I don't know if this is the same 'triple' line Kos is pushing, but Howard Dean is saying the elderly/sick could pay three times the rate of the young in the new system.
That's not necessarily the right comparison. Dean is referring to rates within the new system. Another comparison is what you would pay now in the individual market (for the elderly/sick, a prohibitively high amount) v. what you would pay in the new system. If you're not well and have no recourse now but the unaffordable individual market, you are basically playing Russian roulette with financial ruin. In the new system, you would pay a lot but you would avoid that risk. At least, that's the right argument; whether it's true or not I couldn't say. I haven't been reading the bills. Assuming Dean is right that the bill sucks too much for words, there is still no persuasive fallback position politically that I see. I see a repeat of 1994 and two to four years of even more Clintonesque crap. Dean admitted that the Dems at best would see reduced majorities in the Congress, and their Senate majority isn't worth shit now. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Quimby Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 5:23 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Coming unhinged over health reform? And yet - and yet - the insurance lobby seems to be the definite winner in the presently debated package, and my rates (since I have high blood pressure) could triple! See the Olberman report video on the DailyKos site http://www.dailykos.com. and also the separate report on DailyKos labeled "Insurance Reform? Pre-Existing Conditions" This entire exercise reminds me of the old college joke Prof. (After having spent 30 minutes working a math problem on the blackboard.) Well, this sure is a pregnant problem! Student In The Back Row. It ought to be - you sure have been fucking with it long enough. It's been of value but I am hoping right now that it fails and goes back to the drawing board. Is there a possibility of Congress - because of the coming 2010 elections - may move after the holidays to a more "populist" position? Yeah, I know - and there will be reports of unicorns in Central Park. - Bill raghu wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote: >> Sure. It accepts the rules of the game dictated by the capitalist class. My >> position is that their heads should be chopped off. > > > That's a sentiment I have a lot of sympathy for, but in the interim > while the insurers still have their heads in place, what about this > one: > > "And Americans, particularly poorer Americans and those without > insurance, will be far worse off with the status quo, which is what > will result if liberals succeed in their effort to kill the Senate > bill. That would be the real monstrosity." > > > > > > -raghu. > > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
