Dear Mr. President, I love you but I can CHOOSE to have a car; I can't choose to have a body.

[Nikki Stone1]

Dear Mr. President,

As much as I love you, I have to take issue with your idea that health insurance should be required in the same way car insurance is. I can CHOOSE whether or not I buy a car. I can live (like a lot of people do) near the Metro or bus line and not have a car. I can ride my bike. I can get a ride to work from a friend everyday and can pay her for the gas. And I don't have to have auto insurance if I don't have a car.

But, I have to have a body. I can't get away from that. Just by the very fact that I live and breathe, you are telling me that I have to buy insurance.

Also, Mr. President, if I buy a car, I can choose one that is not expensive or sporty, one that requires less insurance. I can buy an alarm system or have off street parking and lower my insurance costs. I can also decide to buy a used car that's not worth much and only get liability coverage.

And in my state, Mr. President, all I am required by law to have is liability coverage in case I hit someone else. I am not required to have coverage to fix my own car.

But, I cannot choose what kind of body I have. I cannot choose what DNA I have and what possible illnesses that implies. I cannot necessarily choose what pre-existing conditions I have; not everything is the result of personal error. I can exercise, eat right, and still get cancer or break my leg or have a back injury.

What I am saying, Mr. President, is that, despite your wonderful speech last night, you need to take another look at your idea that health insurance should be required like car insurance. They are two different things.

Yours respectfully,

Nikki

[leftstreet]

1. K&R

:applause:

[TxRider]

58. Brilliant, except 15% of motorists don't have car insurance...

Despite being mandated... It's a fairly unenforceable mandate.

How will mandated coverage be any different?

[Donnachaidh]

62. ahh, but you don't have the IRS hunting down those motorists to hit them with fines, do you?

This give away to the insurance companies will be doing that to the poor in this country though.

[Buzz Clik]

2. and if your body malfunctions, who will pay to put you back together?

[Cant trust em]

3. Isn't that the point of having health insurance? nt

[Buzz Clik]

33. Yes, indeed. It seems that the OP is suggesting that she/he doesn't want or need insurance.

... or health care?

[intheflow]

40. That's not what the OP is saying at all.

She's saying she will need healthcare, someday, for something, as will every human being, so the answer isn't forcing everyone to buy health insurance (like car owners are forced to buy car insurance) but to have a healthcare system that covers everyone irregardless of their ability to afford insurance premiums.

[Raineyb]

43. +1 Exactly!

It's like people are being deliberately obtuse on this point. Health insurance does not equal health CARE.

[Nederland]

64. That make no sense

If everybody will need health care for something, someday; shouldn't everybody that can afford it pay for it?

[intheflow]

65. No.

I believe in socialized medicine, not insurance policies. Just b/c you pay premiums does not guarantee the insurance company will pay your bills. That's why so many people with health insurance are filing bankruptcies and losing their homes. What makes no sense is paying insurance companies extortion for protection that never comes through when you most need it.

[Nederland]

69. Can you clarify something?

Are you upset that the plan forces you to pay for health care, or are you upset that it forces you to pay insurance companies for health care?

[intheflow]

81. Insurance companies.

I don't trust corporate America to come between me and my doctor. And any plan will be more expensive if it requires insurance companies to be involved, since they are an added layer of cost. Just cut out that middle man and have the healthcare industry work with the government directly, and have a sliding scale of co-pays based on income.

[smirkymonkey]

121. Yeah, The Insurance Industry is like the Mafia of the Medical World

[sabrina 1]

95. We should have a national healthcare system

like every other civilized country in the world. We do not need to pay private insurance companies and the money saved in premiums can go to slightly higher taxes to make sure everyone is covered.

Is America so stupid that they cannot get a healtcare system like France, eg? No, we are not that stupid, but greedy, that's another story. It's not about health, it's about money. If people would stop enabling the addicts, we could get it done.

[DireStrike]

99. I agree, everyone that can afford it should pay

Therefore, all the money should come from the top 1-10%.

[Orsino]

109. Yes. With progressive taxes...

...and Single Payer, to ensure that more of those dollars go to actual coverage.

[lame54]

135. not everybody should be forced to buy a faulty product

[progressivebydesign]

124. that's nonsensical. Everyone needs to get health insurance, and there are other options.

The point of mandating insurance is not that they're just going to say "go buy insurance right now exactly as it is" There are other avenues that will be included, so that those with pre-existing conditions, etc, and affordable options are available. It should be mandated...

[Raineyb]

42. Health insurance != Health care

A system of getting people care without bankrupting them is what we want. Being forced to contribute to the profits of insurance companies who will find ways to not pay your claim is not health care reform.

[alarimer]

136. No, she is opposed to mandated health insurance

which is nothing but a windfall for insurance companies. They can offer plans with little or no coverage and you HAVE to buy it with whatever miserable subsidies the government deigns to provide (which will not be enough for the rapacious insurance companies). They will cover essentially nothing, just the way catastrophic plans do now. So you are STILL stuck with huge bills.

[jbnow]

84. I know they say the rest of us pay but generally it is the person themselves

Since it is the emergency room that can't turn down people they are most affected.
The person is billed and billed at the very highest price. They will do a payment plan, sometimes way too high. If the person doesn't pay they go to collection like with any other bill, their credit is ruined. It's not free to them more than any other debt incurred
Many people do pay it with credit card or payment plan.

I liked Obama's campaign plan where only children were mandated. He said they weren't ruled out forever but first lets get prices down, that most people wanted insurance and lets see how many stay uninsured before we go further. His plan to allow adult kids to stay on parents insurance to age 26 would help cover many who might not get insurance otherwise.

[progressivebydesign]

125. No, the rest of us pay. The people in bankruptcy don't pay. We pay as taxpayers and consumers. n/t

[progressivebydesign]

123. bingo. Because those who choose not to buy it will STILL get sick, and we will all pay for them. n/t

[tridim]

4. BASIC, inexpensive insurance will be required.

If you can't afford it, you will get help.

IMO that's a really good idea.

[WI_DEM]

12. I don't see why people don't understand that is what Obama said last night.

[tridim]

19. Because they aren't democrats.

Occam's Razor.

[jbnow]

86. Obama was a Democrat during primaries and he was against mandates for adults

at least until we got prices down and see how many were still uninsured.

[Buzz Clik]

34. +1

[BlooInBloo]

78. Because they were never on our side in the first place. They only pretended to be...

In reality, they exist for the sole purpose of protesting. Nothing more, nothing less.

[paparush]

104. Because Foxxx News didn't carry the speech.

This allowed them to keep their massive audience ignorant of Obama's real positions, and only release sound bites that they can spin completely out of context.

Complete and utter mind control propaganda.

[onlyadream]

117. Fox is going to wreck our country, if they haven't already.

Shouldn't there be laws on what can be called 'news'?

[Tansy_Gold]

18. What's "basic"? What's "inexpensive"?

I deal with car insurance claims all day long. Theft. Fire. parking lot fender benders. 18-wheeler rolls over Toyota Camry's hood. You name it.

The car owner has more choices than even the OP posits. the car owner can decide not even to get the damage repaired, if it's just a slight scrape or if the cost of repair would be more than the car is worth.

The car owner can also be covered if he/she is hit by someone else. In my own personal case, my truck was totaled when hit from behind by a driver who fled the scene -- but left their totaled vehicle there on the freeway with the insurance card in it. MY insurance company paid nothing; THEIR insurance company replaced the truck. THEIR insurance company would have paid even if I had no insurance at all.

The only ones who benefit from mandated insurance are the insurance companies. They and their toadies in congress are the ones supporting this bullshit.

Solution: Increase FICA (raise rate, lift cap) effective 1/1/10. Add people to Medicare at age 62 effective 1/1/11. Add people to Medicare at age 60 effective 1/1/12. Decrease age by 5 years each year after that. In 12 years, everyone is covered. Insurance company employees shift to processing Medicare claims. CEOs retire on fat pensions. Everyone is covered, everyone is happy.

EOM

[TxRider]

53. Ummm nobody has realized...

That state car insurance mandates are by and large unenforceable?

Who here doesn't have uninsured motorist coverage?

It's endemic here in Texas, mainly illegal immigrants it seems but not all by a long shot.

[tbyg52]

60. Basic, inexpensive FOR (EXORBITANT) PROFIT insurance will be required.

The insurance companies (and corporations in general) are still in charge. Not that I expected anything else.

[jbnow]

85. We don't know what the income level is for subsidy yet

We don't know how inexpensive the policies will be.

[toadzilla]

98. I don't want my tax money to go to subsidize private insurance company polices either

it's such a waste!

[jbnow]

119. Even with the public option eligible people will get subsidies

for any plan they choose on the exchange, so some of your tax money would go to subsidize private insurance company polices

The hope is that with a public option the prices of other policies will be lower.

[DireStrike]

101. How big are the subsidies? Who gets them?

Will anyone who wants to be able to choose the public option instead?

...In ten years, will the subsidies have kept up with inflation? I can answer that one. The answer is NO.

[LibDemAlways]

103. "Inexpensive" is relative. As long as private insurance

companies are sending out the premium notices, they will be doing everything possible to maximize their profits. What's "inexpensive" for one person might be a wallet-buster for someone else - even someone else deemed not poor enough to qualify for a subsidy.

The only way to get the costs down and make insurance more affordable is to provide a solid public option that will force the for-profit guys to compete.

[dogday]

114. The people who will lose on this will be the middle and

lower classes who can't afford it, but also will not qualify for financial help if they use the current state and federal guidelines for poverty. They always end up slipping through the cracks..

[progressivebydesign]

126. THANK YOU. I can't believe that people aren't getting that point. n/t

[alarimer]

137. Basic inexpensive insurance that covers NOTHING

Look at the plans currently offered that are cheap. They cover NOTHING. It is just pure profit for the evil insurance companies (and this is about as evil a business model as exists in the world). Insurance companies are like the mafia or like some drug cartel.

[Barack_America]

5. So Canadians and Europeans should not be taxed for their health care?

I'm not getting your point. People have to pay in one form or another everywhere.

Now, that being said, there is a big difference in who is getting the money and what they're doing with it.

Sorry, I'm not quite getting your argument.

[leftstreet]

6. How much do they pay for bombs and F16s?

Probably a lot less than I do

[The2ndWheel]

13. Would they have to pay more for them if we paid less?

[Nikki Stone1]

7. Taxes are a public trust; private insurance profits are not.

Start there.

[Barack_America]

10. But the basic point remains; Have a body? Pay for health care coverage.

Don't have a car? Don't pay for insurance.

That is what I don't get about your "I can't help having a body" argument. Having that body is going to take money out of your pocket no matter where you live.

[Nikki Stone1]

23. I think you do understand the argument.

I think you are trying very hard to seem not to.

[Barack_America]

29. If you say so. nt

[Control-Z]

82. I'm having a little trouble understanding myself.

No, I don't want insurance companies making a profit off of people's health, but everyone requires some kind of health coverage and it has to be paid for. If it becomes medicare for all, then the medicare premium will have to be increased. One way or another, the majority of us will have to pay to make it work.

[Matariki]

93. There is a very big difference between a tax for medicare

and a mandated purchase from a private, for-profit business. Why are some people having such a difficult time understanding the difference?

[Control-Z]

128. Perhaps I wasn't listening

closely enough, but I didn't realize that a mandate to buy expensive private insurance had already been written.

Clearly I know the difference so there is no need to act exasperated.

[Matariki]

91. A person without income or property is not taxed.

A mandate to buy insurance is based on simply being alive and a citizen of the US. Surely you can see the difference?

[readmoreoften]

9. If an individual is unemployed and not paying taxes they still get health care.

Not to mention, there's no profit motive in a universal state run system. No one is taking vacations to the Cayman Islands with the money some poor bastard paid for coverage, only to be kicked off when he needs life-saving surgery.

Huge difference.

[Barack_America]

16. And the Democrat's plan will not do this?

I thought this was one of their main points.

[Posteritatis]

17. Canadians don't get fined for not purchasing private insurance. (nt)

[Barack_America]

21. Yes, because their enrollment fees are taken directly from their paychecks.

It was my impression that the "fine" would actually be fees that would enroll one in a healthcare plan.

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Canadians have a basic system that covers all

paid with taxes.

You can have private insurance on TOP of your basic system.

If you want a valid comparison, look at Germany... where yes you are required to have insurance from any of the exchanges set for you to buy it.

[eridani]

90. They pay for CARE, not for profits to go to useless shitstain psychopathic middlemen n/t

[progressivebydesign]

127. My friend in Belgium has awesome insurance, but they ALL pay over 50% in taxes.

Yeah, they have great stuff there, but the tax rates are crazy!

The BIG diff is that people in other countries don't have a near majority of angry anti-tax nuts who sidetrack everything, and they aren't owned by big corporations the way we are. We can't have a system like theirs.. it'll never happen. America the Capitalist will never let it happen. But we do the best we can.. and the best is that everyone has access to insurance of some sort. We'll never get universal health care... America is too corrupt.

[obxhead]

8. k&r

[WI_DEM]

11. If you cannot afford health insurance then they will give tax credits to help you and/or public

option.

[Lorien]

14. Our tax dollars should not be given to private insurance companies

that's corporate welfare.

[leftstreet]

20. +1

[Barack_America]

22. That's a valid point.

And very true.

[Maru Kitteh]

31. Most governments around the world funnel billions of dollars to private companies

including ours. This is not really that different. Military contractors, farm subsidies, charter schools, etc.....

NOT my preferred system by any means, but we have to get started. Real people are suffering and dying out there.

[treestar]

25. But you are getting something in exchange! The coverage!

That's the whole point!

[berni_mccoy]

27. That's why Obama supports a Public Option. And the money wouldn't go to the Insurance Company

It would go to the care of that person.

[Maru Kitteh]

30. They're also used for private military contractors, the privatized post office

private contractors big and small for infrastructure, charter schools, ......... it's a long damn list.

We - like most governments around the world - funnel BILLIONS of tax dollars to private companies.

Is this my favored choice? Hell no.

But it is where we are.

We will NOT get single payer healthcare on this go around or in the near future. Too many families hang in the balance. We have to get started.

[Cant trust em]

37. Isn't that why there is the public option?

To me, that is the crux of the issue. I'm OK with the mandate as long as I can purchase insurance from the public option.

[Dragonfli]

76. I would be OK (as a starting point) if the mandate came with a public option, but it doesn't

Not for most people. The very large majority of the "mandated" will not be allowed to purchase the "not so public option".

That is just a fact of what was said by Obama. Mandates should only apply if choice goes with it.

Is that somehow unreasonable as a request? If we have to buy (or be fined) private insurance from crooks and vultures and have no other choice than whatever crap plan we can afford (think $5000 deductible that covers very little but eats 13% of your income). Well, that is kind of like Romney care don't you think?

It would hurt the lower middle class and the working poor Just like Romney has.

[Cant trust em]

106. The public option is for those who don't have insurance, but need to buy it. Right?

That is the point of the mandate. If you don't have insurance, you must purchase it. Those people could purchase through the public option.

It's possible that I'm missing something. If you've seen an article that sums up your post could you forward it to me? Thanks.

[toadzilla]

105. and if you can't?

most of us wont be allowed to buy into the public option. If it was open to anyone, I would be ok with a mandate.

[flyarm]

75. what if you are a woman and don't work? what the hell good is the tax credit? eom

[jbnow]

87. It will be like property tax credit or heating credit, you file even if you

don't have earned income and you get the money.

What I am not sure of is how they get the money to people to pay to begin with. If you're working it could be like earned income credit where less is taken from every check so you get it all through the year....but can that be enough to pay the premiums? And what about the non-workers for that?
Of course they are aware of that problem for people. It likely is somewhere in the house bill and I just didn't read that part

[Selatius]

88. But, some people still don't make enough money to get good coverage, even with tax credits involved.

There will have to be some amount of income redistribution to cover that.

[Matariki]

94. Oh yay - a TAX CREDIT.

How useful is that for a family stretching their budget from paycheck to paycheck?

And how can we be sure that some republican like Ronald Reagan doesn't come along and repeal the aid to low income people, while still having the mandate to buy insurance?

[CTyankee]

130. I think it is a refundable tax credit. You get it right away. nt

[Maru Kitteh]

15. And I choose not to pay for your body when it gets broke by a bus if you opt out

You have no right to ask everyone else to cover your ass if you choose to opt out of the system if/while you are perfectly able to contribute to the pool.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Do you want UNIVERSAL COVERAGE?

Guess what that requires UNIVERSAL participation.

In some places, Canada, it is fully run by the state

In others, see Germany, it is run by regulated private insurers.

We are taking number two.

Get a frigging clue.

[ItNerd4life]

32. Thank you! I don't understand some comments on DU.

If you want universal coverage, single payer, public option, etc. It means everybody has to have insurance.

I'm glad somebody else pointed this out to the OP.

[Enthusiast]

112. Not necessarily "insurance" in

the public option or single payer. It could more accurately be called a universal care plan.

[girl gone mad]

47. Unfortunately..

no one here is proposing the kind of strict regulations that are imposed on German insurers.

We are going to be forced to buy insurance from private corporations that can effectively act in much the same repulsive manner as they have been for decades.

[Dragonfli]

79. I would prefer universal health care - coverage is a gamble at best that you will get actual care.

My very well covered wife died for lack of prompt health care.
Having the coverage was great! Got to pay bills I could barely afford, got to brag that I had it. Health care? Not so Much.

The $27,000 debt my Health coverage left in the aftermath was just a fun bonus for me.

Listen, I know you are a smart and well meaning individual, I also know Germany's system works for them.
This is not Germany. We can't even get banks regulated properly here (right after a major melt-down) no matter how hard we try because of legalized bribery and a revolving door policy between lobbyists and politicians.

I feel you may simply may have left that bit out of your assessment (again, I have read you so I do not think you did so deliberately, you really believe somehow regulation on that scale is possible I am sure).

Regulation like that would be harder to pass than single payer in this nation, can you not see this?

People need doctors, not insurance agents looking to renege on a deal.

[eridani]

92. We are fucking well NOT taking number 2

If we were, the charges per month per adult would be under $200 for EVERYTHING, no deductibles or copays, and no age or any other kind of discrimination.

[stray cat]

28. We all need a sugar daddy to pay for our expenses

but no one is volunteering to sponsor everyone. Of course by participating in a insurance program you pay for others that need it and can't pay.

[ThomWV]

35. Driving is a privilege, breathing is not.

You may be able to force me to be insured to drive, I don't have to drive. I have to breath though, and no one has any right to force me to buy anything simply because I exist.

[Nikki Stone1]

39. Thank you

That's exactly it.

[inna]

36. what we need as a nation is Universal Health Care funded by progressive taxation,

not the government-mandated RACKET by profiteering, rapacious insurance corps.

[SammyWinstonJack]

44. +1 nt

[Raineyb]

45. +1 n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

46. +1

+1

[truedelphi]

49. Same +1 here. n/t

[Xicano]

56. +1

Well put inna.

:kick:

[dana_b]

73. yep! n/t

[Dragonfli]

77. I am not sure if it is you I love or your simple common sense reply!

:loveya: In any event, I wholeheartedly agree.

[Romulox]

102. +1,000,000. Cuts right through to the point. nt

[closeupready]

111. +1

n/t

[damntexdem]

38. And if you choose to not insure your car and you cause an accident, others pay.

Just as if you choose not to insure your body and you get very ill, others will end up paying.

[Ruby the Liberal]

41. Some people go an entire lifetime without needing to file an auto claim

Can anyone say the same about getting sick? Going a lifetime without needing a prescription?

Health "insurance" isn't "insurance" like homeowners, renters or auto. We should look at it like an extended warranty if anything as "insurance" implies it will never be used, which is not the case with health.

[truedelphi]

48. I love your post. But am confused about

Your proclaiming love for Obama.

There are many like Obamas out there. They are the charming and wondrous creatures who sat at the state legislatures and proclaimed that MTBE is so safe that their kids brush their teeth with it. They tell activists that cell phone antennae towers are perfectly safe and can be located near the schools. (Never mind that their own industry told activists 15 years ago that they were aware that the antennae caused brain tumors.) They go to the local city councils and persuade them that a sports stadium would be a great way to help small businesses in a given neighborhood, as long as the citizenry pay for the stadium and the bosses of those who do the lobbying get the profits.

They know how to give good speeches, but when the damage from their speeches is done and over with, where are they then?

Remember this is the same man that told the voters that he would re-write NAFTA once he was President. And his own staff had to call up the ministers in Canada and reassure them that that was nonsense - just campaign rhetoric needed so he could garner the votes.

[jbnow]

96. No...he didn't say he would rewrite NAFTA. He said it could be

reopened if there were certain issues just as Hillary did.
When he was in Canada this year he did say he wanted to begin talks on adding provisions to the agreement relating to workers and to the environment, but that is not officially reopening it.
And I followed the NAFTA thing in Canadian papers...but you have that wrong even in the basics. They were already meeting in Chicago with Goolsbee on something else. The words were not a direct quote, they were someones notes from the meeting as his response to a question about it. We have no reason to think Obama had given him any message to pass along or that he was pulling some scam.

I disagree with Obama on many things but even more disagree on your portrayal of him. When I researched candidates I knew almost nothing aboout Obama and was surprised to find articles on him for the last 20 years done at the time as well as many articles that were more recent and going back. I read about his community activist time, his decision to go to law school hoping he could accomplish more that way, his time in law school and as law review president...He didn't take part in that article but friends say he kept refusing to try for it because it was too good a springboard for someone and he'd promised to return to Chicago. But the tension on campus was getting worse and worse (law review members were even hissing and booing each other in class). He thought he could help and put his name in. He did help. I read about his 80 hour weeks, things other members and classmates and professors had to say. About his return to Chicago and the Project Vote he agreed to run before starting his own career...because it mattered even though it paid crap.
And on and on through all of his jobs...even as state senator he kept teaching law school (and I found student reviews of him) and training community activists and doing research for old law firm. I read about him as lawyer, as senator, as teacher, in the community. I read about his "unusually frank" disclosure reports, his ethics, long interviews when he was first running for state senate and during his tenure. A lot of attention was paid to him and the one criticism was sometimes endorsing another candidate who was the politically expedient choice and likely not the best one. I knew all about Rezko because Chicago papers were on it well before, went through all his law work and bills he sponsored or voted on and his finances to see if there was anything funny there. (There wasn't)

You can see him as another con man...people who knew him or worked with him, even republicans, did not see him that way. They saw him as dedicated, honest, respectful, thoughtful....and impatient to really make a difference for the better. If anything was remarked on more than his composure it was his honesty.
Usually the more you research someone the more questions you have about them, in his case I respected him more the more I found. I was impressed by him before I heard any speech. Heck, the Tribune who doesn't like anyone endorsed him, the first Democrat they ever endorsed.

I don't expect to change your mind and again I disagree with many things. He tends to be too pragmatic. But I have to respond to a sliming Obama post. There is a lot of improving he could do...but I don't doubt his character or basic decency.

[flvegan]

50. Health insurance should be more like a car warranty, not car (casualty) insurance.

And it should be a bumper-to-bumper, no expiration on mileage warranty.

[seabeyond]

51. and you didnt ask your parents to have you????? man i hate this kinda argument. nt

[seabeyond]

52. and since that body requires food adn shelter we should pay that for you???? nt

[Mixopterus]

54. Jesus

Sounding like a right winger there. The person's argument is for a public option, which is something we all pay for. The person is addressing the fact that people will be forced to pay for UNREGULATED insurance, which means the same or higher premiums and more squeezing of the general populace in the name of profits.

[seabeyond]

55. wasnt it obvious

i was addressing the title, not content.

[Mixopterus]

57. How silly of me

Where I come from we address the content of a stance, not the header.

[seabeyond]

63. all kinds of things happen in this world. gotta stay on toes. can veer in any

given direction

wonderful thing about the board

[taterguy]

59. One of the best OPs I've seen on this site. Seriously

:yourock:

[HughMoran]

68. ...all the selfish libertarian Republican types love it!

Seriously!

[Xicano]

61. Here, here Nikki

Yes, this is the part of Obama's speech that I couldn't believe I was hearing:

That's why under my plan, individuals will be *required* to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

I have a big problem with the government *requiring* people to purchase a private industry product. Just offer a public option and require employers of a certain size or larger to provide an option to its employees for private health insurance. If right-wingers don't like it - fuck 'em. When have they ever given any consideration for us except to fuck us?

If industry doesn't like, then, oh well, I guess they'll just have to offer a competitive plan to attract and keep customers. Like he said, government ran businesses only serves to keep private businesses more honest and provide a more competitive product for its consumers.

[Nikki Stone1]

74. That part of the speech struck me too.

I just see a real mess if this goes through.

[BOG PERSON]

66. Call me old fashioned,

but if business-friendly policies can work anywhere to alleviate social problems, it's in the United States! :patriot:

[HughMoran]

67. Disagree completely

Your body needs service just like a car. I don't think the rest of us should have to pay for your repairs when you eventually breakdown.

[taterguy]

70. Unlike a car, people can't exist without a body

But I guess we can quibble about that philosophically.

[BOG PERSON]

71. If a car breaks down in traffic,

it winds up costing everybody else on the road too, in a definite way.

It's silly to assume a defective vehicle can only affect the vehicle's owner.

[HughMoran]

72. The traffic from a car that died in the left lane this morning speaks to that

It was awful!

[Orsino]

108. We're required to have valid driver's licences to drive, too...

...but that doesn't mean I should be required to carry a national ID card just to be a pedestrian.

[MellowDem]

80. In this case...

The whole point of having mandated insurance is to bring down costs and cover everybody. The only people who won't be mandated are those who literally don't have the means, the poorest of the poor. But if you do have the means, I wonder what kind of selfish motivation must drive a person to not get health insurance. Your DNA, pre-existing conditions etc. won't matter if you are getting the public option and shouldn't matter under the reformed health insurance plan.

[Vidar]

83. K&R

[kenny blankenship]

89. Respiration is Optional!

Oxygen is for earners.

[Pharaoh]

97. Nutshell K&R

Spot on....

[fascisthunter]

100. Everywhere else around the World it is ILLEGAL for insurance companies to profit from Healthcare

But here, people thinks it's a crime to get healthcare coverage through taxation. People really don't give a shit about each other in this country. People are brainwashed into buying into a very corrupt and shitty system.

You'll find this interesting:

"Every country in the world that has a national healthcare system as large as Germany, Switzerland, France, as small as Costa Rica. Every country in the world that has one has made it a crime, has made it illegal, for any of the health insurance companies, and in Switzerland it’s all health insurance companies, for any of the health insurance companies that are offering primary basic care, preventative medicine, responsive medicine, treatment of cancer, all that kind of stuff. As opposed to having a fancier room in the hospital or a private hospitals even, or as opposed to cosmetic surgery, primary care, has made it illegal to be for profit."

http://www.thomhartmann.com/2009/08/27/transcript-why-should-anybody-be-allowed-to-engage-in-for-profit-health-insurance-thom-asks-michael-tanner-27-august-2009/

[Overseas]

116. Exactly. And GOP types don't want something so positive to come from payng taxes.

I want our healthcare covered by our taxes. I think our health security is worth paying taxes for. I have felt that deep health security when working abroad as a resident alien years ago.

If Americans really get the deeply secure feeling of knowing that they will be taken care of if they ever get ill, without worrying about the cost, as a result of paying taxes, then the GOP types will loose their talking point of "Taxes Are Bad!"

Citizens of countries with higher taxes than we currently have (after Reagan cut the super-rich rate from 70% down to 36%), often say, "Well, my taxes are high but I get almost free health care, and that is a great benefit." Yes, my Canadian friend, older than me, pays less in healthcare taxes than I do for my 3500 deductible plan and gets full coverage with tiny co-pays.

Now, as I get older but not old enough for Medicare, I have the deep insecurity of a high-deductible plan that I'm not sure will really cover me if & when I need it. The private insurers slipped this new sport of "recision" into their bag of tricks during the pro-corporate mandate of the Bush Gang's rule.

[avaistheone1]

107. K&R bookmarked and recommended

[Stevenmarc]

110. Could you imagine the outrage if........

Gun owners were required to take out a liability policy for every gun they own.

[zoff]

113. I see your point clearly.

I'm not quite sure which post to respond to but I'll entertain any takers.

It seems that from some responses, others are unwilling to pay for your care. If they see that as the problem in the public option or a universal care scenario, then that is just silly. It happens under private insurance as well. They're all POOLS.

Traffic? Who care about a little traffic. How about a heart attack or stroke while driving at speed? How many people are going to get killed? (Statistics will be argumentative at best but I'm sure it has happened.)

I agree with your answers to your critics. I am not one of the obtuse readers who cannot tell the difference. My hat's off to you Nikki.

My problem with Obama, as with Pelosi and the Dem leadership, is the lack of it. Lack of a clear vision, a clear statement. If he was being clear in his speech, then god help us all.

[onlyadream]

115. They only way that will work is if health care is VERY affordable.

If not, then it will be too much of a burden on many poor people.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

118. Oh God Get A Grip.

Where to even start... Ehhh, not even worth it...

[change_notfinetuning]

120. Best OP I've seen in my year of often lurking and sometimes posting. YOU,

nikki, and not President Obama, absolutely hit it out of the park. A car is an option. Having one's health and staying alive is not the same as a piece of metal that transports us more conveniently. Where is the past humanity of Barack Obama? Do we need to have a scavenger hunt to find it, and return it to this most decent human being? He can't be feeling good with the direction his administration is heading. John McCain said in the 2008 campaign that he went to Washington to change it and it changed him. Couldn't Barack Obama say the same thing today, in spite of his short time in D.C.?

No one was happier or more hopeful than I was on the night of November 4, 2008. I like Barack Obama and I think he is the best person to be president right now, both for his personal convictions and ability to inspire. The problem is not that we have Barack Obama. The problem is that we don't have more Barack Obamas.

However, Barack Obama said he wanted to dilute the influence of lobbyists, yet lobbyists now think they have died and gone to heaven. Barack Obama wanted to hear all sides on the issues, which I thought meant that the more centrist and conservative voices would be represented. How did that come to mean excluding the views and creativity of people to his left? He's no less insulated and isolated than any other recent president, a fatal flaw to any hope for change. If he's playing chess, it's like my seven-year-old daughter's approach. Taking only pawns is an interesting strategy, but try winning with it.

The problem is the pathetic cast of cabinet secretaries and other officials he appointed and the advisors that he has surrounded himself with. The selection of Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff set the tone. Not a good choice for change, unless you are trying to fill up a swear jar. Maybe someone should count the change in the White House swear jars. If what they say about Rahm is true, there just might be enough to pay for health care for all.

[progressivebydesign]

122. you have to have insurance so we can all stop paying for you folks who don't have it.

even if you don't CHOOSE to buy insurance, we ALL pay for the uninsured. So if you get ill, you're just going to lie on a sidewalk? No, someone will take you to the hospital, and even without insurance you will get hundredds of thousands of dollars of care, and the taxpayers AND those who PAY for insurance will pay for you. What part of that isn't obvious to people who are upset that they actually have to get insurance??

Unless you live in a cave, and are committed to dying of .. say.. an infected tooth without any medical intervention, then these arguments are ridiculous. SOMEONE has to pay for your care.. I'd prefer it wasn't me, if you have enough to buy a car then you have enough to pay for your own health care. I pay $138. a month for a very bare bones policy for myself, as I'm self employed. That way, I don't have the rest of you paying for my INDIGENT care because I refused to spend less than $2,000 a year for my insurance. Would I love to have better insurance? Yep... I miss having good employee insurance, but I do the best I can. And I'm going to be 50 this month, so it's not like I'm in my 20s or 30s, where the coverage would be even cheaper.

[Nikki Stone1]

129. The argument is that everyone needs healthcare and it should be provided

But having tax dollars pay insurance companies instead of doctors is a waste of money and a government bureaucracy.

[quaker bill]

131. you should loathe single payer then

because under such a plan, the costs will be collected from all by a mandatory tax, no option to avoid it.

Secondly, while for you a car may well be an option, where I live, if you want to work regularly, you better have one. And yes, you are required to have it insured, and if you fail to do so and keep driving you will likely end up in jail at some point.

Sorry, your argument does not wash. It only works if you will only accept healthcare you can pay for on your own. If you need it, but can't afford it, accept your own demise joyfully.

[TK421]

132. Sorry, but the carbon dioxide you just expended from that speech is gonna cost you

about $30.00 a month from now to the rest of your life.....

[Nikki Stone1]

134. Sardonic lol

:sardonic:

[TK421]

138. as long as I got a mock laugh from someone here, I think I've done my job

:D

[Nikki Stone1]

140. Why yes you have

;p

[Ilsa]

133. Oh! But I disagree with your subject line!

[Nikki Stone1]

139. We need to write Congress--yeah, right fucking now :) ---about this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6534561