Health Care bill passes House

[Hiro]

How many times have I been over the fact that people are already paying thousands for health insurance?
This bill will reduce the cost of existing insurance and offer a cheaper option for everyone else.  The money saved  from not paying thousands for insurance will result in a lower overall cost or no change. 
hey isn't that what the public option is for.

I heard (although I can't confirm it for certain) that the bill has been crippled so badly (to gain support) that the public option is going to be fairly expensive 

[Daddy]

I heard (although I can't confirm it for certain) that the bill has been crippled so badly (to gain support) that the public option is going to be fairly expensive 

I doubt it.

[Socks]

i don't plan on getting sick

[Daddy]

i don't plan on getting sick

no one does

[Socks]

no one does

my genes are superior to yours

[spoiler]because i don't plan on getting sick[/spoiler]

[hotlikesauce.]

Because sick people are completely capable of working.

Duh.

How many times have I been over the fact that people are already paying thousands for health insurance?
This bill will reduce the cost of existing insurance and offer a cheaper option for everyone else.  The money saved  from not paying thousands for insurance will result in a lower overall cost or no change. 

If there's going to be little to no change in cost then the people who already can't afford it won't be able to afford it. The Republicans fucked this up by trying to put regulations and amendments to the bill and the public option is going to go up in cost.

[Daddy]

Duh.

ru dumb

If there's going to be little to no change in cost then the people who already can't afford it won't be able to afford it.

Uh, no.

The public option will be significantly cheaper, and if the person doesn't want to go with the public option they will be able to remain with private insurance, which will either be cheaper even with higher taxes or no change at all. The poor people who already can't afford private insurance will be able to afford the public option

The Republicans fucked this up by trying to put regulations and amendments to the bill and the public option is going to go up in cost.

Considering that there is no public option, making the cost 0 of course the cost is going to go up.

But the republicans do fuck everything up because they're worrying about their bonuses from the health insurance companies rather than the health of Americans.

[hotlikesauce.]

ru dumb


Uh, no.

The public option will be significantly cheaper, and if the person doesn't want to go with the public option they will be able to remain with private insurance, which will either be cheaper even with higher taxes or no change at all. The poor people who already can't afford private insurance will be able to afford the public option
Considering that there is no public option, making the cost 0 of course the cost is going to go up.

But the republicans do fuck everything up because they're worrying about their bonuses from the health insurance companies rather than the health of Americans.

Like Hiro said, the public option will be fairly expensive.

[Daddy]

With no source or statement otherwise. I'm almost certain that "lol higher cost" is just more republican bitching in the same vein as "lol death panels".

[hotlikesauce.]

With no source or statement otherwise. I'm almost certain that "lol higher cost" is just more republican bitching in the same vein as "lol death panels".

"Subsidizing health insurance means that patients and doctors are insulated from the costs of health care, so they utilize too much -- often in the form of unnecessary tests or medical procedures whose value hasn't been proven. This excess demand, along with technological progress, means rapidly growing deficits, so governments limit reimbursements to health providers or ration care. This kills innovation and creates its own inequities. The taxes necessary to fund subsidies are a drag on economic growth." This alone explains the future possbilities for another tax raise or a higher cost in public option.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/29/miron.health.care/index.html

[Daddy]

"Subsidizing health insurance means that patients and doctors are insulated from the costs of health care, so they utilize too much -- often in the form of unnecessary tests or medical procedures whose value hasn't been proven. This excess demand, along with technological progress, means rapidly growing deficits, so governments limit reimbursements to health providers or ration care. This kills innovation and creates its own inequities. The taxes necessary to fund subsidies are a drag on economic growth." This alone explains the future possbilities for another tax raise or a higher cost in public option.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/29/miron.health.care/index.html

You're linking to an editorial from a Libertarian. 

Government should not subsidize health insurance -- for the uninsured, the poor, the elderly or anyone else -- or regulate health insurance markets. Here's why.

It then goes into the paragraph you linked to. It provides no citations for any of its figures and claims.

he then continues to just go on 'hurr dur taxes and disproven claims that equality and providing for people kills innovation' when it does not.

[Daddy]

and by figures i mean it provides no figures

[hotlikesauce.]

You're linking to an editorial from a Libertarian. 

You're saying he was hired as a lecturer at Harvard on economics because he has no idea what he's talking about?   This editorial holds some weight.

It then goes into the paragraph you linked to. It provides no citations for any of its figures and claims.

he then continues to just go on 'hurr dur taxes and disproven claims that equality and providing for people kills innovation' when it does not.

Nothing being said here has any citations for any claims. You don't know how this bill will affect America. All we have is a plan of the course that you think this will take, and all we can really do is speculate about the outcome. That's what I'm doing here.

[Hiro]

Here Jimv: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5461891.shtml

Once again this isn't entirely 100% sure, but it's a more reliable source 

[Daddy]

You're saying he was hired as a lecturer at Harvard on economics because he has no idea what he's talking about?  

Because he's a libertarian who is basically saying 'lol no regulartion free market fuck yeah fuck taxes' when that has failed. They had a chance to not screw people over and look what happened.

Explain how the free market stops every insurance company from working together to fuck over everyone. It doesn't.

It's the FDA--government regulation--that keeps the drug industry in check. Do you really think they give a fuck what the side effects are? No, in fact they'd hope that one is addiction to keep you as a customer.

Mr Taxbaby in your article has said nothing new "lol they will pay taxes hurrrrr" rather than "premiums will be lower so the difference in taxes won't increase".

This editorial holds some weight.Nothing being said here has any citations for any claims.

When I'm an "economist" writing an editorial I''ll make sure I do that.


oh there's also the fact that I live in massachusetts which already has a form of this in place so i know first hand.

You don't know how this bill will affect America. All we have is a plan of the course that you think this will take, and all we can really do is speculate about the outcome. That's what I'm doing here.

we seem do be doing quite fine kthnx

Here Jimv: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5461891.shtml

Once again this isn't entirely 100% sure, but it's a more reliable source 

huh

By contrast, premiums for a "robust" public option -- one that offered Medicare rates plus 5 percent -- would be cheaper than private plans on the exchange, even taking "adverse selection" into account, according to a recent study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

"We estimate that the public plan would have costs that were 18 percent below the average level for private plans but that the public plan premiums would be roughly 11 percent lower than private as a result of antiselection enrollees," the CMS wrote.