Obama On My Mind

Last Updated on Monday, 14 September 2009 10:52 Written by Scott Wegna Monday, 14 September 2009 10:42

obama-on-my-mind

I’m back from the Pittsburgh ComiCon and as always, it was a great show. Stan Lee brought in a nice crowd, we had a very well placed booth, and I met some new people. So all in all a success. On the social side, things were pretty tame compared to past years due to the Raddison being closed and everyone being scattered between five different hotels, most of which not in walking distance of each other. But the Rad will be back in April, so no fear True Believers!

Unfortunately for most of the weekend though I was sort of checked out mentally. Because the day before I left for the con I spent a very uncomfortable hour on the phone with my rep at NEBA -the New England Business Association. What NEBA does (in theory) is allow small businesses and the self-employed gain access to health care by allowing us to act as one large group and bargain for lower prices like corporations and state agencies do.

I’m gonna warn you now that this is not my typical blog post. I spent most of the morning debating whether or not to even write it. It’s got none of the usual sarcasm, silliness, and mock outrage that these things usually contain. I tried to do that. I really did. But my head’s just not able to access that space right now. So you guys who read this blog for a quick laugh or to escape the boredom of the moment might want to check out here and come back next week.

Health insurance has always been the one major drawback to being self-employed in this country. Even with NEBA’s help health care for my daughter and me has typically cost me two or three times more than it ever did when I worked for someone else. Assuming that most of you guys who read this blog either work for someone else or still live at home that’s probably something of an abstract concept for you. So imagine taking your cell phone bill, your cable bill, and your average car payment. Now instead of paying them once a month, pay them twice a month. Or to put it another way, take your rent/mortgage and double it, then increase that monthly payment by no less than $100 every year. It sucks eggs. Especially since that will only get you the most rudimentary of insurance plans, meaning that you pay more than most people for doctor visits, prescriptions, and hospital visits. Or to stick with the home analogy, the double payment doesn’t cover busted water heaters or leaky roofs.

The solution that most freelancers have for this is brutally simple -don’t get health insurance because you can’t afford it, pray nothing bad every happens to you, and if it does, go to the emergency room where they charge you six times the going rate. Since you probably won’t be able to pay that bill it drives up the cost of insurance for those who do have it. Until they can’t afford it anymore either.

But what are your options? In America? None.

Before you take a shit on the self-employed, refer back a few paragraphs and ask yourself this; could you afford to pay your rent if it suddenly doubled?

I feel that I speak for most of us in my situation when I tell you that I work my ass off to put food on the table and keep a roof over my family’s head. You can certainly argue that my job is way better than most, but you can’t deny that I put in almost double the work hours of your average gainfully employed person for a lot less money. I enjoy being a productive member of society, and I actually enjoy paying my own way. I take a great deal of pride in the fact that I do what I do and there is a real sense of accomplishment in doing it on my own.

What I have a real problem with though is a system that is unjust in the extreme and at its core is very, very broken.

The idea that socialized medicine is free medicine is so fundamentally stupid that It’d be laughable if so many people didn’t believe it.

I have friends and family in the UK, Canada, Germany, and Switzerland. All First World countries with government run health care systems. They pay for that health care via their taxes. None of them feel that there system is perfect, but they universally tell me that it’s damn good in their experiences, regardless of how American media often portrays them. With a few of them I’ve actually sat down and run the numbers and even when my health care cost less because I worked for someone else it still cost more than in these other places. And looking at numbers alone it works just as good as our system in terms of illness treated, diseases cured, and average life spans. The big difference is that everyone gets coverage, not just those lucky enough to be able to afford it.

Until last Friday I was one of those “lucky” people. While it meant that I had to give up many things and make many compromises in my life at least I knew I was covered. I didn’t mind that I had to give up cable, I don’t miss taking vacations, and I am pretty well resigned to the fact that I rent a shit-box house in a fly-speck of a New Hampshire town because I can’t afford to live anywhere else. At least I had piece of mind that when my child got sick she would be taken care of.

At least until last Friday.

Now we have passed through the looking glass, and Wonderland is fucking terrifying.

Now we have to chose. Do we go without insurance, squirrel that money away for an emergency, and pray like fuck that we never have one? That’s one option. I wish I could tell you that putting the Widget and me on Dorinda’s plan that she gets from her job was a solution -but that would actually cost us more because her employer doesn’t cover employee’s families. They just let you buy into their shitty plan at full cost (about twice what we can afford). And then there’s option number three -keep paying what I pay now, but drop the Widget from my plan and hope that nothing happens to my beautiful little girl. So my options are basically: Insane, Impossible, or Inhuman beyond fucking comprehension.

Nine year ago on July 27th I was diagnosed with a disease that if left untreated would have killed me. That’s not a supposition. It’s just medical fact. It took months of treatment and many more months of recovery, both mental and physical. In a lot of ways that experience was one of the greatest of my life. Because until you really look at death it can be very hard to appreciate being alive. How many twenty-four year olds really understand that their lives are going to end, and it might happen a lot sooner than expected? Because when people say “life is short”, it’s not a fucking joke. It makes you appreciate things. It makes you reevaluate things. It gives you the courage to understand that as an individual your existence really is meaningless, unless you take the steps to give it meaning. It helps you have the balls to take risks and ,(as horrifically corny as it sounds), follow your passions.

If I’m diagnosed with cancer in 2010 I will die. It’s as simple as that.

Currently only two of the four people who work on Atomic Robo have health insurance, despite the fact that we all work long and hard as our jobs, pay our bills, and try to give a little back to the world in the form of what we create. In a few weeks it will be just one member of the team. And if our Canuck leaves Canada to be closer to a person they care about, it will very likely be zero.

No one is asking for handouts. Institutional charity is bad for society, and bad for the human spirit. But what people are asking for, and should be demanding, is an affordable system that everyone has access to. We live in a country that happily pissed away billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives on an illegal and pointless war that has benefited no one (except the military-industrial complex), but we can’t see the point in spending a fraction of that on making it possible for sick people to get treatment.

Whatever compromised half-measures Obama manages to crap through Congress is almost beside the point for me right now. Nothing will take effect for several years, and my emergency is right the fuck now.

I don’t know what to tell you guys. I’m sorry this was a bummer of a blog post. The Internet in general, and this slice of it in particular, is pretty much all about escaping from reality. But the real world is a fucked up place and it’s where we live physically if not mentally.

If I’ve offended anyone I guess all I can say is, fuck you. Feel free to stop reading my book, and I hope you get to walk a mile in my, and all the rest of our, shoes some day. The way the economy’s tanking that day will probably come pretty soon.

I promise I’ll be back next week with the usual inane dribbery. It certainly is a lot more fun to write those blog posts than it was this one, and if I can make a couple people chuckle it makes me happy too.

RANDOM SPLENDOR

090626-TWIToons-20.ss_full[5]

1236681924_snail_transformers


Popularity: 21%

This entry was posted on Monday, September 14th, 2009 at 10:42 am and is filed under commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
obama-on-my-mind
  • I’ve actually sat down and run the numbers and even when my health care cost less because I worked for someone else it still cost more than in these other places. thats it's
  • I will remove all political content for Ryan's benefit.

    Bob says he has seven apples when he knows he has three.

    Steve says he has six apples because he counted that he has six apples.

    Bob and Steve said very similar things, but there's a qualitative difference between what they said.

    Abortion: the most diplomatic thing I can say is that human beings have a right to autonomy even though human biology means there's gray area that makes everyone feel icky with respect to embryos which do not yet have autonomy.

    PS: CLOSED THE COMMENTS BEFORE IT GOT TOO SILLY IN HERE. IT WAS JUST GOING TO GO ON FOREVER.
  • Mike
    "Finally, if you can allow for the possibility of "sane Christians" and recognize that some might be frustrated by how others behave, then how can you so easily lump everyone who disagrees with you into the category of children who need to be put in a corner?"

    Because the "sane Christians" aren't doing anything to STOP the crazy ones? People mostly thought Scientologists were maybe a little weird but harmless, until Tom Cruise went out there and acted like a lunatic. It shone a light on how crazy those guys are (and honestly, rightly so...if you do some digging, you can find things written by other authors that were apparently THERE when Hubbard was bet that he couldn't start a religion and get someone to join it) and HE became the face of it. If you want people to take your group seriously, don't let your resident nutbag (and every group has at least one) be the one in front of the cameras. If you let that happen, and you don't do anything to stop it, then it's awfully hard to argue when people believe the nutbag is representative of you all.

    "WOW - this is like a microcosm of our country – the comments here are bogging down in "politics" while Scott and the Widget, burdened with REAL problems, kind of get forgotten and left to fend for themselves."

    Quoted because it bears repeating.

    (Also, just because I feel like stirring the pot a little, my personal philosophy on abortion is the "one penis no vote" theory. I'm not personally in favor of abortion, but I also don't see where I should get to exert control over and FORCE other people to agree with me. Pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion, it means you have the freedom to do what you think is best for you.)
  • Ryan
    "I don't want to read anyone's medieval ideas on the topic :\"

    My point illustrated yet again.
  • Please don't drag abortion into this, I don't want to read anyone's medieval ideas on the topic :\

    "There's nothing that can be done? Nothing at all? It's entirely beyond our capacity to work together?"

    The olive branch has been continually offered and continually rejected. There's a point where it makes sense to move on. We're at that point.
  • Ben L
    Wow. You people sure can talk a lot.

    I have to ask, because I always do in these arguments, do the people who argue against health insurance reform have health insurance today? And if they do, do they know what other options they have? And if they do, do they know what the costs are? Do they know what would happen to them if they had to rely upon that insurance in a time of duress?

    I ask these questions and more:

    1.) for the sake of Scott’s original post, to drive the topic and comments back on track (you’re hijacking the thread by focusing on name calling and fact checking – you guys know who you are).
    2.) to find out how little people know about this. Especially those who argue against it.
    3.) To give those arguing against it a breath of reality on the issue. Or at least, tell them my perspective on the issue.

    While there are some valid concerns over health care reform (rsheckel brings up two: public health care used for abortions, and for illegal immigrants) most of the arguments I hear are about “takeover” or “bureaucracies” or some other such talking-point, that I really don’t think the people arguing against health care reform understand what it is, or what it entails.

    What sucks, too, is when these people sit on a nice comfy cushion called “I already have health insurance, and I’ve never missed a meal in my life, so nothing is wrong”. Or they have their head in the sand, because they haven’t struggled with things like what Scott is talking about. Anyone who has had to fight with their insurance company over a claim or dropped coverage, has a debilitating or life threatening disease and switched jobs/insurance companies, is poor, is a single parent, has had to go on Cobra or some other HMO-type program, or any other derivative thereof WANTS HEALTH CARE REFORM. Those who argue against reform often scream of people who are privileged, naïve or just plain ignorant of the issue.

    What also sucks is all the politicizing that is going on. Rsheckel wants them to get it “RIGHT” instead of “RIGHT NOW” – which is a nice sentiment, but very naïve as well. When does the government get anything “right”? Anyway – there is a ton of politicizing going on, and of course, with such a huge bill, that has already been rubber stamped by the President (he said he’d sign any bill put before him, more or less) there’s bound to be all kinds of pork added onto the thing – by both sides. It’s tragic that it’s come down to name calling – liberal this, right-wing that, conservative slant, democratic takeover – and all that shit – is just pandering to CNN and C-SPAN and all the future careers of these hacks. Not one of these fat-ass politicians has struggled with what Scott and millions of Americans deal with daily. They are representatives, but of whom? Corporations, that’s who. Which means – whatever we get in reform will fuel someone’s profit motives.

    Finally, I think Brian is somewhat right, in that there is a lot of yelling going on about this issue. And most of the arguments come from angry white men. And I think they are the ones who woke up on the Wednesday after election day and said, “He fucking won! Where’s my shotgun?” I’m not saying that all the arguments against reform are racist – but these same white guys weren’t hooting and hollering when the last occupant took away freedoms in the name of national security, or grew the government by 3 times it’s size of his predecessor, or added over a trillion dollars in debt to erase a surplus. These white guys weren’t arguing one bit – because a white man was doing it – and, “by golly, war fuels the economy”. Right. Look where two illegal wars got us – how’s the economy running now? How much would you like to be drinking that beer with the last dipshit now?

    I like to ask my questions, because I’m white, healthy, born and bred in the US, and have a steady job. I make good money, can pay my bills and my fair share of taxes, have never had any handouts from the government that I know of (except public education, the “safety” of being protected by an army, and my junkmail arrives on time, every time). But I don’t have health insurance. I dropped my employers plan, because, as kidkosmic pointed out, I can come out ahead by putting that money elsewhere. I did the research, I crunched the numbers, and I figured out that I was paying for something that wasted the majority of my money. To top it all off, when I did have an incident that I wanted covered (an optional X-Ray – non emergency situation) and was covered in my plan, they refused, claiming some Bureaucratic Policy). After arguing with them - then ordering an investigation into them - they eventually paid – and I rewarded their bastard behavior by dropping them. All in all, they won, because I had paid in for years, and financially they came out on top – but I’ve used the experience to educate individuals against health reform, that it isn’t poor, illegal or destitute people who want reform.

    Anyway – I feel for you Scott. Thankfully, I don’t have a child to consider, or I might be forced to drink the cool-aid they serve here at work. But I wish that everyone came to the argument equally prepared to talk – instead of focusing on specifics, or outright lies, or fears of a black planet.
  • rscheckel
    "For this example to apply, we have to be able to prove that the right is a bunch of fascists the same way we can prove they're a bunch of liars."

    www.factcheck.org hosts many examples where both sides are distorting the truth to suit their political needs. But I think my point is being overlooked, here. If we want to oversimplify the issue and say that there are only two "sides" to this and that those opposed to the current health care bill are liars/conservatives/Republicans/teabaggers and those supporting the current proposed legislation are truth-tellers/liberals/Democrats, then this back and forth (akin to what you and Ryan have been filling up these comments with) of which "side" is more wrong still doesn't make the side that is less wrong victorious by default nor does it give that side carte blanche to do whatever they want because they're less wrong.

    "the right is throwing a national tantrum"

    It's unfortunate that some pay more attention to tantrum throwers while there are still very valid and reasonable people who disagree with the proposed legislation. If, say, this mangled shoe were on the other foot and some on "the left" were trying to have a reasonable conversation while "the extreme left" was throwing a fit, would you want to be lumped in with them? This is one of the key problems with how politics are discussed in the U.S.: it's either US or THEM, democrats or republicans, liberals or conservatives. That's just not reality. But many would like us to think it is because it helps maintain the status quo.

    "...and the left is powerless to get anything done because they're making the mistake of treating the other side like intellectually honest participants in the American political process. There's nothing we can say or do to bring the right to the conversation..."

    Talk about a limited set of options. There's nothing that can be done? Nothing at all? It's entirely beyond our capacity to work together? Either you agree or you don't? Where'd the hope go?

    "...so we need to put them in the corner for a while and let the grown ups govern."

    No marginalizing language there. Nope. ,':| I think this is the crux of Ryan's argument: when you decry the tactics of your enemy but turn right back around and use them yourself, it doesn't strengthen your argument. Mockery doesn't help anyone. It's tough to honor any argument leveled by someone who feels that mockery (or name calling or white washing or lying or marginalizing or...) is acceptable discourse. If we want intellectually honest discourse, somebody needs to stop touting party lines and just speak honestly. Is anyone in Washington really doing that across the board? Even President Obama's speeches on this matter have had falsehoods in them (http://factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care...).

    And, Brian, if we want to talk about conflicting interests (and I almost don't want to type the word for fear of where it might take this downward spiraling conversation), how about the direct conflict between government health care for all as a HUMAN RIGHT while that same health care would pay for abortions (even late term if permitted in that state)? What about those here without legal right? Are they not human? The current plan refuses to pay for any claim they make. This bill is flawed and could ruin our country and further polarize the health care situation, not fix it.

    Finally, if you can allow for the possibility of "sane Christians" and recognize that some might be frustrated by how others behave, then how can you so easily lump everyone who disagrees with you into the category of children who need to be put in a corner? It's like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.
  • "So, if the right screams "COMMIE!", it's okay to scream "FASCIST!" back at them?"

    For this example to apply, we have to be able to prove that the right is a bunch of fascists the same way we can prove they're a bunch of liars.

    "We need to work together, which was the promise on which I voted for President Obama."

    I hear ya. The problem is that the right is throwing a national tantrum and the left is powerless to get anything done because they're making the mistake of treating the other side like intellectually honest participants in the American political process. There's nothing we can say or do to bring the right to the conversation, so we need to put them in the corner for a while and let the grown ups govern.

    @Ryan I have already explained why it "sounds a lot alike" but is not equivalent. I'll run through it again.

    1) It's funny to call them tea baggers because they're actions and messages are based on distortions of the truth, racism, or flat out lies, therefore they are to be mocked.

    2) Conservatives who vote against their own interests; who ignore evidence that contradicts their (now failed) ideology; orwho make clear their actions are firmly based in racist thought so thinly veiled you can see right through it are stupid conservatives.

    3) It is a shame that many of 1) and 2) are self-professed Christians who don't seem to understand a damn thing about their own religion, because if they did they wouldn't be in 1) or 2), but that is exactly what the GOP political leadership has cultivated for about forty years now, so it's not terribly surprising. Unfortunately, these are stupid Christians. I am not a Christian, but I've read the Bible (more than once!) and every time I see someone thumping it in the name of oppression or ignorance it sinks my heart. I cannot imagine the frustration one must feel as a sane Christian when these are the people who are its public face. I guess it'd be like if every scientist spoke like Richard Dawkins.
  • Ryan
    Once again. No where did I say anything about it not being ok to call them liars. If you think they're lying, then fine, say so. I was responding to Scott's statement complaing about Republicans saying "Because you disagree with me you are a stupid Liberal and you are wrong." And specifically listed three types of things that, come to think of it, both you and Scott say often that sound a lot like, or have the same attitude as "Because you disagree with me you are a stupid Liberal and you are wrong." Those three things were the term "tea-baggers," calling conservatives stupid because they are conservatives, and insulting Christianity (specifically calling Christians stupid).

    It had nothing to do with the validity or lack there of the protester's arguments. You brought that in.
  • rscheckel
    So, if the right screams "COMMIE!", it's okay to scream "FASCIST!" back at them? If the right calls someone a "socialist", it's political discourse to call them "teabaggers"?

    ernie makes a good point. This (both here and on the national scale) isn't helping anybody. No one argument point is going to make the other side go, "Oh!? I hadn't considered that! My bad. Proceed." We need to work together, which was the promise on which I voted for President Obama.
  • You're drawing a false equivalence.

    When the right screams lies and distortions (i.e. every message propagated by these protests), it's okay to call them liars.

    I mean, I guess it "sounds" alike in that both sides are calling each other liars, but one of them is spouting "birth certificate", "death panels", and protesting at Obama over the taxes enacted by the Bush administration that he had no power or influence over. So, yeah. One of these sides is not like the other.
  • Ryan
    "No, it's not. They have every right to say what they want, no matter how full of ignorance they are. We have every right to point out that what they're saying is ludicrous."

    Did I say you don't have the right to say anything? I said that some of the things you say make you sound like the very people you say them against. Feel free to keep saying them.
  • "And my original statement is still valid."

    No, it's not. They have every right to say what they want, no matter how full of ignorance they are. We have every right to point out that what they're saying is ludicrous.

    Further, you can assert these protests would occur no matter who won the election, but I don't think it'd be quite as full of racist undertones if that were the case. Whatever the alleged intent of these manufactured events, they have been turned into something far more disgusting.

    "I don't give a rat's ass about the party leadership or their strategies. They've screwed the membership over so much in recent years."

    Then for the love of god, vote them out!
  • ramonschenk
    All I could think of was to go online and order the second Atomic Robo tpb. Best of luck to you all!
  • ernie_stiner
    WOW - this is like a microcosm of our country – the comments here are bogging down in "politics" while Scott and the Widget, burdened with REAL problems, kind of get forgotten and left to fend for themselves.

    So sad.
  • Ryan
    I'm sorry. I can't stop posting.

    From Wikipedia:

    "During the 2009 Tea Party protests against the tax policies of the United States Government,the use of the phrase "tea bag" was used by Fox News Reporter Griff Jenkins and reteaparty.org. Salon.com, however, pointed out that "teabagging" has long had another meaning.

    The term "tea bagging" was quickly co-opted by those critical of the movement. For example, MSNBC's David Shuster who on April 13, accused the protesters of "going nuts for it" and "whip[ping] out the festivities"; wanting to "give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending." He argued that "the people who came up with it are a familiar circle of Republicans including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, both of whom have backing from right wing financiers and lobbyists." and that "the Fox News Channel, including Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity, both are looking forward to an up close and personal taste of teabagging themselves." He concluded, saying that "If you are planning simultaneous teabagging all around the country, you're going to need a Dick Armey."[13] On April 13,[14] 14,[15] and 15,[16] MSNBC's Rachel Maddow made similar remarks. On April 14[17] and 15,[18] MSNBC's Keith Olbermann made remarks in the same vein, and on April 15, CNN's Anderson Cooper said "It's hard to talk when you're teabagging."[19][20]

    "Teabaggers" has become a label used by some to cast aspersions with sexual innuendo on those who protest Obama administration initiatives such as health care reform[21] or to imply such intent in others who use the term, and by some of the protesters themselves."


    So yeah, you were right. It started out being used by a couple people and websites who were ignorant of its other meaning. I didn't know that. It wasn't used by the main groups involved. But now it's definitely being used by people who want to insult and belittle the movement. And my original statement is still valid.
  • Ryan
    Anyway, I really don't want to debate more. This comment thread is better served by pretty much everyone else in it except you and I. My initial point was that while I feel for Scott, and understand his predicament, his use of terminology that is highly reminiscent of the very tactics he deplores from conservatives bothers me.

    But that's a side issue, and shouldn't take up as much of this as it has. Please feel free to delete all my comments.
  • Ryan
    1) Can you provide any examples of them calling themselves that? I know a lot of people who were involved in those rallies, as well as heard about them on the radio before hand. Never onc heard the term teabagger till they started getting media attention.

    2) I was referring to idibividuals within the party. Ordinary people like yourself on the other side of the issues. I don't give a rat's ass about the party leadership or their strategies. They've screwed the membership over so much in recent years. You realize those tea parties were being planned before Obama got elected? They're not just about him. In large part, yeah, because he's the one in office screwing people over. But if McCain had won, and done some of the stuff he said he'd do, he'd have gotten protested too.

    3) seriously? I was referring to the section I later changes mind and decided to comment on. Yes the Bible advocates compassion... Did you know conservatives are the largest donators to charities, by percentage of income, by far? We're all for compassion, but just don't think the government is always the best way to achieve it.
  • kidkosmic
    Scott: I've been a freelance designer off and on for 18 years. Not much different than being a freelance artist. There are literally millions of self-employed individuals who carry catastrophic health coverage. Basically, this coverage is for just what the name implies so that cancer or something really expensive doesn't bankrupt you, but you are not paying $300 - $600+ a month (depending on the plan and how many family members you have) for a premium plan with doctor co-pays, prescriptions, etc., etc. This kind of "catacoverage" (or HDHP) typically has a high deductible of say $2,500, which means the insured is responsible for anything in one year below that amount.

    With this coverage, you pay cash for doctor's office visits. Tell them beforehand and they will usually give you a discount rate--works for me. So, if I pay $150 a month for catacoverage and have a month where I pay $150 for a doctor visit, that's $300. How often do I need to go to the doctor? I haven't needed to go in 5 years.* That's 5 years I wasn't paying a premium for a $10 co-pay that I didn't need (or want, really). At minimum, I saved $9,000 over those 5 years by going with catacoverage and I was protected from bankruptcy the entire time.

    * A couple of years ago, my daughter needed her tonsils out (it was a non-emergency procedure) and I wanted to pay cash for it. So, I called around to find a hospital who would work with me on a decent medical payment plan and got a price break. It worked out great and I'm still cash ahead of where'd I'd be if I had been shelling out $400 a month for a Cadillac plan.

    BTW, why do people go to the emergency room if they don't have insurance? There's a doctor's office 3 miles from my home that I can walk right into off the street and get cared for and they charge much less than the hundreds or thousands an ER might charge for the same service. You know why a lot of people go to the ER? Because they don't care about the high bill as they have no intention of ever paying it. Our system is being abused by people who visit the ER several times a year for non-emergency care.

    We are willing to pay for comic books, toys, movies, video games, cable TV, gadgets, concerts, music, cars, data plans--on and on, but we can't afford to pay for some health care? Priorities, I guess.

    Check these links out for more info on this subject:

    http://www.insurance.com/article.aspx/Pros_and_...

    http://benefits.advocatehealth.com/MedicalHDHP.asp
  • @Ryan: No, they called themselves "Teabaggers". That's why there was a joke to be made in the first place. That's why they don't call themselves that now, they finally caught wind of the joke. If you think for one second that the GOP would let a gaffe like that slide, you are literally out of touch with reality.

    "How funny it is that that's pretty much exactly (with a couple names changed) What a lot of the Right thinks of the Left... Just saying."

    Maybe you've never heard of the Southern Strategy, Karl Rove, or Newt Gingrinch? I don't know. The leadership on the right is pretty open about how they're not interested in debate or intellectual honesty. They barely pretend to be a part of the political process any more. The party's entire message has boiled down to thinly veiled codewords for racist rhetoric.

    Lastly, for not commenting on "the rest" of my comment because you disagree, the only thing you didn't touch was what I mentioned about the Bible. Is it actually your position that the Bible does not advocate compassion toward your fellow man?
  • Ryan
    Though I do have to point out,

    "The left continues to be hamstrung by assuming people on the other side of the issue are also making honest attempts at communication. The right gave that up somewhere in the Clinton years.

    So, we're a little frustrated that what has become the American version of the BNP has been allowed to control every issue and level of discourse when they'd be a laughing stock anywhere else in the world."

    How funny it is that that's pretty much exactly (with a couple names changed) What a lot of the Right thinks of the Left... Just saying.
  • Ryan
    Not going to bother quoting and responding to the rest of your comment Brian, as that's just disagreeing with each other and not going to change, but:

    "It's what they called themselves...?"

    No it's not. They had "Tea Parties" as a reference to the Boston Tea Party of fame. They do not call them selves "Tea-Baggers." That's entirely a name given to them initially by initially by bloggers trying to make fun of them, and picked up by the media, possibly ignorant of its other use. But no, they don't call themselves tea-baggers.
  • yayap91
    Hey Scott, you blog was mentioned on CBR's news section:

    http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2009/09/co...
  • rscheckel
    Brian: I couldn't agree more about the horrible job Christians in America have done in caring for those who need care. As a Christian, I honestly believe that the lack of compassion and caring for the poor, homeless, ill, etc. is the greatest sin on the American church's back. I honestly can't figure it all out, but I believe it's root lies somewhere in a selfish bastardization/perversity of patriotism, politics, and religious identity. While looking "to the past" might not be the best approach given tetsubo's comments, I think back to a time when people in need sought out the church for help and received it and I wonder how we screwed it all up so, so badly. I am honestly ashamed of how "we" have acted.

    But, the fact that I feel that shame doesn't mean I can just dismiss the principles on which stands my objection to the adding of yet another government-run program to the existing foul brew. I can't get behind piling more bureaucratic mess on top of existing bureaucratic mess on top of profiteering-greed on top of prejudice on top of... well, you get the picture. I want a complete overhaul, not an expensive bondo patch. I guess that doesn't qualify me for the "conformist" definition of conservative, but there's got to be a better way than what we have and there's got to be a better way than just slapping something else on top of what we have.

    tetsubo: Not that I assume your post to be about me, but if you consider me to be conservative (I consider myself to be more of a libertarian, but whatever) because I'm a Christian and I am concerned about the cost, I hope I have shown you that not all have a very narrow range of opinions. I honestly believe in the human capacity to think outside of the box and come up with an elegant, fantastic, caring solution. I just don't think the proposed plan is that solution. It sure ain't a bargain (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoo... - skip down to the $2,500 savings part). And clearly it isn't a single-payer system.

    One of my friends brought up the inalienable/human right perspective on twitter (yeah, having this debate with unlimited characters is hard enough... 140 is a bitch!) and I just can't shake the notion that that means that all humans have the right to live, to breathe, and to not have their living-ness and breathing-ness interfered with by another. It doesn't mean that government-run health care is the best and only way to ensure that people don't die.

    It's not that black and white (only, in a lot of cases, this health care thing is about black and white and brown and... never mind). It's not a) government-run health care or b) people die. At least a quarter of the tens of millions of Americans out in the cold are not, in fact, left out in the cold as they qualify for existing government programs but, for reasons equally diverse, don't access the care provided. Why? Because of poor management and communication on the part of our existing government-run health care systems? Because the existing systems are crappy anyway? Another 20% make more than $70,000 annually but don't have jobs that provide it and they don't buy it on their own. Why? Because of the profit-driven nature of insurance companies? Because of the cost of malpractice insurance + the cost of getting an MD + elitism = it's too damn expensive? Another fifth have recently come to the states (both legally and illegally). What about those who have yet to or don't pay federal income taxes? Can they "buy in"?

    It's. Complicated. Let's get it RIGHT.
  • tetsubo
    By it's nature, by the very definition of the word, a conservative world view is about conformity. It's about not changing the status unless absolutely necessary. That what we have *now* is the best and shouldn't be changed. Some in the movement even look to the past as some idealistic utopia. So when you personally encounter conservatives that act in a lock-step manner, after a time you start to think of them all doing the same. I'm not saying this is right nor justified, but it does happen. And that has been my personal experience. From conservatives that follow Limbaugh, to conservatives that are highly educated, the ones I have known have had a very narrow range of opinions. So it is my, possibly wrong, habit to lump all conservatives into the same basket.

    I would go so far as to say that if you aren't in that conservative basket, you might not in fact be a conservative. I've often said that Bill Clinton was the best Republican president within that past fifty years. Maybe that will help explain my own personal point of view.

    Health care is a human right. The US is the only industrialized nation that does not possess a universal health care system. It is amoral and is financially crippling our nation. If we were to adopt one it would provide universal coverage AND save our nation money. Which is why I am constantly confused why 'fiscal conservatives' haven't hopped onto the band wagon. Americans love a bargain. And a single payer system would be a bargain. It would also be the moral and ethical thing to do.

    Our current system leaves 46 million Americans out in the cold. Scott and his daughter may well be among them shortly. That same system lets 18,000+ of our fellow citizens die. For the crime of not being able to afford health care. A profit driven system that benefits from human suffering is morally reprehensible. This isn't about the government doing something to us, it's about the government allowing us to help each other. About Americans helping Americans. Because you never know when you will become one of the people that need that help. It is in your best interest to support a system that provides a safety net for all of us.
blog comments powered by Disqus