"Change Blindness"

[Cleo's Mom 257]

If only we had had all this delay, debate and consternation about the lead up to the war in Iraq that was totally unjustified instead of with health care reform. Bush gave the WMD inspecters 10 minutes to inspect, then he invaded at a cost of nearly one trillion dollars to date. Blank check after blank check was issued without any discussions, fear mongering or debate. After all, to be opposed to this costly (in terms of lives and money) war was to be unpatriotic and be with the terrorists. If only this war had been debated to the extent that health care has (after all it has been discussed since the Truman administration) perhaps nearly 5000 soldiers would still be with us and we wouldn't have had to borrow a trillion from China to finance it.

The Iraq war cost money and lives and we got nothing for it. Health care reform saves lives. 18,000 people a year die from lack of health care. But where were all these fiscal conservatives who are so concerned about the cost of health care when the Iraq war was being waged? Not one person or reporter asked Bush where he was going to get the money to fund the Iraqi war. Not one. And he and Cheney were completely wrong about the war - about everything - from the lack of WMD's to being greeted as liberators to the cost of the war to how long we would be there. But no one held them accountable. And still the blank checks kept coming. But now, all those same people are asking ad nauseum, ad infinitum about the cost of health care reform. Even though health care is profit driven and helping to contain those profits will contain some future costs.

All of these arguments against health care reform are red herrings to divert attention away from the real issue which is that profit driven health insurers will still be able to do what they have always done: 1) sell policies 2) collect premiums 3) deny as many claims as they can get away with 4) make obscene profits. Why would they want to change any of this?

[Nanook 2]

Am I too old t be a co-ed? :laugh:

No but if you wait till you're a senior citizen you may get tuition for free!

[BethFromVA 5]

No but if you wait till you're a senior citizen you may get tuition for free!

Hmmm... *taps finger to chin

:laugh:

[BeckyinTn 0]

Good Luck Beth! I too am going back to school to finish what I started many many years ago! I was told that I have about 18 months and I will be done with my B.S in Elem Ed. My husband thinks I am nuts to want to still teach..lol.

[BethFromVA 5]

Good Luck Beth! I too am going back to school to finish what I started many many years ago! I was told that I have about 18 months and I will be done with my B.S in Elem Ed. My husband thinks I am nuts to want to still teach..lol.

LOL, I think you're nuts too, but it's a noble profession. Not all are called, that's for sure.

I should have about four full-load semesters to finish (including summer session) as I'm about halfway there (59 hours out of 120). I figured if I could do about 15 each semester, I will finish by December of 2010 (YAY, originally I thought it would be April of 2011!).

>edit< Though now that I think of it, there is a senior class I have to take where it is HIGHLY recommended you take no other classes during that time as it is so time-intensive. That may have been for working people, but I guess I'll see. So it MAY be spring of 2011 after all... :laugh:

[plain 12]

Not one person or reporter asked Bush where he was going to get the money to fund the Iraqi war. Not one. And he and Cheney were completely wrong about the war - about everything - from the lack of WMD's to being greeted as liberators to the cost of the war to how long we would be there. But no one held them accountable. And still the blank checks kept coming. But now, all those same people are asking ad nauseum, ad infinitum about the cost of health care reform.

So, we shouldn't be asking these questions just because nobody asked Bush? I don't see the logic there....unless you're trying to say that two wrongs do indeed make a right.

[BJean 16]

The point is, where was the outrage when something truly, truly outrageous was happening to us? Instead of complete and utter outrage when people are trying to put together something that will improve our lives so dramatically.

I can't imagine that anyone among us doesn't understand the need for serious healthcare reform.

When Cleo'smom said: "All of these arguments against health care reform are red herrings to divert attention away from the real issue which is that profit driven health insurers will still be able to do what they have always done: 1) sell policies 2) collect premiums 3) deny as many claims as they can get away with 4) make obscene profits. Why would they want to change any of this" she is totally on the mark.

I can't understand why all Americans (except of course those whose income is from the insurance industry) aren't screaming for healthcare reform. It seems as if they have allowed their aversion to our current president overshadow good sense and the possibility of a policy that would improve health care costs and availability and even quality for this country of ours.

[BethFromVA 5]

BJean, I don't know ANYbody who doesn't agree that we need healthcare reform. We just don't believe that 1) the government has any business doing it, and 2) that you scrap an ENTIRE SYSTEM where 85 percent of the people are covered just to cover the remaining 15 percent. In the long run, more than 15 percent will go without.

You know, with Teddy "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy's death today, it really makes me wonder: Since he was one of the biggest proponents, if not one of the orignial founders, of government-run healthcare, why is it that he didn't take advantage of it himself? Why was it that HE, with all his resources and private planes, was able to seek out the best care and didn't seek out a plan more akin to what he wants the rest of us to have? With all his family money, I guess that makes him greedy that he didn't spread his family's wealth and instead chose to use that money on himself to extend his own life at the cost of the lives of others. Why is it our government is SO good at taking my money to give to my neighbor, yet ALL of them are independently wealthy compared to the average American? Why doesn't the giving start out at the top?

Anyway, under his very plan, a guy of his age would have been sent home with aspirin and nothing more.

If he isn't the epitome of hypocrisy, I don't know what is.

[plain 12]

The point is, where was the outrage when something truly, truly outrageous was happening to us? Instead of complete and utter outrage when people are trying to put together something that will improve our lives so dramatically.

Actually, I would assert that asking "where was the outrage when....." is a total waste of time. I mean, how far back do you wanna take the outrage game? Reagan era? Carter?

I can't imagine that anyone among us doesn't understand the need for serious healthcare reform.

A lady wrote an op-ed piece in the local paper and said that it would be more accurate to call for "insurance reform", instead of healthcare reform....and I find myself agreeing with that. Of course we need reform. It's how that reform will take shape and what the cost will be that divides.

When Cleo'smom said: "All of these arguments against health care reform are red herrings to divert attention away from the real issue which is that profit driven health insurers will still be able to do what they have always done: 1) sell policies 2) collect premiums 3) deny as many claims as they can get away with 4) make obscene profits. Why would they want to change any of this" she is totally on the mark.[

Right on the mark. The blind ideological mark. See, if she was "on the mark", then how would you explain my opposition to this plan? I'm not a CEO of a giant insurance company. I'm not a simple rube that swallows propaganda from either side. This is where the left is making a huge mistake (I've said this before, but indulge me)......The cannot for the life of them understand the common, everyday American opposition to this. They can't relate.

I can't understand why all Americans (except of course those whose income is from the insurance industry) aren't screaming for healthcare reform.

Er....see above comment

It seems as if they have allowed their aversion to our current president overshadow good sense and the possibility of a policy that would improve health care costs and availability and even quality for this country of ours.

Here we go. Oppose this plan and you must dislike President Obama. Or, in thinly veiled terms, you must be a racist....because why else would Americans be skeptical?

Ok, here's a little something to think about: President Obama has said that under his plan "if you are happy with your insurance, then you can keep it"......but one of the first things the plan proposes to cut is Medicare Advantage. Hope nobody was happy with it.

Asserting that this policy will improve costs and availability and even quality is a stretch, at best. I can tackle each of those seperately, if you want me to.

[BethFromVA 5]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj73rqEpr1A

[BJean 16]

Uh the reason Ted Kennedy didn't do what he proposed is because it was only a proposal - it hasn't been put into action yet. Unfortunately people like Ted Kennedy are the people in the U.S. who can call the shots with their health care (if you'll pardon the pun). Most of us cannot. We're jerked around like puppets and we pay through the nose for the privilege.

The interesting thing that you all seem to agree on is that the insurance companies are at the root of the problem. Do you think that if we tell them that they can't operate the way they've been doing it, they'll change the way they do business? And that action will revamp health care in America? Sure, and I have some beach front property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.

[BethFromVA 5]

The interesting thing that you all seem to agree on is that the insurance companies are at the root of the problem. Do you think that if we tell them that they can't operate the way they've been doing it, they'll change the way they do business? And that action will revamp health care in America? Sure, and I have some beach front property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.

Yet though you've seen government failure after government failure coupled with fiscal irresponsibility on top of that failure, you seem to somehow believe that the government will do a better job of taking care of this mess than if some regulations and reform at the base level were implemented.

[BJean 16]

plain since you say that, "Of course we need reform. It's how that reform will take shape and what the cost will be that divides" it would be beneficial if you could actually map out the plan that you and the brilliant minds you support, can git 'er done.

People don't understand what is on the table right now and part of the reason is because people keep saying all kinds of stuff that might sound logical on the surface, but it is not logical. It is just chatter that clouds the real issues. No wonder people are so confused.

I have not intimated that opposition to Obama is anything but political opposition. I can't imagine that everyone who opposes Obama and his political views is a racist. That's just plain stupid and I don't believe that for one minute. And that is very offensive that you would suggest that his race is the reason people don't agree with him. Of course there are racists in America, but it doesn't mean that people oppose the President because he is of a mixed race.

If your response to my post is an example of how you go about explaining "... each of those seperately, if you want me to" don't bother. I'm pretty sure I understand where're you're coming from. First of all, you disagreed with me that we don't have the best medical care in the world. So, I don't think I need you to explain cost, availablity and quality for me. And secondly, you've talked a lot on this topic on various threads but I haven't read anything that leads me to believe that you have a clue how this "rotten in Denmark" system that we have will actually be fixed.

And btw, the reason you keep hearing it brought up that people were not outraged by our former president, when he was indeed completely outrageous is because it is a very important part of our history. Is there some reason other than historical significance which causes everyone to continue to talk about Reagan, Kennedy, Carter and other past presidents and their behavior in office? We hear about Clinton, ad nauseum, and usually the reference has nothing to do with anything but his sexual indiscretions. So sit back and get used to it. You'll be hearing all about President Obama once he's out of office too. It's a part of our history and part of our learning experience if we are smart. And comparisons are always inevitable. We learn when we contrast and compare, right?

[BJean 16]

"Yet though you've seen government failure after government failure coupled with fiscal irresponsibility on top of that failure, you seem to somehow believe that the government will do a better job of taking care of this mess than if some regulations and reform at the base level were implemented."

Beth I believe we have no choice but for the government to get involved. Just like in the banking industry and housing industry and many other places that we have to muscle our way in to keep this country strong and to keep our citizens from being ground into the mud by the people who have the power to do it and stand to gain financially by doing it.

We're not making this move to change the healthcare system because it is working well. We're getting government involved because the health care industry, including pharmacuticals, doctors, hospitals and the insurance industry can't do it for us. They have way too much to lose. And in fact, they are the ones who are fighting us every step of the way and they are the ones who have put a stop to changes in health care in the past.

And on top of that, I do not believe that the government behaves irresponsibly like you say. We've worked in the government, in some of the biggest parts of the government and trust me, you only wish that private corporations had the kind of controls and transparency that most branches of the government have. It's very popular to bash the government. Fact is, we can't do without it and have the country that you say you're so proud to live in.

I am not saying that the plan put forth in the House is what I would choose, if I had the chance. But I do believe that no plan is far worse than doing nothing and keeping things as they are. Could it be improved, hell yes. Will it be done? Probably not.

And one reason is because there is so much B.S. that is out there muddying the Water. If we could handle this in a straight forward way - without lobbyists and palm crossing of big bucks, we could hash out a decent plan.

I will admit that most people, by human nature, are afraid of change. But when you have to live with a medical system that is run by big money and you fight battles all the time just trying to get a doctor, the proper diagnosis and treatment, good safe care in the hospital, medications that are top-notch that you can actually afford, and an insurance company that won't cut you off if you get a recurrence of cancer, where your treatment is limited to what you can afford out of pocket (as happened with my school teacher sister, who subsequently died), it is easy to see that although change is scary, not making some major changes can threaten your health and even your life. We're stupid if we, as a country, don't understand that after years of dealing with the system the way it is. Just because it hasn't happened to you or one of your loved ones doesn't mean it isn't going on every single day.

[plain 12]

The interesting thing that you all seem to agree on is that the insurance companies are at the root of the problem. Do you think that if we tell them that they can't operate the way they've been doing it, they'll change the way they do business?

Why not just overhaul the industry with increased regulation?

plain since you say that, "Of course we need reform. It's how that reform will take shape and what the cost will be that divides" it would be beneficial if you could actually map out the plan that you and the brilliant minds you support, can git 'er done.

BJean, if I had such a plan, I'd be a sell it to a think tank and be a rich mofo. From all that I've heard, I think we should: 1) proceed with the IT upgrade that would help cut medicare fraud. 2) Tort reform 3) allow interstate insurance purchases. A plan like this wouldn't bankrupt us, and we could reassess to see what needs to be from there.

People don't understand what is on the table right now and part of the reason is because people keep saying all kinds of stuff that might sound logical on the surface, but it is not logical.

Like what exactly?

I have not intimated that opposition to Obama is anything but political opposition.

Oh, ok. My apologies then. But when you said: "It seems as if they have allowed their aversion to our current president overshadow good sense ", it sounded eerily like all the news anchors talking about the "racist" townhall protestors

I don't think I need you to explain cost, availablity and quality for me.

If you think the current plan will increase each of these things, then I think I do need to explain it to you. Or perhaps you can explain how it'll work to me.

And btw, the reason you keep hearing it brought up that people were not outraged by our former president, when he was indeed completely outrageous is because it is a very important part of our history.

Germane to history, yes. Germane to the healthcare discussion, nope.

We learn when we contrast and compare, right?

But only when we compare / contrast apples to apples. We wouldn't learn very much about President Clinton's education policy by comparing it to President Carter's foreign policy.