|
| quote: | Originally posted by Fledz
The simple answer should be:
"Because, you fucking uneducated, gun toting, moron, a person who ends up in hospital costs you in the long run 10 times more than they would if you had treated them early. So by not giving everybody at least a decent form of basic health cover, you're dooming your public system to years of sick and poorly treated patients that cost the country countless billions in lost healthcare. Something like a statin will cost the government a decent amount of money to treat somebodies cholesterol over the course of the rest of their life, but it will be comparatively far less than if they have a stroke/infarct, end up in hospital, need people to treat them, need more medication, possibly never be able to work again, lose core body functions etc etc etc" |
I agree with you, but the fundamental misunderstanding about the current bill in Congress is that it doesn't even represent a rise in cost! Republicans bandy about the 800 billion dollar figure because it's a soundbite, but that is the cost displacement of current health care expenditures, which are projected to be about 900 billion over the next ten years. That's actually a fairly substantial decrease in overall costs! And still the Republicans refuse to negotiate.
| quote: | Color me unsurprised that Barack Obama didn't mention the public option in his remarks to the Senate last weekend. One of the dynamics that hasn't really penetrated in this debate is that the Obama administration is mainly interested in the cost controls. The president will throw the public option overboard if Susan Collins asks him nicely. Conversely, Peter Orszag will lay down in traffic to save the Medicare Commission. Generally, Democrats want to reform the health-care system because they want to cut the number of uninsured. The Obama administration's commitment to health-care reform stems from their belief that it's the first step towards cutting long-term deficits.
That's why it's been so depressing to watch the Republicans and conservative Democrats who base their opposition on cost control prove stubbornly unwilling to cut a deal that would control costs. The Obama administration would support pretty much any cost containment device that could pass Congress. They'd cap the employer tax exclusion, create a Medicare Commission, bundle every hospital payment in the country, support a strong public option, whatever. But there has been no bloc of votes interested in a deal along those lines. Instead, the conservative Democrats have contented themselves with killing the public option and the Republicans have committed themselves to killing the bill. That's left liberal Democrats like Jay Rockefeller to advocate everything from progressive ideas like the public option to conservative ideas like the Medicare Commission. |
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ez...tion_doesn.html
It's insanity really - Republicans are simply taking advantage of widespread public ignorance for political cover in refusing to legislate for the public good.
___________________
|
