cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

First David Stockman and now...

31 Replies
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

Your link didn't work, Bruce, but I've seen and heard enough from David Stockman to know we have been lied to. It's just darned hard to believe the people on the right can't understand it. All they can do is pretend he's got some kind of agenda against the Reagan the magnificent.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

Lol, you were trying to hide that it was a TPM link.

you can find 1000s of opinions, the ruling of the federal judge is the only one that is law. The only reason I can figure why the little soldier dem's, like the posters here, have such a woody for the fascist mandate is that it gives the federal government complete and final control over all human activity.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

Actually I saw it in a number of places. But yeah, i did think that all of the impeccably open minded here might be more apt to look at it. The guy seemed pretty credible to me, tainted as he was by his previous employment.  I'd say the same if it was Robert Rubin, Dee Dee Myers or Karl Rove. Yes, opinoins are like bung holes...everybody's got one..... 'ceptin for Rumsfeld etal...history is busy reaming out a new one for each of them

 

And I seriously doubt that no matter how the reform bill is read or applied that it constitutes what you describe. If it is, or has been democratically arrived at, it doesn't. The argument that the voters don't know what they are doing may have some validity. That's always there.

 

What's going to be most interesting is what the view of the nearly drowned will be, after the deluge.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

If it weren't so detrimental to our freedom it would be funny how you guys got tossed under the bus on health care. You people were all giddy cause you thought you'd get some big new socialistic entitlement. Then bam, 180 and the democrats in congress and the president served American up like stuffed turkeys to the insurance companies. It's too funny, and now all you good little soldiers that got thrown under the bus are defending the right of your government to force you into the mauls of a corporation. Corporations you hate. Too pathetically pitiful. Why don't you people wake the hell up out of your trance.
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

  It's that whole left/right thing which is actually two different wings of the corporatist mentality party. If you notice, the whole "debate" skipped right past a lot of options or ideas and went straight to the "individual mandate" that coincidentally has previously been brought up or introduced by the right. The right's opposition is for political theatrics, because any and everybody knows that they can't get it overturned or nullified. It will go to the SCOTUS and be ruled constitutional which will set the mandate in stone because of precedence, just like Roe v Wade. It's a cash cow for the insurance companies, and of course it will be used for campaign contributions just like Roe v Wade, but with the exact same results.

  The democrats screwed up because this could have been a gift that keeps giving instead of a one time shot. This will be the new abortion issue for republicans to exploit for years for campaign contributions.

  All this is for naught, when you consider that 40? million people don't have health insurance but still get care and the price for it is covered by the government. The health care conglomerates haven't adjusted their prices to capture that group, and actually have increased prices anyway. Nothing has or will change except for some government money(corporate welfare) going to the insurance industry. It just adds another entity (middleman) in the process.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

Decades of observation and experience sam.

 

As with any and all legislation that leaves any sort of a legacy, first things first. Get something into place and then get it to work.  Refining it as needs be. For whatever someone may think that the numbers may be, I'll assert that there are less Democrats in Congress who are wholey "owned" by greedy interests and that number would directly line up with the count on the vote. 

 

The GOP was asked to produce an alternative proposal and came up with 2 pages that featured nothing more than purchasing across state lines (the insurance equivelant of unregulated over the counter deriviatives and credit default swaps) and tort reform.

 

It was hastily contrived, was full of compromises put in place to get passage and gives way, way too much to the industry....you are darned tootin right abou thtat.

 

What's goofy about your response is that you seem suddenly  to be taking some populist side. Are you telling us that you were in favor of a more radical or far reaching plan? Single payer? Or what? By saying that we who are generally supportive of the Democratic members of Congress who got this through should feel as though we have been thrown under the bus does that mean you wanted something differnet? What would that be? Or did you prefer business as usual? Your premise doens't seem to support business as usual, and you are indeed a persistent critic of business as usual.

 

We didn't get much of a bill. Actually what we got was a clone of what it was that Congressional Republicans actually did propose as an alternative to the more far reaching, single payer seeking "Hillary Care" effort back in '93. And a full sibling to what perennial Presidential contender and sweetheart of the moderate GOP Gov. Romney got passed in Massachusetts.

 

It ain't much. I fully agree. Lots of it is dumb and unworkable...like just about any legislation.we are going to have single payer in due time ...not out of any desire for it, or out of any meaningfully thought out legislative process... but as a triage response to conditions on the ground.  It too will have been hastiy contrived...at the call of people gathered at the steps of the Capital. And we'll look back and say  "Wouldn't it have been much better if we'd have done this in an orderly fashion?"

 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

is it so bad to have a food stamps type of health program for poor people? instead of trying to change healthcare delivery in America to serve the needs of the 40 million, whom you would agree are presently being served in some fashion,( and quite a bit better than virtually every other country in the world except maybe a handful, and that is subject to debate), why not continue to concentrate on the free market incentives the dirty republicans were after....HSA's, which have never gotten a chance to work?

 

I hope the whole mess gets thrown out.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: First David Stockman and now...

  It's a mandated creation of a middleman, which is the insurance industry, nothing more and nothing less.

 

  Insurance at it's most basic form reduces risk, but in the process that means that healthy people have to subsidize the unhealthy people. That does absolutely nothing for the COST of the health care services, but just lowers the price of insurance for some. The act just mandates participation by some healthy people to help lower the cost of insurance for others. The health care conglomerates still get theirs.

 

  It's political kabuki theatre and costs will still skyrocket regardless. Even if the mandate could be fully implemented, how long would it be before the costs become an issue again? I'm guessing under 10 years at the current rate of price inflation/increases. We're seeing the ability to be scammed for massive amounts of money by people that need health care or are scared of serious illness and disease. How much will people pay to save their own or their loved one's lives is what the main issue is???