|simon666 - 2009-08-20 |
Here is the second half of this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIF_dWwxAHE
|HURF BLURF DUH - 2009-08-20 |
but but but private enterprise! i don't understand your question!
|sosage - 2009-08-20 |
The familiar nausea from the Bush Jr. era is hitting me again. Insurance companies are having a fun time fucking up what is really a very simple concept. I bet they could convince people that shooting themselves in the head is a good idea.
"Health care is not a commodity" is the best fucking thing said all year.
Well, it IS. I think the disconnect here is that Rep. Weiner has drawn a line in the sand and decided that health, and health alone is a morally inappropriate demand to satisfy along market principles.
Joe, being a red-blooded American capitalist, sees (perhaps accurately) that there is no particular reason economically speaking why government funding for a doctor's visit and IV tubing should be exempt from the operation of the free market but a chiropractor's visit and glasses should not. Or a visit to a therapist, or fire insurance. Or car insurance.
The fear Joe has is at least nominally a reasonable one. If we're willing to turn this over to the government, there is no clearly discernible end point. What about paramedical services? Nutritionists and personal trainers? Funding those will save the health care system a lot of money, and will only make sense for a bureaucratic health provider. We're now talking about a massive government agency and a tax rate similar to Canada's. Except Canada can afford its health care tax because it doesn't have to pay your defense tax. Joe's concern, and the concern of all non-crazy opponents of the public option, is that this will establish an agency you'll never be rid of that will continue to grow and eat and grow and eat.
Now, I'm Canadian, and I agree with Rep. Weiner --- I think it's morally wrong to withhold lifesaving technology and services from people for financial reasons, and it's within the powers of a democracy to determine that we will collectively assist one another in times of medical need. But that isn't to say that health care isn't a commodity like any other. It is. "What do insurance companies provide?" Insurance in a private system.
That's why Joe doesn't understand the question; if you've been raised on free market principles and you can understand the value of extremely complex insurance arrangements, insurance against expensive treatment has an obvious value. He thinks of health insurance as a way to access services and materials; Rep. Weiner thinks of it as a barrier to services and materials. Neither can comprehend the a priori conception of health care that the other has --- either that it is by default free or by default very expensive.
|Billie_Joe_Buttfuck - 2009-08-20 |
WEINER IS LIKE PENIS
God, fuck, I am a retarded four year old. DICKS DONGS FLOPPY OLD COCKS.
This man is amazing. He doesn't deserve shit over his name.
Really, five stars, amazing man.
|Xenocide - 2009-08-20 |
Joe can't think of a single good thing about private insurance companies or a single bad thing about public health care but none the less he is committed to the idea that private is good, public is bad.
This, dear friends, is fanaticism.
Is it dogmatism too?
|Bort - 2009-08-20 |
By the end of it, it almost sounds like Joe has made a mental breakthrough -- it's almost like he's listened long enough to understand that Weiner is talking strictly about funding, not medical services. I say this only because Joe more or less correctly articulates this at the end, albeit stumbling at first. It could be that he realized he wasn't winning this on bullheadedness alone, or it could be his noggin opened up a bit. (Just like Lori Klausutis, amirite?)
A point that isn't made often enough is that, until about 1981, most insurance companies were legally bound to run as non-profit organizations. Then the law was changed so they could operate as for-profit organizations, and costs have been exploding ever since. Thanks, Gipper!
I should speak less stupidly about this: it's not that companies were legally obligated to be non-profits, but if they wanted to enjoy the tax incentives then offered to them, they had to abide by non-profit rules. Most insurance companies found this an irresistible proposition; then Reagan did away with those tax incentives, and they had no reason not to become for-profits. Once they figured out how to game the system -- refusing to pay on pre-existing conditions, for example -- they completed their transformation into parasites.
In a lot of ways, Obamacare pushes things back to the pre-Reagan model. Under the ACA, profits are capped, there are no more pre-existing conditions / rescission / annual caps / lifetime caps to worry about, and hopefully the exchanges will force the for-profits to compete against the non-profits that offer the best deal.
|Camonk - 2009-08-20 |
"What's the value of insurance companies?"
That long silence, Joe? That's the sound of your backward fucking ideology dying its long-awaited intellectual death, you stupid sucker of fetid corporate cock. Now if it would just die its emotional death, like your shriveled integrity did months ago, we might get somewhere as a country.
"I don't even understand the question." That's because you're a brainlocked shitstain of a thinking, self-aware human being and you should be ground into mulch to fertilize the crops used to feed hard working illegal immigrants, you FUCK.
What a disingenuous piece of shit.
|Udderdude - 2009-08-20 |
|RockBolt - 2009-08-20 |
Answer the question!
I am not here to answer questions!
Answer the question!
Well I would if you'd let me!
Just answer the FUCKING question!!!
And here's a word from our sponsors!
|augias - 2009-08-20 |
really cravin some weiner right about now, for america
|Louis Armstrong - 2009-08-20 |
To be fair, and this is probably why he is on msnbc, but I appreciate that Joe is open to talking with him, except during him being fazed(and this was because he was fazed, not bile spewing hatred) to this guy. That aside, I hope Joe's ideals on healthcare don't survive a year(hell another fucking day).
Part two was also worth a million stars as well.
Right, Joe isn't a bile-spewing retard, just a completely disingenuous one. He still wants to lie, prevaricate, and mumble out platitudes about small government and free market. He just doesn't get as angry as the Fox News guys. So, hey, Joe's better than Fox News by a small degree. There's something to be proud of.
|teethsalad - 2009-08-21 |
|pastorofmuppets - 2009-08-21 |
What bugs me is that the people who think it's ok to treat people's access to health care as a commodity are supposedly the Christians.
Mo: wank to Rand
Tu: wank to Rand
We: wank to Rand
Th: wank to Rand
Fr: wank to Rand
Su: wank to Jesus, mow lawn
I would like to say though that I don't think Joe's totally wrong for thinking health care insurance should be provided by a free market.
It wasn't so much of him being OMG BURNED as it was a difference in philosophy between two guys.
I say we let the numbers decide. Is free market health care more efficient?
Is it so much more efficient that it makes up for the added overhead of profit and marketing? Let's go with what works, screw the ideological arguments.
What I sad above was more of a cheap shot against religion. These people's god would not necessarily agree with the idea of keeping the lower class small by denying them healthcare in order to save money on taxes.
|THA SUGAH RAIN - 2009-08-21 |
The female anchor doesn't even pretend to have anything to say. She could be replaced tomorrow by a real doll that turns its head toward sounds and occasionally belts out a high pitched "HA!".
Joke's on you; they did that yesterday. Money well spent.
|chumbucket - 2009-08-21 |
I'm on the weiner plan
|Doctor Arcane - 2009-08-21 |
This shit just depresses me, I'm going to go play videogames.
|halon - 2009-08-21 |
That was incredible
| Register or login To Post a Comment|