hours a week of work providing daycare, cleaning, organizing, or any other services to my family that we deem necessary in exchange for their care. They want wealth resdistribution and I want work redistribution. 


I know they'd call that some form of slavery, but I suppose working to earn a living and having to hand it over to someone isn't right?