Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Hey, looks like my recall is spot on. Any other senseless one liners there JayHawk?
D.C. Circuit guts ObamaCare
- Thread starter DinoDoc
- Start date
Hey, looks like my recall is spot on. Any other senseless one liners there JayHawk?
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Right - both his quotes were directed at DinoDoc. How on earth is that poor recall? Someone is accumulating enough strikes to be hired on as a consultant for the UAW.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
It matters when he claims they were directed at me.
Please don't get him near UAW. That would frighten me.
J
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Yep, and they shouldn't be cutting a small selection of "letters of the law" out from the rest in order to rewrite it either. But I get the feeling you're probably ok with that sometimes and not ok with it other times. That's fine, it's just a sign you're thinking politically instead of legally. Obviously, judges do that sometimes too. Like precisely in this case.
sophie
Break My Heart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_health_insurance_option#Public_opinion
It absolutely did at the time when healthcare reform was being debated.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
I didn't direct anything at you. I actually agreed with you. Since you are obviously committed to taking anything I say as an insult that may have been a mistake, but since it was only one line I thought you might bother to read it. My apologies. I promise to never publicly agree with you again, even when you are right.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I despair for the day people learn to read polling data. Even your wiki article does not support your statement. It is of the much broader question of public involvement. Support fell off quickly when any specifics were proposed. If you refer to the 2009 Yahoo poll, the results were mixed.
One of the problems is that people find the subject confusing. Varied wording of questions produces an unusually high variance in result. All that could be inferred with confidence is that people wanted to pay less for insurance. There's a shocker.
J
It's not so much that people found the subject confusing, it's that they all wanted a free lunch. There was broad support for public healthcare (like I said, 97% of voters picked a presidential candidate that promised strong interventions), but they also wanted cheaper healthcare.
I'm curious where in that paragraph you see a lack of support for a public option. Best I can see is a couple polls that showed less than majority support, which is (?) offset by polls indicating majority support.
I'm curious where in that paragraph you see a lack of support for a public option. Best I can see is a couple polls that showed less than majority support, which is (?) offset by polls indicating majority support.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Goddamn, you beat me too it.
Let's all cheer the suffering of poor people everybody! w00t w00t!
Then again, there is a teeny tiny chance this ruling will stand.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I like the choice of working and starving.
It is possible to soften the blow a little, but there has to be this sort of a line.
J
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
As I said, they wanted pie in the sky, with ice cream. What they needed was reform before the country went bankrupt as the existing system exploded. What they got is the ACA, which isn't pie in the sky with ice cream, but won't bankrupt the country. Looks like a win.
The republican party is trying to capitalize on it not being pie in the sky with ice cream, while not mentioning that they couldn't produce that either. I would say that they are just mad because they didn't think of it...but in fact they did.
Initial sounding of alarm that the health care system was headed for bankruptcy without reform before the baby boomers got old: Richard Nixon.
Source of major concepts: Rand corporation study commissioned by Richard Nixon.
Proof of concept: State level system in Massachusetts installed under governor Mitt Romney.
Too bad the republicans never got around to implementing their solution to the problem that they pointed out. It would work just the same, and we wouldn't have to listen to them blustering and acting like fools about it.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Polling did not support ACA during the debate. There was only support for a generic public option, specificity was damaging to the numbers.
J
Right, that was Owen's original claim
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
The numbers are remarkably consistent over time, mostly in the -10% to -12% range.
For numbers from the beginning, click on MAX, lower right.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
J
For numbers from the beginning, click on MAX, lower right.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
J
Oh, I don't doubt there was hostility towards the ACA, that thing had horrible press and might even had a horrible basis. Owen's original claim was that there had been initial support for a public option
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
When one side labels it Death Panels and does everything in it's power to confuse and obfuscate then it's indeed no shocker people got shocked. People don't read specifics. They hear buzzwords.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
When people want something that doesn't exist they inescapably are going to get something else.
Politically, it is always easier to point out to them 'that isn't what you wanted' than to admit 'I have nothing better for you'.
People want endless high quality health care for free. Everything else follows from that.
Politically, it is always easier to point out to them 'that isn't what you wanted' than to admit 'I have nothing better for you'.
People want endless high quality health care for free. Everything else follows from that.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I suspect you would find a lot of argument on this. Certainly the press was active, but saying it was biased or "horrible" is in the mind of the observer. The bill, now the law, was a mis-mated hash at its best and rapidly got worse. Fair reporting should be negative.
At no point did the bill have popular support. Still doesn't.
J
