So this is how liberty dies... (in Debates)

{Wookie}-Jir.Vr- March 21 2010 10:49 PM EDT

... with thunderous applause.

Not a good day to live in America. :(

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 21 2010 11:10 PM EDT

So, Obama will have a legacy, hopefully he just won't have an office in 2012...

BootyGod March 21 2010 11:18 PM EDT

I'm confused.

How is this a BAD thing... Except for the fact that you disagree with it? I disagree with plenty of things. Doesn't mean those things are terrible, evil things...

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] March 21 2010 11:21 PM EDT

Not a good day, unless you are sick, middle class or lower, a student, working for an abusive company, etc.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 21 2010 11:24 PM EDT

or this guy

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 21 2010 11:28 PM EDT

I'm a student Bast... Dude, horror stories and corruption on every side. I just wish people in power paid attention in econ class, or that voters who elected them, knew a tiny bit about economics.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 21 2010 11:29 PM EDT

Btw, I come from a middle class family, and I'm a student who is about 20k in debt already. I stood against this bill not for gaining purposes, but b/c it was a bad bill.

Admin{CB1}Slayer333 [SHIELD] March 21 2010 11:37 PM EDT

Hardly the end of freedom.

Mountains out of molehills.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 21 2010 11:38 PM EDT

from my experience with the last administration, you will get over it. if enough people are upset then the pendulum will swing, that is after all what brought us to this point!

it is pretty melodramatic though after the last administration to talk of the death of liberty over something like this though.

if an admin reads this could you please just go ahead and move it to debates since the originator didn't have the foresight to see this coming! ; )

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 21 2010 11:39 PM EDT

Still hardly a good bill, billions of savings is really going to be trillions of debt, to add onto our already tens of trillions of debt. Bush is going to look like a fiscally responsible president.

Zenai [Ministry of Pain] March 21 2010 11:39 PM EDT

As the saying goes to move a Mountain you have to start with a Pebble.........

Lord Bob March 21 2010 11:41 PM EDT

Correction: a GREAT day to live in America!


Health care passes the House 220 to 211! Epic win for America, and a much needed kick to the groin to Glenn Beck's army of idiots and the teabagging movement!

QBRanger March 22 2010 12:38 AM EDT

And now the endless court battles begin.

Such a bad law that will be changed again and again by judges finding many areas unconstitutional.

Think judges will not do something as controversial as that? Reflect a bit on Bush v Gore.

I really wish some of those who are so happy actually read the bill and know what exactly is in it.

I do and that scares me, not only for my family but for the future of quality medical care in the US. That is why, even with all the underhanded backdoor deals they barely passes this behemoth.

Miandrital March 22 2010 12:53 AM EDT

In case people missed it, the quote used for the OP is from Star Wars

Revs March 22 2010 1:00 AM EDT

How is another trillion spent, passed on to the next generation, not another mountain? This tax burden will hardly be a molehill!

Cube March 22 2010 1:07 AM EDT

"paid attention in econ class"

If you did, you'd realize that to maximize utility; you do take from the rich and give to the poor. Economics is about maximizing utility, not GDP.

Today is a step in the right direction.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 22 2010 1:33 AM EDT

This will decrease utility, evidently you didn't take enough econ classes. What if you take from everyone and give to no one?

ControlFreak March 22 2010 1:50 AM EDT

Since I am not american, I have no deeper insight in this issue.

But looking at the statistics I can gather, it seems that america is spending more per capita on healthcare than any other country, while the percentage of health costs covered by the government is notably lower than other countries.

To me that could only be explained by 1), a inefficient health care system or 2) that the people of america is a lot sicker than other people.

Thus, it seems like a new system is needed.. and why is it wrong to try with taking a step towards the health care system that other "western countries" have?

Soxjr March 22 2010 1:55 AM EDT

I do and that scares me, not only for my family but for the future of quality medical care in the US. That is why, even with all the underhanded backdoor deals they barely passes this behemoth.

I don't know how to do the quote thing, so this is Rangers last comment. My question to you Ranger is in just one of your words in that. "Quality" medical care. I was raised in middle class USA. My father and mother had good jobs and had very good insurance. I saw my dad get medicine that cost 1,000$ per shot and he had to take 14 of em. So 14,000$ worth of medicine was in our refrigerator at one time when I was young. Now I consider myself upper lower class or lower middle class and I don't have the best insurance and can only afford certain things for my medical care. How is this right? My father passed away in my senior year of high school and the choices I made after that severely impacted the way of my life. I then got married in a ready made family and raised 2 kids that weren't my own. I am just now in my 30's able to start thinking about going back to school and trying to get better, but as of right now, I'm not there yet. So I shouldn't have the same opportunity to receive the best care our doctors can provide because our country is all about making huge profits. Other countries don't have drug companies advertise on television and therefore their medicines are not as expensive. Why do we even have those? I go to the doctor for him to tell me what is wrong with me and prescribe medicine. Not the other way around. I should have the ability to receive the same care as most others. My dad lived and fought a tough battle with cancer because he had good medical coverage, but a good friend of mine just died 2 weeks after he found out he had cancer because he didn't have insurance. He didn't have the opportunity to fight because he couldn't afford the best medicine. That is wrong in so many ways.

I don't want to put words into your mouth or anyone else, but are you saying that having money and insurance dictates who should receive this "Quality" care? If so then that is such a sad state to be in and I hope for anything that can change that. I'm sorry if this is blabbing on and doesn't make any sense but I have had a couple bad weeks watching a friend die because he didn't have good health care so anything... and I mean anything has to be better than what we currently have.

Cube March 22 2010 2:11 AM EDT

"This will decrease utility, evidently you didn't take enough econ classes. What if you take from everyone and give to no one?"

Diminishing returns

QBJohnnywas March 22 2010 2:23 AM EDT

I don't know what your healthcare system is going to end up looking like. But if you end up with something like has it's flaws but I know I can get looked after properly when I'm ill. I know that people come from all over the world (including the States) to study and train in our system.

A certain amount of money is taken from me every month, but I know that I or my wife or my son or my father or anybody that needs it is going to get the medical treatment they need if they need it. And anybody else. Yup, I don't mind that I might be paying for somebody who isn't working, so isn't paying.

If you end up with something like ours it won't be a bad thing. How can it be worse than a system that over 30 million people could not afford or weren't able to get coverage from?

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 22 2010 3:07 AM EDT

What could be worse? How about a system that treats everyone, but treats everyone much poorly? Compare wait times between Canada's ER and the US's. Or how about Colorectal Cancer death rates between Canada and the US? While the US has a 6% higher Colorectal cancer rate for me, the death rate from it is actually 6% lower than Canada's with similar rates for women. What else, add a more ineffective system, to an increase in the deficit (if you think this will decrease the deficit over time, then you're as dumb as Obama's predecessor and the current V.P. combined) and you're looking at a huge crappy bill. Oh, and do you want to know why the colorectal cancer death rates are higher in Canada? Because the number one drug, based off success rate, isn't offered by the government in Canada because of it's cost... Yay for America!

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 22 2010 3:12 AM EDT

for men*

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] March 22 2010 4:01 AM EDT

I see the current medical system as so non-functional I'm willing to forgo my usual ideals in the hope that something actually gets done about the rampant mental illness afflicting the populace instead of just making truckloads of money off filling people with speed and nasty bad dope. Profit is a terrible motivator when the goal is curing chronic illness. In a case where there is benefit to the system in having people cured I see it as much more likely that research into causes and cures will take place. The patent system has done amazing things for medicine, I'm not entirely ignorant, however I believe that we have reached the limits of what simple greed can do to deal with disease and illness.

AdminQBVerifex March 22 2010 4:55 AM EDT

What is interesting, and I'm not entirely sure what to make of it, is that there seems to be a couple groups of people here. Very interesting mix actually.

People who seem to support this legislation as some kind of change to a system that is seen as broken.

People who seem to support this legislation because they or someone they know are in dire straits due to medical problems and want some change.

People who seem to oppose this legislation because they are not convinced the economics of it add up to fiscal responsibility.

People who seem to oppose this legislation because government is ineffective at everything and why would this be any different.

It's kinda strange, because each reason for supporting it seems important, and yet the reasons for opposing it also seem important. So, it would seem the most productive thing would be to try and quantify the cost/benefit of this reform versus something else. I'm really sad that some people have shown things that seem to discredit the CBO, because I always thought their job was to figure that crap out. So I suppose we can't really have a meaningful debate about this, all we can do is throw wild speculation into the air.

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 22 2010 5:42 AM EDT

Hahaha. Your country gave up freedom for DHS that even wants MY banking data and I'm far far away from the U.S. Now tell me something about the loss of liberty.

AdminNightStrike March 22 2010 11:55 AM EDT

People who seem to support this legislation because they or someone they know are in dire straits due to medical problems and want some change

Wanting change for the sake of change is fallacious. Changing something to something else just because you can doesn't mean you shouldn't properly weigh the costs of your new "something".

That is what we have here -- a system that is different because people want something different, no matter the cost. And that cost is *HUGE*, way more than we as a country can afford.

Lord Bob March 22 2010 12:05 PM EDT

What could be worse? How about a system that treats everyone, but treats everyone much poorly?

No, what's worse is where millions of people don't get treated at all. I'd rather have what you describe. Something is better than nothing, though it's irrelevant, as I'm not convinced this law will lead to poor treatment either.

And just in case anyone is confused, no, we are not getting Canada's health care system. I'm not sure why it keeps getting brought up on the Right.

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 22 2010 12:11 PM EDT

Compare wait times between Canada's ER and the US's.

Compare life expectancy of Canada and the US! CIA World Fact Book: Life expectancy at birth

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 22 2010 12:12 PM EDT

Why did the s from https get removed? hopefully correct link

Lord Bob March 22 2010 12:18 PM EDT

For those who listen to closely to the teabaggers, or worse, those who still think we're copying Canada's system, here's what the bill really does:

Lord Bob March 22 2010 12:24 PM EDT

David Frum, former speechwriter to President George W. Bush:
It's hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they'll compensate for today's expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. [...]

No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents' insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there - would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat. [...]

*wide grin*

VsCountStrum [Black Watch] March 22 2010 12:52 PM EDT

My Main opposition, is not as much to the decline in quality of care, though I believe that it will decline based on the fact that I have not see the government do anything well, but it is to the economic impact that this will have on the US. Higher taxes, higher unemployment and lower economic growth are almost inevitable.

Revs March 22 2010 12:58 PM EDT

There's a great children's book I used to read to my kids when they were younger. "If you give a mouse a cookie . . ." where a small child's world turns upside down as the mouse continues to ask for more and more. America just gave a mouse a cookie. And now we'll have to see where this leads. Obama-care was the beginning. I wonder where the current administration will go next in their bullying over our economy? Will we buy our cars from the gov't next? Pay the Fed for your internet, where they set the rules and your privacy? Get your loans from the Fed Reserve where they will simply print you more to keep up with demand, completely ignoring the ever growing defecit that we'll pass on to the next couple generations? What will the next Machiavellian move be I wonder . . .

Cube March 22 2010 1:14 PM EDT

Compare wait times between Canada's ER and the US's.

I also don't measure effectiveness in wait times. Nor do I measure it in death rates of colorectal cancer. I measure it in aggregate quality and length of life. You're starting from a false premise. Just like I don't measure my enjoyment of CB by the user count. There's more to it than that.

We'll see how effective it is, but I expect these few changes to make a big difference.

The United States, the richest country in the world, can afford to provide a basic level of care for all it's citizens. I'd expect a long term benefit to having a more healthy workforce. I see it as an investment in health. Though, take that as you will.

If you think Government regulation can't ever have a benefit, I'm sorry but you are definitely sorely mistaken. I may hate how the DMV works, but it's better that everyone who drives is certified. I may hate the quality of education in public schools, but it's better than no schools. I may hate the way food subsidies work, but it's better than having food shortages.

We put trust in dozens of government organizations, just by getting out of bed in the morning. The laptop I'm using right now is certified by the FCC. The pizza I'm eating is inspected by the FDA. The building I'm sitting in is certified by State building codes. Government can't be all bad, can it?

AdminQBVerifex March 22 2010 1:26 PM EDT

Cube, I think the main problems people have is that it costs more then we have, and isn't 100% efficient and isn't making someone rich at our expense. I guess the person getting rich treating us is going to turn their profits around and spend them trying to make us healthier, somehow.

AdminNightStrike March 22 2010 10:25 PM EDT

I'm reminded of the underpants gnomes...

{Wookie}-Jir.Vr- March 23 2010 1:05 PM EDT

If you're trying to give any sort of argument on this topic, please at least take the time to read the bill in question. I know only 3 people here have even GLANCED at it. ZzZz... Ranger might have read it... =)

This is really just the beginning of the court rooms.

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 23 2010 1:23 PM EDT

You maybe should realize that you are living in a democracy and your side LOST. Get over it. The USA once was the country I looked upon, this has declined enormously: You gave your intelligence agencies pretty much every power they wanted, started 2 senseless wars, had a highly controversial vote that your grand court "decided", and now this.

Either the USA gets up on their feet again as the leeding country of the western world, or soon China might become the big global player. And that's the real sadness.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 23 2010 1:32 PM EDT

We also won a pretty senseless war... You're welcome.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] March 23 2010 1:34 PM EDT

China missed the boat. ;)

You should be looking out for India! :P

Cube March 23 2010 2:13 PM EDT

If you're trying to give any sort of argument on this topic, please at try to make a logical point, rather than just complaining. I know only 0 people here have even TRIED to refute my points.

As far as I'm concerned, regulating a monopoly is not 'liberty dying'.

And I believe my overarching point was:
It's better than the alternative.

So yes, there are problems. Like with everything else.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 23 2010 6:08 PM EDT

forcing someone to get healthcare = liberty dying ; know matter how you cut it.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] March 23 2010 6:12 PM EDT

How dare you say I can't kill myself if I want to.

Demigod March 23 2010 6:19 PM EDT

forcing someone to get healthcare = liberty dying

That's excessive. It's similar to Uncle Sam requiring drivers to carry insurance and wear seatbelts, and even though that only applies to drivers, that's still darn near every adult in the US. I don't feel that the government should interfere with private life, and I'm curious how this requirement will stand in court, but calling it "liberty dying" is extreme. It's more like liberty taking a gut punch.

{Wookie}-Jir.Vr- March 23 2010 6:24 PM EDT

Meh, My OP was a quote from a movie I found amusing. Liberty died 60 years ago as far as I'm concerned.

Some people don't fully understand 'Liberty', so I'll give you a little copy/paste.

1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0031PD">So this is how liberty dies...</a>