Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Support Health Insurance Reform

By

Please join your friends in support of Health Insurance Reform in Peabody Square at 1PM on 08-13-09.

Republicans in opposition of President Obama’s health care proposal plan to demonstrate outside the office of 6th District Congressman John Tierney. This rally of misinformation has been promoted on various media outlets including WRKO.

We have seen these guerilla tactics all across the country. Closer to home, this web of fiction is being lead by Republicans who are more interested in self promotion rather than equitable and affordable healthcare for all Americans.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  2. What do we do with people who honestly believe things that simply aren’t true.  Obama has never said anything remotely close to using hospice to eliminate undesirables.  He’s gone out of his way to proclaim the exact opposite.

    <

    p>So, what do we do when there’s this much cognitive dissonance?

    • either follow the whim of the majority and not enact this legislation, or you could still do it, under the rationale that you know what’s better for the people than they do.

      • Of those two alternatives I’ll take the latter over the former without the slightest hesitation.

          • One political mistake made by the Bush Administration was to think that politics simply consisted of marketing. “Spin it right,” they thought, “and Americans will buy it.” They were very, very good at spinning and that worked marvelously at getting us snagged in Iraq without even a plan.

            <

            p>That’s the problem, though. The public rejected the Bushies because of the results of their policies. They could not spin Katrina or the endlessness of their Iraq improvisation. The failure of their policies did them in.

            <

            p>So too, here, I think. National health insurance promises to do a lot of good. It will grow our small business sector. It will remove a big weight of worry from the lives of many. It get people checkups and preventative care who need it.

            <

            p>What Christopher is suggesting, then, is the opposite of Bush. Bush pushed bad policies because they sold well; we want Obama to push good policies even if they don’t because ultimately they will.

            • This policy may be good in theory to some, but the math doesn’t work.

              <

              p>We’re going to raise 500 billion from taxing the rich, who already pay a plethora different taxes?  And this whole business with cutting another 500 billion from medicare, but then 300 billion blowing back and all this…These numbers are huge numbers, too big to be wrong if things don’t go according to plan, which they almost never do.  

              <

              p>You’re older than me and clearly (no snark!) are blessed with great wisdom, KBusch.  However, I have a lot more years ahead of me than you (I hope!) and I am far more worried about this country collapsing under the weight of its debt than I am about Iran, jihadists, anti-abortion terrorists or old people bombing down the street and can’t see well.  I’m worried that when I’m your age (and I assume you’re in your 40s or 50s) that this country will be so indebted and stuck in deficits we won’t be able to function.  I’m worried this reform will make that problem even worse.  

              <

              p>Nobody has alleviated me of these fears.  Bush and Obama both showed that they have no problem tossing billions into the wind and hoping it will work out in the end.  I’m all set with that kind of thinking.  

              • Perhaps I should answer your questions more formally, but here’s an informal take on it:

                • Ultimately taxation is less important than the dynamism of the economy. If the economy thrives, then it can afford taxes. If the economy crawls, then no tax can be low enough.
                • The thing that looks as if it is going to bankrupt us is not debt. It is health care costs. Medicaid is already getting scary. Medicare is not far behind. The increases are affecting employer coverage. We need to get this under control or you, with your greater life expectancy, are screwed.
                • As I indicated elsewhere, the cost of health care jeopardizes the ability of our economy to innovate. Small businesses have difficulty with health care coverage.
                • Most every other major industrialized country has some sort of government involvement and guarantee of health care. If this were such a bad and risky idea, one would expect to see very negative consequences in other countries, but we don’t.

                Maybe that will be a bit reassuring?

                <

                p>I like you, too, by the way. Thank you.

                • but this point bothers me:

                  Ultimately taxation is less important than the dynamism of the economy. If the economy thrives, then it can afford taxes. If the economy crawls, then no tax can be low enough.

                  <

                  p>We are currently in a period lacking in a thriving economy.  Isn’t there the potential that this kind of spending and increase on taxes in segments that are critical in a economy like ours (people hate on the rich, but we need them) could end up causing even greater problem economically?  

                • … the problem is debt and you need to get a handle on it.  Sometimes the problem is activity slowdown and you need to ramp it up.  Debt is a perfectly acceptable thing when employed toward growth activities that are projected to be worth the price.  Going into debt for a war, for example, is not as economically desirable as going into debt for health care.  And make no mistake… dealing with health care is a growth activity… just look at health care cost growth projections on budget, something like 100% of GDP by 2085 at this rate.  It’s really a ‘we have no choice’ activity.  The tragedy is that if it were not for non-debate debate, we could concentrate on more efficient cost saving measures.

                  <

                  p>Investment is a real thing, even when done on borrowed money.  

                • I should have said ‘optional’ war.  Certainly you can make an argument that some wars have unacceptable economic consequences with regard to disinterest.  Wars of defense in particular would fall into this category.  

      • Slow down JoeTS.  The health care cognitive dissonants are nowhere near in the majority.  They’re very loud fringe.

        <

        p>The fact is that the American people have elected a 60% majority in the House, a 59% majority in the Senate (Specter wasn’t elected as a D), and a 100% majority in the POTUS — and that the health care plans are solid, common, traditional, campaigned upon ideas.

        <

        p>The fact is that the American people did elect the people who were publicly in support of this kind of legislation before their last election.  They are the majority, not the cognitive dissonant fringe.

        • I have started to see polls suggesting that the protesters are gaining in the public sympathy department.  How sad.

      • Last time I checked, this was a Representative Democracy and a certain party in power won vast majorities because, among other things, they were seen as the party that could finally do something about health care.

        <

        p>If anything other than a robust, progressive and speedy health insurance reform bill occurs, then it represents the complete and utter failure of our system of representative democracy – and it’s time we throw away outmoded and not-originally-intended rules like the filibuster, perhaps even the entire (very undemocratic) Senate.

        <

        p>The majority wants major health insurance reform. They want cost controls, better quality and improved access. Don’t fool yourself, Joe.  

        • because you win elections versus an extremely unpopular party isn’t necessarily a mandate on every segment of your agenda.  

          • but health care was one of the two or three biggest issues. We have a mandate on health care, no matter how many guns teabaggers bring to town hall meetings this summer.

    • A far more accurate characterization is “flagrant lying”.

      <

      p>The teabaggers are simply lying. The GOP is lying. Rush Limbaugh is lying. None of this is surprising, these people have been doing this for years.

      <

      p>It’s long past time we stopped ducking the reality that faces us. What do we do when so many people lie?

  3. After watching the video on this post I’m speechless — very unusual for me.  I’d give practically anything (not my 2 kids, though) to have an honest discussion with the woman in this video to find out what her sources are for understanding of “Obama’s Plan” for health reform.

    <

    p>It would also be interesting to find out if she and her husband make use of Medicare and Social Security benefits, programs that they, as she said, most unwillingly paid in to.

    <

    p>For any BMG readers who aren’t on the Alliance to Defend Health Care listserve that sent out this resource for grassroots organizing to 2,000 activists on 8/11, you might want to make use of this searchable health care town hall events tool by FDL. Try it, you’ll like it.

  4. and read the paper daily, also. It doesn’t help when I have to find out about these events on web sites like BMG at 4:00 PM when the event was at 1:00 PM that day. Publicity is lacking here. BTW, I support reform, strongly.

  5. … is owed money.  In general it still makes economic sense to take out a student loan.  You take out a loan for a car because you are able to afford the payments.  you take out a loan for college because you will be able to afford the payments.  

    <

    p>Again, this is a principal… the specifics with regard to health care reform cost and projected growth are another matter.  To some extent, it almost doesn’t matter because whatever the cost, the investment is necessary because the alternative is unacceptable.  Think of it as throwing a bomb on a credit card by taking out a different loan at a lower rate.  At the rate of health care cost increase, almost any refinancing rate would be worth it.  Indeed, if ever it was beneficial to go into this kind of strategic debt, now is the time to do it given current interest rates.

    <

    p>Of course it costs money and debt sucks, but in this case it really is (in general) the lesser of two evils.  It’s just hard to grasp in the current conversation because we’re talking about ‘future’ evils – that’s the nature of debt.  The average American citizen thinks they have a reasonable understanding of the national debt, so it’s an easy fear to bring up.  If your first instinct about government is that it can never get anything right (that there is almost no such thing as a good policy choice other than to ‘stay out of it’, which in this case would be fiscal suicide), then the increased debt can be made to look scary because you don’t trust what you’re buying with that debt.  

    <

    p>Knowing all these factors, what I really want is a policy designed by wonks and nerds instead of Senators with an interest in pushing public opinions rather than education Americans on the issue (and one side is clearly more in one camp than the other).  What we have, however, is a political process that is (hopefully) informed well by the wonks.  I know this is the case for Obama.  His decisions on staffing positions within the administration made it clear he wanted smart wonks on this issue in particular.  By contrast, the ‘loyal’ (heh) opposition has been way more interested in political gain here.  Indeed, anyone expecting to come out with a policy that will necessarily (because of the reality of the situation) be the lessor of two evils should expect to take some political pain for it.  The fact that one side is bypassing this and exploiting it for their own gain is an indicator that they (in general) care less about actually solving the problem than other considerations, including probably financial.    

Archives