Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
dtotire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:32 PM
Original message
Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill
Edited on Wed Dec-16-09 12:35 PM by dtotire
Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill
by Nate Silver @ 3:42 AM


Pick your subheadline:

a) It's time to stop being polite and start getting real.
b) Here's hoping a picture is worth 1,000 words.



Go to the link to see his figures.


Link:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/why-progressives...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. The bill is worse than nothing.
What's batshit crazy is that liberals are not in charge
so that we could get a decent bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It clearly isn't worse than nothing.
As the numbers show. Unless you think Silver got the math wrong? If so, do illustrate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Silver got his base assumptions wrong. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. A meaningless statement unless you identify which ones and how.
There's several hundred words explaining his methodology, while you offer a 6 word rebuttal with no detail. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt until you offer a more specific objection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. Fascinating!
Now how about we try this? Tell us which ones, and illustrate how so?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. I'm still guano oppose it.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is why I love Nate Silver. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. LOL. The Dittocrats are still sucking corporate tit and loving it.
Go away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I think you should call Tom Coburn's office. Hell, call ALL the Republican senators.
Thank them for heroically standing up to the evil corporations!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. This is the first and only item that's really convinced me. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. The current Senate bill fails to meet most of the big objectives stated at the beginning.
Edited on Wed Dec-16-09 12:44 PM by AndyA
1. No public option.

2. No caps on coverage (annual caps are still in the bill to keep premiums down).

3. No competition.

4. No cost controls.

They gave up all this and got nothing for it in return. It's a bad bill. Whether it's better than nothing remains to be seen, but it falls far short of what the American people were promised.

Pre-existing conditions cannot be used as a reason to exclude someone, but the premiums for that person can still be so high they can't afford insurance. (Some of this may have changed at the last minute, but as of last night that was the deal.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. It's all about the subsidies,
and the House subsidies are even better. We've got to get people health care. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomm2thumbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. his numbers & backup say it all - 'Affordable coverage for everyone: FAIL.'
'The latest CBO estimates for the Senate bill say that a family of four with a household income of $54,000/year should expect to pay 17% of their gross income on healthcare - about $9,000/year. (And that was when there was a public option to hold down costs!) That's more than they'll spend on federal taxes. That's more than they'll spend on food.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dtotire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. The Premium is $4000
Out of pocket costs are another $5000. Usually, out-of-pocket costs aren't that high. If something serious happens, then they will be higher. But the insurer will have to cover everything over that. It would be good to have this insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
11. I think it proves the opposite.
Is a family of four paying 17% of their income out of pocket the best we can do in REFORM? Really? And if they can't afford that, they get fined? This is what the best and brightest in our Senate have come up with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kansas Wyatt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. Well if you think all Hell is breaking loose on the DU....
Just wait until 2010 & 2012.

The same people who think this SHIT Bill is so great, will be scratching their heads wondering why so many people would vote against their alleged best interests. It's Batshit Crazy to keep scratching your head and never figuring it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. according to Krugman
Romneycare is pretty popular in Massachusetts.

One good thing though is that we can do what the Republicans used to do. We push the legislation our way in conference. The Senate bill is not the end of it. It goes to conference and gets modified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
14. Moderatist hogwash!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
15. There's nothing to prevent financial ruin
due to a major illness/injury; as, even WITH insurance, the bills can be far higher than people can afford and yet medical collectors are permitted to harass people and take their assets. And having insurance is no guarantee that it will cover what needs to be covered or that you'll get needed care without financial ruin. And it does NOTHING to prevent medical bankrupties.

And that's just the start. There are so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin. It's the exact opposite of what needs to be done. We need the for-profit insurance companies OUT OF IT. And fines for people who don't have enough money afford required insurance, especially if they have a condition that insurance companies are permitted to charge astronomical rates for? PLEASE. This bill needs to be KILLED. NOW. It's far worse than nothing at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
20. Nate's good with numbers
but this is a words and numbers thing, and he's starting with false assumptions. No offense Nate, but this problem was made by those who count beans when deeper issues are at hand. I'm sure he has a chart, and a graph, and an envelope filled with cash. More beans to count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC