The message of the Ma election: we want the public option!

Atheistmark said:
Paying 750 in fines instead of providing healthcare does make you less competitive.

And people who don't get healthcare from their employee's can simply grab subsidies and get a single plan. The public option isn't in the senate bill.
Click to expand...
Again this ignores that corporations who simply fire you if they want to save money won't decide to save money. And it doesn't make you "less competitive" when everybody has the same incentive to drop your coverage.

Let's look at my position. If they drop my coverage without raising my salary, at this time I can't just hop on over to a new job as they aren't really available, I then have to use money that I use now to pay bills in order to buy required insurance (even if it is subsidized it is still MORE than I pay now). There is no incentive to raise my salary as they don't get a deduction on taxes for increasing my salary and the deduction for insurance that they cover nets them less than just paying the $750 will...
 
Damocles said:
Again this ignores that corporations who simply fire you if they want to save money won't decide to save money. And it doesn't make you "less competitive" when everybody has the same incentive to drop your coverage.
Click to expand...

If one company is providing health coverage and one is providing an equivalent amount in just salary along with paying fine, they are at a disadvantage in the marketplace.
 
Atheistmark said:
If one company is providing health coverage and one is providing an equivalent amount in just salary along with paying fine, they are at a disadvantage in the marketplace.
Click to expand...
This would only work if MOST companies would decide to continue to cover people against cost cutting pressures in a bad economy. Companies who randomly fire people would be "at a disadvantage" if such were the case, yet layoffs continue. The reality is there is no incentive for them to keep coverage under current conditions and, in fact, they are incentivized to drop it and not increase your salary...
 
Chapdog said:
they should have been doing this in an open forum like they promised. I dont sign/vote for anything that is hidden from sight. Id like to see the final version.
Click to expand...

Silence!!!

The politicians in DC know what is best for you. You do not need to know what is in the bill. It is good for you. You will learn that after it is passed.
 
NigelTufnel said:
No, I'm just telling you that it doesn't matter what anyone said. Single-payer can't just magically happen.
Click to expand...
Right, it happens like they said, step by step. And the first step was....

Well, according to them it was this bill. IMO, they created opposition to their bill because every leader who promoted this "plan" directly stated that this was the first step to single payer, that single payer was the only goal and that everything they did was working towards that. Not just party opposition, but opposition of the independents as well.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
This has completely shattered my confidence in Obama's leadership. Why the fuck did they wait till the last minute like this? Hubris? Where was the sense of urgency knowing this agenda was hanging in the balance by one fucking vote? I smeall a rat. A very big smelly rat.

Health Care reform is officially dead for the rest of the Obama administration.

I all ready held the Senate in contempt as the most un-Democratic institution in our government. An institution stuffed with Oligarchs, in both parties, who will sell the best interest of this nation down the sewer in a heart beat in order to serve the selfish interest of a handfull of people.

The time has come to ask the question. Is it now the time and place in our history to do away with the Senate?
Click to expand...

Haha Mott you are fucking nuts.
 
They keep talking about dismantling Lords in Parliament. I guess that's the equivilent of dismantling the Senate, which was modeled after Lords (especially pre retarded 17th Amendment)...
 
Threedee said:
They keep talking about dismantling Lords in Parliament. I guess that's the equivilent of dismantling the Senate, which was modeled after Lords (especially pre retarded 17th Amendment)...
Click to expand...

Hell there's no real institutional point in dismantling it other than to cut down on costs. The Lords were already stripped of what remaining vestige of power they had in the last decade. For a long time it was pretty much reduced to a way for PMs to kick "up and out" troublesome MPs. Slap them with a peerage and make them politically irrelevant in the Lords.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top