Comments on: Kennedy Steps Down From Judiciary to Focus on Universal Healthcare

By: bluebutterfly

bluebutterfly — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:51:14 +0000

It is my guess that insurance companies will be part of Kennedy’s plan. They are so entrenched right now that it would be impossible to get rid of them all at once. Probably, he will try for halfway measures that will finally, somehow, give coverage to all without causing people to go bankrupt.

The DNC rejected having a single payer plan and went with Hilary’s plan, instead. He will have to work within their decision?

http://www.lonestaricon.com/ab.....#038;z=275

By: bluebutterfly

bluebutterfly — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:31:35 +0000

That is the problem..both parties get lots of money from these blood suckers.

By: greenharper

greenharper — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 01:31:27 +0000

One aspect of the current U.S. health care situation that I’ve not seen addressed is the costs to employers for the medical component of workers’ compensation insurance, and the costs to adjudicate claims that workers’ injuries arose out of and in the course of employment.

These latter costs are both internal to companies, which may fight such claims & send a representative to the hearing, and to the state and federal governments, which adjudicate them (or, apparently, in some states, turn the adjudication over to a for-profit agency).

These costs also include payments to physicians not to treat injured workers, but to evaluate the connection of injury or disease to employment. Such evaluations are needless with single-payer.

Single-payer health care (NOT health insurance, guaranteed care with no co-pay) would eliminate all of this.

It would not eliminate adjudication costs for extent of permanent disability, or for disputes about pay for time off due to injury. But only a small proportion of the claims that I handled years ago for the U.S. Department of Labor were for those reasons.

There are also considerable costs to state & federal taxpayers for bankruptcy courts, and costs to the bankrupt for bankruptcy lawyers, that single-payer health care would eliminate.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:52:03 +0000

What a great comeback. I agree about Sachs but what a wonderful reply.

By: Bluetoe2

Bluetoe2 — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:47:25 +0000

I’m running back and forth from the News Hour to cooking dinner to blogging. Hard to keep up. How do I expect ”that” to happen. Engagement with groups like MoveOn, ActBlue, and even FDL. At some point their needs to be a mobilization of progressive elements. Get us out from behind our keyboards and onto the streets.

By: wildethyme

wildethyme — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:41:47 +0000

Tommy Douglas, who put through Canada’s health care plan decades ago, has been voted (at least once) by Canadians as their most admired public figure. It would be a fitting future tribute here to Ted Kennedy.

By: foothillsmike

foothillsmike — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:36:04 +0000

Enema stick with a gear shift knob.

By: eCAHNomics

eCAHNomics — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:27:24 +0000

So how do you expect that to happen?

By: eCAHNomics

eCAHNomics — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:26:53 +0000

One of the best things he did today. Some jerky airhead critter, think she was a D from CA, but might have been a R, said that her constuents were really against bailing out auto cos. What Sachs said was: what your constituents are really angry about is an unemployment rate of 6.7%. And if you think they’re angry now, just wait until the unemployment rate gets to be 10% in a couple of months, and 12% not long after. It’s your job to watch over the macroecomics and explain it to your constituents. She seemed taken aback.

Guess Sachs is no longer a Shock Doctrine proponent, at least for now.

By: CTuttle

CTuttle — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 00:25:16 +0000

Uh oh, I’ve been remiss in my duties… Swopa’s upstairs…!