The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Alex]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Or how the system can handle 40 million more people having regular doctor visits without an increase in the number of doctors. Or how waiting times will increase because of that.

This particularly argument makes not sense to me (and seems really cruel since it appears you're arguing for stringent rationing; i.e. it is bad to provide health coverage to 40 million people who currently have none because it would slow things down for those who currently do have some) and it looks like you're abandoning your capitalist credentials (an increase in demand will apparently not result in an increase in supply). Would you be willing to expand on the thought since I'm sure neither of those are true.


And I know you say you don't watch the various reviled talking heads. I'll take you at your for that. It is, therefore, interesting that through some apparent osmosis much of the time whatever arguments you make for or against a position are the same as what they were saying just a few days before or happen to currently be a link on the Drudge Report. To me, observing you, it looks like you're very much consuming what they say, you just may be getting it secondarily. Either that or you actually do have though processes similar to Glenn Beck. That would be worse.


And yes, "astroturfing" in the sense of centralized and organized excitement of supposedly grassroots movements exists on all sides of the political spectrum and has for approximately 1.2 million years (413 years in Kansas, Alabaman, and parts of Florida) since the first hominid really felt we should get out of the trees to look for food and so slept with the alpha males mate and tricked her into presenting it to him as her own idea.

I have no problem with that. I do have a lot of problem with said leaders telling outright lies and fabrications in pursuit of it. And no, to say that the health care reform opposition is telling some amazing whoppers is not to say that everything they say is a lie. So pointing out some valid concerns is not an amelioration of the charge.

If I say:

1) The sky is blue
2) Cap'n Crunch cereal tastes good but cuts up the roof of your mouth
3) Comcast is a cable company
4) Your grandma is a coprophiliac

When you say "my grandma is NOT a coprophiliac and you're a horrible person for saying such a despicable lie" it would be rightly viewed as in no way redeeming myself if I said "what? but the sky really is blue!"

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Alex

This particularly argument makes not sense to me (and seems really cruel since it appears you're arguing for stringent rationing; i.e. it is bad to provide health coverage to 40 million people who currently have none because it would slow things down for those who currently do have some) and it looks like you're abandoning your capitalist credentials (an increase in demand will apparently not result in an increase in supply). Would you be willing to expand on the thought since I'm sure neither of those are true.

I have done most of my research through the Heritage Foundation. Lots of articles and info there.

An increase in demand can lead to an increase in supply, but it would most certainly start with a shortage of the supply. Short supply with increased demand increases the cost until supply can be increased. That presents another problem, in that increaing supply isn't as simple as going to a doctor manufacturer and having them make more. We have to have people that want to become doctors, are willing to study long enough to become doctors (and pay the tuition for it), and are qualified to become doctors. So I disgaree with the foundation of your first paragraph. I am not arguing for rationing (though I think it is going to happen based on supply and demand), nor am I abandoning those economic principles.

A side effect of insurance coverage that I experience all the time in arguments with my wife is that the kid has a low fever. "Oh my!" says the wife. "A fever! We must take the child to the doctor. After all, we have insurance, so it only costs us the copay." Well, OK, if the kid still has a fever in a week and the tylenol doesn't take it down, sure, but the immediate reaction is insane. I do not wish for any sick person to be denied treatment, but I think my situation (and no, I haven't done the research) is typical. Our bodies are pretty much made to take care of and heal themselves, and too many people think every little owie or booboo requires a doctor visit.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Alex

I have no problem with that. I do have a lot of problem with said leaders telling outright lies and fabrications in pursuit of it. And no, to say that the health care reform opposition is telling some amazing whoppers is not to say that everything they say is a lie. So pointing out some valid concerns is not an amelioration of the charge.

Nor is focus on the outrageous claims (both by those that mke them and those who focus on them) reason to ignore the real problems.