brynndragon: (Default)
benndragon ([personal profile] brynndragon) wrote2006-04-07 12:06 pm
Entry tags:

FYI

Today at 3PM on WBUR (90.9 FM and online at WBUR.org) fucking Romney and members of the state legislature will be discussing the new health care plan with the public. I'll be listening, because I want to know if my (and some friend's) impression that this is taking a nice notion[1] and turning it into a nightmare for people who are eking out a living or are (or become) GoLs[2].

[1] No matter how feasible you think it is (I'm up in the air about it myself), quality health care for everyone (aka universal health care) is a fabulous idea.

[2] Gentlepeople of Leisure, also known as the unemployed

[identity profile] bikergeek.livejournal.com 2006-04-07 04:58 pm (UTC)(link)
I wonder if "making health insurance available, but forcing the employee to pay 100% of the cost if they want it" (my current situation) passes muster under this law. Honestly, in my younger days, at the pay scale I'm making now, I probably would have passed it up and prayed I didn't get sick. Unfortunately at 40 years old "pray you don't get sick" isn't really a viable strategy any more.

ext_267559: (The Future)

[identity profile] mr-teem.livejournal.com 2006-04-07 05:53 pm (UTC)(link)
The Massachusetts plan makes me nervous because of the penalties imposed on those who make more than $48,000 or so (that's the number in today's Globe article and I understand it's been fluctuating) if they become uninsured. I have lots of friends my age who's COBRA benefits have long since run out and are underemployed but currently don't have coverage because they can't afford it. Conceded, the very poor will get coverage but the cost shifting is moving around in an odd way.

And, of course it does nothing to address the actual costs of health care although I've heard some state lawmakers on the radio imply that it will.

[identity profile] tober.livejournal.com 2006-04-07 11:14 pm (UTC)(link)
I would actually disagree with the statement that "No matter how feasible you think it is, quality health care for everyone is a fabulous idea." I could launch into a lengthy tirade[1] on this, but instead I'll just claim that this statement is pretty platitudinous and about as meaningful as any of the following statements:
Quality food for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality housing for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality sex for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality annual vacation to exotic locales with balmy beaches and fruity alcoholic beverages with tiny umbrellas in them for everyone is a fabulous idea.

[1] Tiny version of tirade: Regulation that distances individuals from the true cost of things that benefit them is bad. I am convinced that much of what is wrong with health care as it stands now is not that too few people are insured, but that too many people are insured - or, in other words, a much fairer (to all parties except insurance companies) market would exist with respect to health care if the vast majority of consumers of health care services paid out of their own individual pockets.