17 Million Of The Poorest People Won't Be Covered By Obamacare

[robby]

The monolithic program, that will cost society 1.5 trillion dollars. doesn't cover the poorest in society. Obama wanted to have the states cover them under Medicaid (edit), but many states can't afford to, and now the Supreme Court has ruled the states can't be obligated.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/us/politics/some-states-reluctant-over-medicaid-expansion.html?_r=1&hp

Comments

[a1icey.livejournal.com]

but you can't sell legislation on "this is an improvement in healthcare bureaucracy and won't change a damn thing on the ground."

[robby.livejournal.com]

It's going to cost trillions, and it's all on the backs of the middle class. Studies have shown that middle class savings are now gone, after five years of recession, and this new burden, is for the most part, is for a frivolous bit of badly concieved social engineering.

[mallorys-camera.livejournal.com]

Yeah. The middle class has lost all the equity in their homes over the last five years. Stock market seems to have rebounded so maybe their 401Ks are still good. I dunno.

I suppose the real analysis would be how much a middle class family would pay for health care without Obama's bill, and how much they are paying for health care with Obama's bill. It's a simple enough analysis, yet I haven't seen anyone make it.

[a1icey.livejournal.com]

well, you saw my entry on the bogus system of taxes and credits it introduces. but this is legislation drafted by a democrat, what do you expect? for what it is, it's ok. good things about it: more generic drugs faster, non-profit group to study treatment (so maybe we can start using b vitamins and st johns wort to treat depressed people), anti-fraud funding (a MASSIVE issue), preventative care, etc.

as I am sure you can imagine, I have pretty fancy health insurance. yet, i have an undiagnosed chronic condition. i did two months of tests to try to find out what it was and got nothing. the only further tests available to me involve radiation. i have decided to live with my chronic condition and its disabling effects rather than risk effects of radiation on my ovaries. there are other options but they are more expensive than the radiation tests so my insurance won't cover them. i could probably negotiate something but the kind of chronic condition i have isn't curable anyway so it's pointless.

healthcare for anyone is a bummer, because a doctor will never solve all your problems. people imagine it's lack of money that causes it. the only reason why lack of money should be a factor is because of medicines that are still under patent and surgery. both of which deserve to be expensive. angry liberals fail to see that you cannot solve all problems with money. this is where ludwig von mises comes in. humanity is not a machine with inputs and outputs.

[mallorys-camera.livejournal.com]

Well. I think the bill is an example of incredbly badly written legislation. Have I read it? No, I haven't. Tom and Katie are getting a divorce so I need all my reading energy for that. Goin' on hearsay, here.

I will say, however, much as I loath the bill -- and I do loath it -- it addresses something that needs to be addressed: the plight of the working poor (see Barbara Erenreich Nickel and Dimed.)

[a1icey.livejournal.com]

i am wondering if it had to be poorly written to muddle the issues for all the special interest groups. it's basically the only way to get past them, jumble up the incredibly attractive public policy stuff with the stuff that hurts special interest groups.

[mallorys-camera.livejournal.com]

I think you're gving the Obama Administration too much credit there. Most legislation is badly written, of course. I think that's because the legislation drafters lack the language skills to make legislation elegant the same way, for example, a court decision can be elegant. I did legislative analysis for a while when I worked for CA's Health Dept. It's a fucking mess for the most part.

[a1icey.livejournal.com]

well if you look at the bills that are introduced in congress by sweet, well meaning representatives who are just trying to improve government efficiency in a clear, concise manner, and how easily they are thrown out... it seems to me that the longer and more jumbled the bill, so long as it is tied to an unbeatable public policy objective, the better.