Democratic Underground

Home Forums In The News Democratic Underground Democratic Underground

Viewing 22 posts - 1 through 22 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #592974
    Y.W. Editor
    Keymaster

    This new category has been added in honor of Charliehall & Co. so he can post all the liberal news he wants!

    Please don’t let us down, and make sure to gather the latest “lib” news so we all have what to read.

    🙂

    #1110524
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    I’m not Dr. Hall, but I would like to try:

    REAGAN GRANTS HASIDIM ‘DISADVANTAGED’ STATUS

    June 29, 1984 NY Times

    They were talking about it in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn yesterday. Bearded men in dark coats under a hot sun, men known for their deep spiritual values, their belief in education and hard work, their pride in self-reliance. They were all Hasidic Jews, and they were talking about President Reagan’s decision, announced Wednesday, to add them to a list of minority groups considered ”disadvantaged” by the Government.

    What are your (meaning the CR) opinions regarding this historic expansion of Affirmative Action?

    #1110525
    charliehall
    Participant

    Wow!!!! I am not worthy of such an honor!!!!

    I have to get to work now but will post positive things here in the future.

    #1110526
    AinOhdMilvado
    Participant

    Please do NOT use the wrong word, as so many people do.

    It is NOT the “democratIC” party. It is the DEMOCRAT party!

    I really think the intentional use of the wrong word (by some,- not you Y.W. Editor) makes people think that the Democrat Party represents (or is equal to)democracy, while the Republican party is not.

    Both parties (hopefully) are democratIC.

    One is Democrat.

    #1110527
    mosheemes2
    Member

    The name of the party is the Democratic Party. Democrat Party is a term used by its opponents. Here’s a quick history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(phrase) . It’s no more an effort to make Democrats seem to be the only people who care about democracy than the Republican’s name suggests that Democrats don’t want a Republic, or the Constitution Party’s name suggests that both major parties don’t believe in that.

    #1110528
    A23
    Participant

    AinOhdMilvado, please see MosheEmes’s post and stop listening to everything Limbaugh and Co. feed you.

    Just like there is a Republican Party, so too there is a Democratic Party. They are both in the adjective form.

    #1110529
    charliehall
    Participant

    The Kaiser Foundation released a poll showing broad support for the most important aspects of Obamacare, save one:

    (1) Tax credits to small businesses that offer insurance to their employees — approved 78% to 18%

    (2) Closing the Medicare “donut hole” — approved 72% to 22%

    (3) Financial help for those who don’t hav…e employer based insurance so they can afford premiums — approved 71% to 24%

    (4) Eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion — approved 71% to 26%

    (5) Increasing the Medicare tax on higher incomes — approved 54% to 39%

    (6) Mandating that everyone be insured — disapproved 68% to 27%

    Precisely which points of the plan do YOU want repealed?

    (1) Tax credits to small businesses that offer insurance to their employees

    (2) Closing the Medicare “donut hole”

    (3) Financial help for those who don’t hav…e employer based insurance so they can afford premiums

    (4) Eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion

    (5) Increasing the Medicare tax on higher incomes

    (6) Mandating that everyone be insured

    #1110530
    charliehall
    Participant

    I want none of those things repealed. Repealing the unpopular mandate will mean that nobody in their right mind would buy insurance until they are sick which will drive currently high premiums into orbit. That this is so unpopular is yet another example of the American Entitlement mentality of wanting something for nothing.

    #1110531
    Moq
    Member

    Charlie, I dare not argue with a man in his realm.

    #1110532
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    (4) Eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion

    Just call health care what it is already (health care), don’t call it insurance (which it is not).

    And it should be available to all regardless of income, immigration status, and “future life expectancy”.

    How to afford it…there are some good ideas floating around.

    #1110533
    charliehall
    Participant

    Gavra,

    There were some really good ideas from Republicans in the 1970s (Nixon/Ford) and the 1990s (Dole/Chaffee). The Nixon/Ford plan was pretty similar to what got passed last year; the Dole/Chaffee plan was far more radical as it would have basically eliminated employer-provided insurance and required all individuals to buy insurance. I really liked the Dole/Chaffee plan and I thought that the Clintons made a big mistake in not negotiating with them, just as Kennedy made a big mistake in not negotiating with Nixon in 1973/1974 until it was too late. I wish that the Republicans had been willing to put forth real proposals last year rather than just obstruct; the only Republican who did seriously try to work with a Democrat was Robert Bennett and the the Republican right wingers primaried him.

    Moq,

    My training is in biostatistics and epidemiology, not health care policy. Go ahead and argue!

    #1110534

    i dont know if he wants to argue with someone who knows how to spell

    epedeimiology

    #1110535
    myfriend
    Member
    #1110536
    charliehall
    Participant

    Mod and Moq,

    Nothing to be ashamed of: Epidemiology is rarely studied except in graduate school. It is simply the study of disease in populations (as opposed to individuals). It is how we know things like

    Cigarette smoking causes cancer

    The HIV virus causes AIDS

    Vaccines do not cause autism

    Diabetes causes heart disease and blindness

    Unfortunately I’m only paid to teach medical students and graduate students and not the general public; we public health folks have not done a good job of explaining things to the general public and as a result there are a lot of things that people believe that aren’t true.

    I may start a separate thread on epidemiology in Nach and Shas.

    #1110537
    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    A.

    Popa still thinks that health care will continue to cost more and more as we make new technology which will always be more expensive.

    As with all commodities which are not unlimited (like air), health care will always be rationed. Currently, it is rationed by ability to afford it. The health care bill’s ultimate object is to make it rationed by a governing body who will decide who needs it most.

    I would rather it be rationed by money.

    B. There are ways we could lower the cost, by using last years technology. That will ultimately be done. When the government is paying for all care, it will simply not pay for new technologies. That is already happening in other countries, although they have the benefit of buying our technology at cheaper prices since they simply say they will not pay the amount we pay. (That is why drugs are cheaper in Canada, we pay for the technology, once it exists, we may as well take what they will pay for it.)

    Popa thinks by deregulating the health insurance market, we could allow people to but last years technology now,and at least those who can afford better will be able to get it.

    #1110538
    mghanooni
    Member

    Charliehall-

    Your list of benefits in the health care law sounds nice, but what exactly is the law, the whole law – all 2000 pages of it.

    For example, what obligations – operational and financial- are required for the employer in order to get the tax credit? You make it sound like a tax credit is good for the employers, but is the whole picture good for employers?

    I do not know what is the medicare “donut hole”, but I am sure that different people describe it differently. Consequently, there will be different “fixes” to it. How does the law address it (whatever it is) effectively?

    I could on about how your list is just political grandstanding based on a craftily worded and biased poll. This stuff happens all the time in politics – when your ideas won’t sell then artificially create your support.

    #1110539
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Gavra thinks that instead of the government rationing to only some this years technology, thereby leaving others with nothing (Medicaid), it could provide to everyone last years technology at a lower overall cost.

    If someone wants this years technology, they can pay for it, instead of having the government provide it for them if they are poor, not getting it if you are middle class, and paying for it if you are rich.

    (Why am I refering to myself in third person?)

    #1110540
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Your list of benefits in the health care law sounds nice, but what exactly is the law, the whole law – all 2000 pages of it.

    Oh yes, forgot.

    Dr. Hall, can we repeal the 1099 requirement?

    #1110541
    charliehall
    Participant

    ‘For example, what obligations – operational and financial- are required for the employer in order to get the tax credit? You make it sound like a tax credit is good for the employers, but is the whole picture good for employers?’

    It took me just two minutes to find the details on the IRS web site.

    ‘I do not know what is the medicare “donut hole”, but I am sure that different people describe it differently. Consequently, there will be different “fixes” to it. How does the law address it (whatever it is) effectively?’

    That one was even easier, there is a nice Wikipedia article on “Medicare Part D Coverage Gap”.

    “Dr. Hall, can we repeal the 1099 requirement? “

    Absolutely!!! That is the one part of the law that should be repealed.

    #1110542
    mghanooni
    Member

    Maybe I did not present myself clearly when I said “what obligations – operational and financial- are required for the employer in order to get the tax credit?” As I mentioned above, the law has about 2000 pages. There seems to be an awful amount of stuff that was passed and many may not understand all the laws and ramifications. For example, the tax credit can only be used for two years. See the original text at http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf see the bottom of p 319. The IRS also has that part of the law listed on the page http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=227404,00.html

    Therefore, as far as I’m concerned the tax credit is little more than a ruse to sound like there are great benefits for small businesses. In reality, it’s a short lived benefit that returns thousands of dollars back to a business while the same law obligates the business to shell out tens of thousands ongoing.

    #1110543
    AinOhdMilvado
    Participant

    A23—

    Stop getting your exercise by jumping to conclusions.

    I do not even listen to Limbaugh (or Hannity).

    Don’t tell me they are “both adjectives”.

    If you are claiming that someone in the “democratIC party” is a “democrat”, then…

    I guess someone in the Republican party is a “Republic”?!?!?

    #1110544
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    Do you prefer democratican?

Viewing 22 posts - 1 through 22 (of 22 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.