In the parallel universe, this bill is introduced by Republicans and the Democrats are fighting it

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

and are filibustering it, calling it the biggest giveaway to corporate interests since . . . . . the last giant giveawy to corporate interests.

In all honesty, this bill seems like a Republican bill. It benefits a private monopoly at the expense of everyone else. I wouldn't feel so cognitively dissonanced if this had been introduced in the Bush years. I really don't understand why the Republicans don't support it - it is like one of their previous wet dreams.

Are we going to get another version of this same phenomena when the predators move towards Social Security and Medicare? Will we get another Republican bill introduced and supported by Democrats?

The Republicans want to spin off prisons, schools, police, utilities and God knows what else. Maybe we could make war officially a for-profit private function? We seem headed in that direction with our latest wars.

Why are the Democrats behaving like private contractors hired by Republicans to finish the job they started?

[Deja Q]

1. B and S?

"Bought and Sold"


?

[grytpype]

2. :cry:

:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:
Why won't Obama bust up the mean corporations????????
:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

[treestar]

3. Ask a Republican

No way will they agree. This bill is socialism and the end of our freedom! It is a Marxist attempt to get between you and your doctor and establish death panels to determine who will live. Worst of all, the government cannot do anything right (except military things) and therefore the system will be terrible, just like that awful system in Canada.

The insurance companies hate it. No company ever wants more regulation.

[dkf]

4. That's because Republicans are completely deluded about what is in the bill.

If they really understood it, they would love it.

I bet the money Republicans love it and are going to snap up health insurance company stock ASAP.

[treestar]

10. No they would not

The arguments against the mandates here are nothing to how offended Republicans would be at the idea. They have freedom to contract, you know, and make their own deals with the insurance company. yeah, right. But that's what they believe.

They are against even government regulation which they see as confiscating their property.

Why are all of the Republican Senators going to vote against it? They can't be deluded about what is in it.

[dkf]

12. Republicans aren't voting up or down on the merits of the bill.

They just want to stop Obama.

Luckily for them, they can rely on bought and paid for Democrats to give the insurance companies what they want.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. It gets tricky.

They're misinformed but on the other hand what they believe their party stands for and what it really stands for are two different things. Beyond that it's too dangerous to contemplate their frame of mind.


The difference with Dems is that a larger majority are aware of where they are at cross-purposes with their party. Not all, mind you; a larger percentage.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

5. How many ads against the "bill" have you seen?

I've seen 90% pro-"reform" ads in my area.

The exact opposite of what happened in the 90's.

Which tells me the ins. co's are just fine with it.

[treestar]

19. I haven't seen any ads

Are you saying they are paying for the pro reform ads and it's a great conspiracy while they pretend to be against it?

Man, those Republicans are so clever.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. No conspiracy. You've seen no ads. You've made my point.

Last time thru(90's) we had an anti-"reform" ad blitz. Now, not so much. It's telling.

Work the noodle!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

8. The insurance companies got their profit margins engraved in stone

at close to the same levels they are now! That is a victory. With no cost controls they can just raise premiums to cover the spread. This bill is asinine in that regard.

[treestar]

17. I doubt that

More government involvement will cost them. Republicans are always against government regulation and government run programs. There is not way they like this.

[Armstead]

13. Um no. It is enforced capitalism. Insurance companies love it.

Which would you rather have if you were an insurance company?

Real healthcare reform that would offer public insurance that competes with you, and/or actual regulation of prices?

Or a captive market of 30 million new customers, in exchange for some mild trade-offs and very little price regulation?

I kind of think they prefer option 2, which is what the democrats are delivering to them.

[FrenchieCat]

6. You know what sounds and feels quite Republican to me at the moment?

Those who don't want no stinking bill!

The Republicans congressfolks are panicked that it will pass.
The Looney Right Fringe are dying in because of it,
and some at DU are making pronouncements without any real back up
based on what they barely know.

Do you know what the "fines" will be for those who choose not to purchase
health Insurance?

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

15. Frenchie, we will most likely get the stinking bill

and then we can kiss the Democratic Party good-bye for the next generation. It's like a crazy mass suicide pact. Why didn't they just craft a good bill that we could all be proud of? One that would lower costs? One that would stand up to scrutiny? Why did they have to give in to the Tea Baggers with all that bogus "deficit neutral" stuff?

It's all going to come down to:

does the good outweigh the bad and will people see a positive result in their lives? Some people undoubtedly will. But for many people who have been happy with their employer plans, they are not going to be happy to see the costs go up and be taxed on their value to boot. People who are uninsured would have been ecstatic to be offered affordable health insurance. I've posted a couple of times that I have figured out that what I think is "affordable" and what the Senate thinks is affordable is miles and miles apart.

I read that the fines were fairly onerous - I think it was 2.5 % of income capped by what the cost of the premium would have been? Something like that. Don't quote me, I would have to run off and Google. It would have to be fairly substantial or their whole plan would go down the tubes.

The emphasis was placed on protecting the companies and their profits and not serving the people. That is the bottom line.

[Armstead]

18. Rational points do not matter -- This is what the Democratic elite want

So therefore the rest of us are supposed to be grateful that at least it's not Republicans doing this.

I hate to say this, but i think the Republicans would have done a better bill, if they were in charge and felt like they had to do Healthcare reform. It'd be shit, but it would not be as outrageous as this one.

[DURHAM D]

7. I found this priceless comment by Alan at FDL.

"Every two years or so, we progressives go to the polls and face a choice between voting for a party of insane homophobic warmongers who want to take our money and give it to corporations, rich people, bombs, and jails, or voting for the Republicans. So we hold our noses and vote for war. jails, discrimination, unaffordable health care, planetary destruction, and massive wealth transfers to the rich, and we think we’ve done just great because at least we didn't vote for Republicans."

So true...

[IndianaGreen]

14. K&R

So true!

:kick:

[Armstead]

9. The Republicans are smart. It gives them what they want, while Dems get the blame.

You are absolutely correct that this advances the GOP Conservative ideology of forcing the health care system further into the hands of the markets -- and even more outrageously by forcing citizens to become consumers of it whether they like it or not.

With the mandates, it is so blatantly outrageous that the rank and file of the GOP and the independents would yell "Foul" if the republicans did it.

But by letting the hapless Democrats do the dirty work, the GOP gets to "oppose" it, knowing that it will still become law, thus serving their corporate backers while bamboozling their grass roots supoporters.

Better yet, from the GOP Conservative point of view, this will discredit real reform and turn popular sentiment totally against any efforts to actually put in place a real government program that would provide coverage in the future.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

16. You completely get what I am saying. Thanks! nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. In this Universe THIS is a bill Republicans could have introduced

25 years ago and Democrats would have fought it.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

22. Thats my point. So in 25 years, the roles have been reversed. nt

[Vidar]

23. You're absolutely right.

[slipslidingaway]

24. knr - just imagine the Republicans introduced a bill that mandated ...

purchase of a for profit product and the person selling the product adds nothing of value, the Dems hopefully would be screaming.