u.s. politics: faygo to the polls

[Kalbear]

Just now, GAROVORKIN said:

Insurers are bailing out of the exchanges, thats. huge problem right there.

Some are, others are joining back in. It is a problem that would be almost precisely solved if the current administration pledged the money that they were supposed to in order to support the markets. 

The biggest fundamental flaw of the ACA is assuming that the government will not actively try to sabotage it and will in good faith attempt to make it good or better. That was such a fundamentally optimistic assumption that it really strikes at its core. If there was a doover, I think medicare/caid for all would have been voted on in an instant given the ACA bouncing around and the like, letting people buy into medicaid as they choose. 

[GAROVORKIN]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

Some are, others are joining back in. It is a problem that would be almost precisely solved if the current administration pledged the money that they were supposed to in order to support the markets. 

The biggest fundamental flaw of the ACA is assuming that the government will not actively try to sabotage it and will in good faith attempt to make it good or better. That was such a fundamentally optimistic assumption that it really strikes at its core. If there was a doover, I think medicare/caid for all would have been voted on in an instant given the ACA bouncing around and the like, letting people buy into medicaid as they choose. 

One thing I've heard mentioned is rising costs are also due to  poor overall  management on the part of management in hospitals  and doctors and waste , I don't have any statistic  backing  this one up. But it  makes sense.

[LongRider]

Medicaid/care for all would really be the humane and fair thing to do.  But, then Gar would only have one choice, from the Gov'mt no less (unless he was really, really rich and could afford the Cadillac plans that would exist for the elite who wouldn't  think of touching Medical).  Boo hoo, affordable available health care not tied to one's employment.   How awful!     /s

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

12 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The valve is already turned on. That is entirely my point. I'm suggesting that perhaps it's okay for both sides to use the hose, instead of one side. 

But the time is long past when the valve was closed. 

So turn it up full blast! An armed society is a polite society, right?

[GAROVORKIN]

7 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well it depends what your priorities are. If it’s

1. Achieving universal coverage (and for me this is a moral and ethical imperative)

2. Getting our health care cost down

3. While keeping a high quality health care system.

There are good reasons to think that ultimately single payer is a good way to go.

I consider the ACA the second best solution, not necessarily the best solution.

Anyway, different countries have come up with different solutions. And it would seem they achieve universal coverage, while having lower cost, and maintain a high level of care. The American health care system has been a mess for awhile. And it badly needed fixing.

If your talking about a one payer system there are number of obstacles to that happening .  

[OldGimletEye]

On 8/20/2017 at 4:31 PM, GAROVORKIN said:

Insurers are bailing out of the exchanges, thats. huge problem right there.

In large part because of conservative and Trump's efforts to destabilize it.

I remember back in the day when some conservatives sung the praises of Swiss style healthcare. Interestingly enough, the ACA was pretty close to that model.

If conservatives believe that government has no role in healthcare, they need to so state and be honest about it, rather than hinting how they would do better.

[LongRider]

4 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

One thing I've heard mentioned is rising costs are also due to  poor overall  management on the part of management in hospitals  and doctors and waste , I don't have any statistic  backing  this one up. But it  makes sense.

Something you heard?   

 

[OldGimletEye]

On 8/20/2017 at 4:41 PM, GAROVORKIN said:

If your talking about a one payer system there are number of obstacles to that happening .  

I'd probably agree that it would have to be phased in, so people could adjust their plans. But, the main obstacles right now are political and ideological, not technocratic.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

13 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

Insurers are bailing out of the exchanges, thats. huge problem right there.

I don't know about that, but there are other weird things the US system leads to which drive up costs significantly. For example, American patients often get way more numerous and expensive treatments than they reasonably need for their specific ailments, both so that the doctors can avoid leaving legal openings for potential lawsuits and so that they and their hospitals can charge the insurance companies more money. This is a phenomenon that basically doesn't exist in countries with normal healthcare systems. 

[LongRider]

1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

I'd probably agree that it would have to be phased in, so people could adjust their plans. But, the main obstacles right now are political and ideological, not technocratic.

This sadly, is correct. 

[Seli]

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

No, it's still apples and oranges. It's 1940 to 2017. It's an aggressive, militarized, foreign power that had occupied a large number of our allies to a fringe group of Neo-nazi dipshits who are cosplaying out a dead fantasy.

 

The US wasn't an ally in 1940. And the in Germany the persecution of groups the extremist right didn't like started years before.

[GAROVORKIN]

10 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Something you heard?   

 

Americans Waste 200 billion Every Year on Medical Test they Don't need Experts Say  by Chad Terhun  Los Angeles Times 

and from 2012.  * Kinds of Waste Driving Healthcare Costs  Healthcare Finance 

I cannot link  them but if you punch them in up on you  computer they should come up . There are other articles if want to actually take the time to look .

 

 

[LongRider]

8 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

Americans Waste 200 billion Every Year on Medical Test they Don't need Experts Say  by Chad Terhun  Los Angeles Times 

and from 2012.  * Kinds of Waste Driving Healthcare Costs  Healthcare Finance 

I cannot link  them but if you punch them in up on you  computer they should come up . There are other articles if want to actually take the time to look .

I also have low tolerance for snide people .

 

 

Ahem, that was not your argument.  Show me citations  about overall poor management.  See how that works?

Quote

One thing I've heard mentioned is rising costs are also due to  poor overall  management on the part of management in hospitals  and doctors and waste , I don't have any statistic  backing  this one up. But it  makes sense.

If you have a low tolerance for snide people, why are you posting on the internet?

[Rippounet]

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

Yes and no. It is true that the overall rise of inequality has nothing to do with affirmative action or any of the other "diversity" initiatives. However, the latter are a multiplicative effect on top of the former: with ever fewer desirable positions, the preferential treatment towards certain groups based on immutable characteristics becomes more significant. Using the standard pie metaphor, inequality has decreased the size of the slice that most people get, but affirmative action and the like redistribute a part of the already shrunken slice away from certain groups and towards others. Of course, the two effects aren't of the same order of magnitude, but the visibility of the "diversity" one is magnified by the fact that it has beneficiaries who are easy to see (and in fact some who loudly advocate for its increase).

That's one way of looking at it. I personally find it difficult to believe affirmative action has much impact these days. In my opinion, the Supreme Court decisions have gutted it at university levelf for instance.

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

There is no official discrimination against women or minorities and there are lawsuits where it is found. The unofficial variety is by its very nature difficult to substantiate (again, if you could prove that it is present, there'd be a lawsuit).

Depends what we're talking about. It's very easy to show that schools in predominantly black neighborhoods are underfunded for instance. Of course, you might say that there are numerous factors leading to that, but those are exactly what affirmative action is supposed to compensate for.

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

In the US, it is much too late for this: at this point, the media would be hard pressed to convince more than half of the population that they're telling the truth if they say that water is wet. This is probably the scariest aspect of this mess: the alt-right and the alt-left are currently too small to make a noticeable difference, but there is no national-scale entity with moral authority anymore or even one that will simply be believed by most people.

Yeah, that's really worrying because it might prevent the current polarization from subsiding.

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I think the 2017 French election was expertly executed: the French elites learned a lesson from Brexit and Trump and decided to take no chances. Macron would almost certainly have won against any other candidate in any case, but having Le Pen in the second round made the victory much more decisive.

That said, yes, for some reason the media seems to be more effective in preventing socialists from getting anywhere than they do with the far-right. I'm not sure why this is the case. Maybe the European media don't really want to attack them., but the American one has bashed the far-right every chance it got for a while... it just seems to be damaging the media more than it does the far-right.

I think the easy answer is that the European media and those who own them are not afraid of the far-right. In fact, they have no reason to be. Otoh, they have reasons to be afraid of socialists.
It's different in the US because the Democrats are harmless to corporate interests (unlike some European socialists).

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

The percentage of the population is negligible -- but it is the case for practically all actions, events or policies so far. On the other hand, the propaganda impact is national and it contributes to the rage. I can just as easily ask what percentage of the population have been impacted by the alt-right; it is almost certainly even smaller and not by a little bit.

Uh. Deportations have affected a huge number of Americans.

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I think you mean the Mexicans -- nobody in the US has been talking about the Canadians

Really? You haven't heard about the US currently renegotiating NAFTA with Canada?

58 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I think you mean the Mexicans -- nobody in the US has been talking about the Canadians -- and no, I don't. Thus far, Trump appears to be an opportunist who had the skill and luck to acquire a powerful position, but not quite enough to get anything significant done with it. I'm not sure if he's a neoliberal simply because he hasn't done anything yet.

Uh. How about cutting taxes for the wealthy -again?

 

[OldGimletEye]

On 8/20/2017 at 5:02 PM, Rippounet said:

Uh. How about cutting taxes for the wealthy -again?

Seriously, look who Trump went and got as economic advisers. He got that fraud Stephen Moore (architect of the “Brownback Boom”) and Larry Kudlow another conservative clown.

And then Trump wants to dismantle Dodd-Frank and put in Jeb Hensarling’s Financial Bomb Act?

And somebody is going to say with a straight face, well, well um, I’m not sure if he’s a neoliberal? 

Come on.

[GAROVORKIN]

20 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Ahem, that was not your argument.  Show me citations  about overall poor management.  See how that works?

If you have a low tolerance for snide people, why are you posting on the internet?

 

Go and read the articles

 

Because Im a snide person and I can't even stand  myself?

 

[GAROVORKIN]

40 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

In large part because of conservative and Trump's efforts to destabilize it.

I remember back in the day when some conservatives sung the praises of Swiss style healthcare. Interestingly enough, the ACA was pretty close to that model.

If conservatives believe that government has no role in healthcare, they need to so state and be honest about it, rather than hinting how they would do better.

 

Part of the issue is not enough healthy people signed up for ACA to offset the cost of people with preexisting conditions. Insurance companies  can's make enough money on them to  justify staying in  the exchanges   Also the fine for not signing up for ACA is less then what a healthcare plan would cost so form standpoint , its cheaper to pay the fine then it is to have healthcare whcih they can sing up for when they get sick .

[Larry of the Lawn]

46 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

So turn it up full blast! An armed society is a polite society, right?

Dude, everyone else already is taking advantage of violence as a tool.  If you want to be the guy that's telling your oppressed allies "keep suffering a little longer, remain holier than thou, take the high road, etc" so be it.  I don't think anyone is calling for the execution of white supremacists or anyone bass on political ideology.  But there are a lot of us saying 'fuck you' to the notion that these people need to be defended.  There are a lot of us wondering why this is the hill you're choosing to die on.

 

And yes, I believe that anyone that voted to repeal the ACA is a violent person and I can see no reason to think otherwise.  They have literally threatened friends and family of mine with pain, suffering, and likely an earlier death than need be.  And then when this same administration calling for this coddles these fucking white supremacists that would love to see my family dead or gone I have absolutely zero fucks given for anyone trying to defend them or call for moderation or anyone ringing the 'both sides' bell.  One of these sides has already conducted genocide.  Go fuck yourself.

[OldGimletEye]

On 8/20/2017 at 5:21 PM, GAROVORKIN said:

 

Part of the issue is not enough healthy people signed up for ACA to offset the cost of people with preexist conditions. Insurance companies  can's make enough money justify staying on the exchanges   Also the fine for not signing up for ACA is less then what a healthcare plan would cost so form standpoint , its cheaper to pay the fine then it is to have healthcare

Yes, the reality based community knows all about adverse selection problems. We’ve been trying to tell conservatives about it for years.

Making the mandate stronger could help stabilize things. But, conservatives didn’t want to go for that, instead they opted to sell fantasies like “buying insurance across state lines”.

[GAROVORKIN]

39 minutes ago, Khaleesi did nothing wrong said:

I don't know about that, but there are other weird things the US system leads to which drive up costs significantly. For example, American patients often get way more numerous and expensive treatments than they reasonably need for their specific ailments, both so that the doctors can avoid leaving legal openings for potential lawsuits and so that they and their hospitals can charge the insurance companies more money. This is a phenomenon that basically doesn't exist in countries with normal healthcare systems. 

 

Tort reform  and limiting the damages paid alone  won't significantly reduce medical costs.