Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Health Care Reform: Now With PR Gimmicks! We're Doomed.

enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
edited February 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
So, as we know, the Senate is trying to do something about health care reform. This has caused some debate!

The players:

Tea Parties! Are crazy, pressuring the Republicans to be even more insane. Huzzah!

Republicans! Are irrelevant.They hate the bill, will do anything to stop it. Believe in death panels, that this is socialist, and a government take over of health care.

Olympia Snowe/Susan Collins! Open to the idea of health care reform, but would really rather take the reform out and just make it you know, a PR stunt. Tend to favor an exceptionally weak trigger for most of the reforms, counting on the health insurance industry to reform itself.

Joe Lieberman! Asshole. Won't vote for anything the Democratic base likes.

Ben Nelson! Gigantic asshole. Won't vote for anything that lets women control their uterus without going bankrupt.

Blue Dogs! Really don't like the idea of not giving corporations a lot of money.

Mainstream Democrats! Are frustrated, think the bill has been watered down rather a lot. But will grudgingly vote for it!

Bernie Sanders! Is not going to take it anymore and is threatening to walk.

The liberal base! Is with Sanders and unproductively bitching (yeah, at least I recognize it).

Harry Reid! Is remarkably ineffectual.

Rahm Emmanuel! Is an asshole. Ignoring the liberal base.

Barack Obama! Where the fuck does he stand? Increasingly seems Rust was right.

Will the bill pass? Will it suck? Will it be good? What about political ramifications? Would you like better strategery? Better policy? Have ideas on how to get the latter? Are you a happy Republican watching the Democrats do our circular firing squad thing? Will it pass before the recess? All this upcoming on Health Care Reform: 100 Man Melee.

enlightenedbum on
Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
«13456763

Posts

  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    It IS socialist, but that doesn't mean it's bad.

    Edit - Though, I guess in its current state it isn't socialist because the medicare buy in and public option are being axed!

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • NarianNarian Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    It's "protosocialist".

    Narian.gif
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".

    You guys really need to stop making up words. D:

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    and stop using socialist like it has an actual useful meaning

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".
    No, no. Neo-Marxist.

  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    and stop using socialist like it has an actual useful meaning

    Fine, but I get to keep the flags.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Barack Obama! Where the fuck does he stand? Increasingly seems Rust was right.

    This would be a travesty if it comes to pass.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".
    No, no. Neo-Marxist.

    I thought the neo-trotskyists were supposed to put a stop to that

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • RustRust __BANNED USERS
    edited December 2009
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".
    No, no. Neo-Marxist.

    I thought the neo-trotskyists were supposed to put a stop to that

    they tend to wind up with ice axes in their heads

  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    It's a rather obscure star-trek reference

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    1) He seems to think that because the US has:

    A) 300 million people.
    B) A "representative democracy that has voided its Constitution."
    C) Social sects representing every race/ethnicity on the planet.
    D) 3.1 million miles of geography to cover with enforcement/oversight.

    . . . universal health care would bankrupt the country in 7 years.
    This does not sound to me as good enough reasons to actually bankrupt the country, and in fact sounds ridiculous to me, but I still ask: does this makes sense to anyone here?

    2) $40 billion to fraud is high, and googling it gives a 60 Minutes report of $60 billion.
    Is it really that widespread? What can be done to combat it? I guess this may not be the appropriate thread for this question even if it has to do with Medicare.

    3) Could someone give me a quick explanation of what "on the individual worker level of GDP, you are down $28 per" means? If it's a long explanation, PM me.
    1): The US is not Europe. Our population density is significantly lower, and we're a bunch of fat disgusting fucks with attendant health problems. I think UHC could work here, but it will absolutely be more costly than in the Netherlands or Britain or wherever, on a per-capita basis.

    2): There are a shitload of Medicare/aid claims filed every year. There's not enough money to audit all of them. Medicare fraud is also ridiculously easy, from what I understand; just file a fake or exaggerated claim, and poof, here's your reimbursement. It is indeed a serious problem, and increased cost due to fraud is a legitimate concern with UHC in the US. The answer is to mitigate it, not throw out the program because of a tiny percentage of lying fucks.

    3): I have absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

    sig.png
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".
    No, no. Neo-Marxist.
    Retro-Statist. We should keep this going.
    Spoiler:

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Parental Unit RemulakRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    So is there any course of action left to Senators besides "vote for this shitty bill" or "vote against this shitty bill"? Reconciliation, nuclear, all of that is off the table in terms of repairing the bill?

    I'm asking honestly.

    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I get by on the knowledge that I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time mucking about inside of my asshole anyway
  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Parental Unit RemulakRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I get by on the knowledge that I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time mucking about inside of my asshole anyway
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    Our Senate.
    Our House has been decent.

    Such hot bicameral action.

  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009

    I... what the fuck. The first minute of this is non-specific prayer. No wait, the bulk of this is non-specific. That wasn't prayer against healthcare reform, it was fucking prayer for, "Hey God, we know who you are."

    And I said it in another thread, fuck these people who are all "OH THE LORD" but when it comes to helping others they want to turn away and demonize it.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Yeah the House is pretty cool, really. They've passed decent climate legislation, a pretty good health care bill, adequate but not great financial regulation, patched the estate tax, and a variety of other things. None of which have passed the Senate. Hooray!

    And things are possible if Reid didn't suck, maybe. Senate rules are confusing.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    1) He seems to think that because the US has:

    A) 300 million people.
    B) A "representative democracy that has voided its Constitution."
    C) Social sects representing every race/ethnicity on the planet.
    D) 3.1 million miles of geography to cover with enforcement/oversight.

    . . . universal health care would bankrupt the country in 7 years.
    This does not sound to me as good enough reasons to actually bankrupt the country, and in fact sounds ridiculous to me, but I still ask: does this makes sense to anyone here?

    2) $40 billion to fraud is high, and googling it gives a 60 Minutes report of $60 billion.
    Is it really that widespread? What can be done to combat it? I guess this may not be the appropriate thread for this question even if it has to do with Medicare.

    3) Could someone give me a quick explanation of what "on the individual worker level of GDP, you are down $28 per" means? If it's a long explanation, PM me.
    1): The US is not Europe. Our population density is significantly lower, and we're a bunch of fat disgusting fucks with attendant health problems. I think UHC could work here, but it will absolutely be more costly than in the Netherlands or Britain or wherever, on a per-capita basis.

    2): There are a shitload of Medicare/aid claims filed every year. There's not enough money to audit all of them. Medicare fraud is also ridiculously easy, from what I understand; just file a fake or exaggerated claim, and poof, here's your reimbursement. It is indeed a serious problem, and increased cost due to fraud is a legitimate concern with UHC in the US. The answer is to mitigate it, not throw out the program because of a tiny percentage of lying fucks.

    3): I have absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

    You forgot the real reason.

    U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png

    the red 21%

  • NarianNarian Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    Narian wrote: »
    It's "protosocialist".

    You guys really need to stop making up words. D:

    What are you talking about, I did not make it up.

    Narian.gif
  • mrdobalinamrdobalina Registered User
    edited December 2009
    1) He seems to think that because the US has:

    A) 300 million people.
    B) A "representative democracy that has voided its Constitution."
    C) Social sects representing every race/ethnicity on the planet.
    D) 3.1 million miles of geography to cover with enforcement/oversight.

    . . . universal health care would bankrupt the country in 7 years.
    This does not sound to me as good enough reasons to actually bankrupt the country, and in fact sounds ridiculous to me, but I still ask: does this makes sense to anyone here?

    2) $40 billion to fraud is high, and googling it gives a 60 Minutes report of $60 billion.
    Is it really that widespread? What can be done to combat it? I guess this may not be the appropriate thread for this question even if it has to do with Medicare.

    3) Could someone give me a quick explanation of what "on the individual worker level of GDP, you are down $28 per" means? If it's a long explanation, PM me.
    1): The US is not Europe. Our population density is significantly lower, and we're a bunch of fat disgusting fucks with attendant health problems. I think UHC could work here, but it will absolutely be more costly than in the Netherlands or Britain or wherever, on a per-capita basis.

    2): There are a shitload of Medicare/aid claims filed every year. There's not enough money to audit all of them. Medicare fraud is also ridiculously easy, from what I understand; just file a fake or exaggerated claim, and poof, here's your reimbursement. It is indeed a serious problem, and increased cost due to fraud is a legitimate concern with UHC in the US. The answer is to mitigate it, not throw out the program because of a tiny percentage of lying fucks.

    3): I have absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

    You forgot the real reason.

    U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png

    the red 21%

    Obviously you meant to say the Blue and Green.

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Parental Unit RemulakRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    And things are possible if Reid didn't suck, maybe. Senate rules are confusing.

    Yep, that's why I had to ask. I'm sure that even if there are options to pass something that isn't terrible it won't happen at this point, but that might just be my inner pessimist talking.

    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I get by on the knowledge that I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time mucking about inside of my asshole anyway
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Doesn't that chart ignore a whole bunch of funding that gets apportioned to the DOD outside of the budget? Emergency war bills and such?

  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    When the house, after months of discussion and debate, finally said "Let's pass the damn bill already!", it passed (albeit with a couple of terrible, terrible amendments).

    When the Senate, after months of discussion and debate, said "The house passed it, let's pass it to!" they spent a month... and still going... debating.

    camo_sig2.png
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Social Security and Medicare would largely be rolled into a grouping with UHC. Thing is we're always dancing around ever increasing military costs that politically are impossible to cut.

    This country is trying to do the Charleston on a flagpole with an anchor tied around our necks

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    This is really the important chart, military spending wise:

    country-distribution-2008.png

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    When the house, after months of discussion and debate, finally said "Let's pass the damn bill already!", it passed (albeit with a couple of terrible, terrible amendments).

    When the Senate, after months of discussion and debate, said "The house passed it, let's pass it to!" they spent a month... and still going... debating.

    I've noticed that after the Senate dropped the ball, some people had enough context to find the House bill acceptable when prior to the Senate having its chance they were going off the fucking wall about how bad the House bill was.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    The fact that they won't put it to vote is sad. Open votes force people to take a position publicly. In Canada, we're uncovering disturbing evidence that the military handed over prisoners to Afghan guards, knowing that they would be tortured - and that top levels of the government ignored credible, repeated warnings that this was going on.

    The opposition parties have had two votes on the matter, and have forced the sitting government to basically say "Fuck you, democracy!" - something similar to what a few, key players are currently doing by implying their filibuster threat. I mean in that open vote, you stop people being able to hide behind the idea of the filibuster, they actually have to stand there like a douche in front of the nation and say "I DUN WANNA VOTE NEENER NEENER" - hopefully destroying their chances of re-election knowing the sweeping popularity of this bill.

  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    When the house, after months of discussion and debate, finally said "Let's pass the damn bill already!", it passed (albeit with a couple of terrible, terrible amendments).

    When the Senate, after months of discussion and debate, said "The house passed it, let's pass it to!" they spent a month... and still going... debating.

    I've noticed that after the Senate dropped the ball, some people had enough context to find the House bill acceptable when prior to the Senate having its chance they were going off the fucking wall about how bad the House bill was.

    I was more referring to the House as the congress and the senate, forgive me if my terminology was wrong. The whole legislative process seems bjorked (but that seems true around much of the world right now)

  • Irond WillIrond Will Dragonmaster Cambridge. MASuper Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited December 2009
    1): The US is not Europe. Our population density is significantly lower, and we're a bunch of fat disgusting fucks with attendant health problems. I think UHC could work here, but it will absolutely be more costly than in the Netherlands or Britain or wherever, on a per-capita basis.

    Well yeah we are not the healthiest people in the world for sure, but remember that Europe has its own health problems. Especially that they smoke a lot more than we do and that they drink a lot more than we do.

    To a large degree out heath statistics get dragged down because we have a sprawling and ridiculously unhealthy economic underclass that we really don't make any great effort to mitigate.

    Wqdwp8l.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Robman wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    When the house, after months of discussion and debate, finally said "Let's pass the damn bill already!", it passed (albeit with a couple of terrible, terrible amendments).

    When the Senate, after months of discussion and debate, said "The house passed it, let's pass it to!" they spent a month... and still going... debating.

    I've noticed that after the Senate dropped the ball, some people had enough context to find the House bill acceptable when prior to the Senate having its chance they were going off the fucking wall about how bad the House bill was.

    I was more referring to the House as the congress and the senate, forgive me if my terminology was wrong. The whole legislative process seems bjorked (but that seems true around much of the world right now)

    You flipped it: Congress = both houses, House = House of Representatives (though we call them Congressman/Congresswoman instead of Representative).

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Robman wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    The fuck is wrong with you guys, someone needs to slap some bitches in your House.

    The Senate is really where the problem is.

    When the house, after months of discussion and debate, finally said "Let's pass the damn bill already!", it passed (albeit with a couple of terrible, terrible amendments).

    When the Senate, after months of discussion and debate, said "The house passed it, let's pass it to!" they spent a month... and still going... debating.

    I've noticed that after the Senate dropped the ball, some people had enough context to find the House bill acceptable when prior to the Senate having its chance they were going off the fucking wall about how bad the House bill was.

    I was more referring to the House as the congress and the senate, forgive me if my terminology was wrong. The whole legislative process seems bjorked (but that seems true around much of the world right now)

    Ah no no, enlightenedbum's post was what actually triggered my post (him and Tom's).

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    This is really the important chart, military spending wise:

    country-distribution-2008.png

    When anyone else in NATO is willing to step up with some force-projection power I'll be all in favor of cutting the military budget by half.

    Meanwhile as long as we're the only people with the means to get a whole bunch of shit to the other side of the world that isn't really an option.

    Thanks for playing though!
    Social Security and Medicare would largely be rolled into a grouping with UHC.
    Frankly a UHC bill should be structured such that we can completely end Medicare.

    If we don't do that, Medicare needs a lifetime cap.

    Social Security should really just be taken out back and shot, frankly.

    sig.png
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    You flipped it: Congress = both houses, House = House of Representatives (though we call them Congressman/Congresswoman instead of Representative).

    WHY DO PEOPLE PARK ON DRIVEWAYS AND DRIVE ON PARKWAYS.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Social Security and Medicare would largely be rolled into a grouping with UHC.
    Frankly a UHC bill should be structured such that we can completely end Medicare.

    If we don't do that, Medicare needs a lifetime cap.

    Social Security should really just be taken out back and shot, frankly.

    Mmmmm catfood.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Social Security and Medicare would largely be rolled into a grouping with UHC.
    Frankly a UHC bill should be structured such that we can completely end Medicare.

    If we don't do that, Medicare needs a lifetime cap.

    Social Security should really just be taken out back and shot, frankly.

    Mmmmm catfood.

    Move in with your kids.

    sig.png
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Social Security should really just be taken out back and shot, frankly.

    Are...are you kidding? It's only the most successful social spending program the US has ever enacted.

    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    My point is the US isn't as broke as it pretends to be

    we just spend lots of money on crap

«13456763
This discussion has been closed.