Monday, December 21, 2009

Big Dan's Big News Dec 21, 2009

Top 10 Reasons to Kill Senate Health Care Bill

1. Forces you to pay up to 8% of your income to private insurance corporations — whether you want to or not.
2. If you refuse to buy the insurance, you’ll have to pay penalties of up to 2% of your annual income to the IRS.
3. Many will be forced to buy poor-quality insurance they can’t afford to use, with $11,900 in annual out-of-pocket expenses over and above their annual premiums.
4. Massive restriction on a woman’s right to choose, designed to trigger a challenge to Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court.
5. Paid for by taxes on the middle class insurance plan you have right now through your employer, causing them to cut back benefits and increase co-pays.
6. Many of the taxes to pay for the bill start now, but most Americans won’t see any benefits — like an end to discrimination against those with preexisting conditions — until 2014 when the program begins.
7. Allows insurance companies to charge people who are older 300% more than others.
8. Grants monopolies to drug companies that will keep generic versions of expensive biotech drugs from ever coming to market.
9. No re-importation of prescription drugs, which would save consumers $100 billion over 10 years.
10. The cost of medical care will continue to rise, and insurance premiums for a family of four will rise an average of $1,000 a year — meaning in 10 years, your family’s insurance premium will be $10,000 more annually than it is right now.

Jane Hamsher: There is an enormous, rising tide of populism that crosses party lines in objection to the Senate bill. We opposed the bank bailouts, the AIG bonuses, the lack of transparency about the Federal Reserve, "bailout" Ben Bernanke, and the way the Democrats have used their power to sell the country's resources to secure their own personal advantage, just as the libertarians have. In fact, we've worked together with them to oppose these things. What we agree on: both parties are working against the interests of the public, the only difference is in the messaging.

Jane Hamsher: Left/Right Populist Outrage Will Defeat Senate Health Care Bill

Glenn Greenwald: If progressives always announce that they are willing to accept whatever miniscule benefits are tossed at them (on the ground that it's better than nothing) and unfailingly support Democratic initiatives (on the ground that the GOP is worse), then they will (and should) always be ignored when it comes time to negotiate; nobody takes seriously the demands of those who announce they'll go along with whatever the final outcome is.

Glenn Greenwald: The underlying divisions in the healthcare debate

Ed Kilgore: The Obama administration has chosen the strategy of deploying regulated and subsidized private sector entities to achieve progressive policy results. This approach was a hallmark of the so-called Clintonian, "New Democrat" movement, and the broader international movement sometimes referred to as "the Third Way," which often defended the use of private means for public ends.

Ed Kilgore: Taking Ideological Differences Seriously

Obama Year One: Betrayal and Failure

Dean Agrees With Feingold: Obama Responsible For Loss Of Public Option

How was an entire debate that OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN only about health CARE, turned into a debate solely about health INSURANCE – with a mandate that everyone buy it, to boot?

What everyone needs is care, when they need it.

What no one needs is insurance, provided care is available when the need arises.

The amount of money that would be retained and re-purposed by abolishing the insurance sector ENTIRELY more than pays for the CARE that Americans need.

Over the last decade, I’ve personally paid over $40,000 to Blue Cross for insurance I have literally never used, because my deductible is never hit.

Is there not a better use for money presently spent on insurance, like, for example, care? - plunger

You know what? I agree with him!!!

'My advice, as a Christian priest, is to shoplift. I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither.

'I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices.

'I would ask them not to take any more than they need, for any longer than they need.

'I offer the advice with a heavy heart and wish society would recognise that bureaucratic ineptitude and systematic delay has created an invitation and incentive to crime for people struggling to cope.'

Read more:

Priest outrages police by telling congregation: 'My advice to poor is to shoplift'

How Banks Fleece the Unemployed

ATM's and the hidden cost of convenience

I want more money...

More than 4,000 robots are deployed in Iraq.

Reuters: Killer robots pose latest militant threat: expert

blog comments powered by Disqus