55% of Americans want to keep their current private insurance plan. They should discuss that with a psychologist but you know it wouldn’t be covered under their health plan.
Masochistic Kinks Exposed
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
8 Comments. Leave new
GM strikers are now being denied their health insurance.
End your strike now and accept low wages or die; you are free to choose.
“If you like your health insurance you can keep it,” said the previous liar-in-chief.
He could only have been addressing the murderous capitalist pigs.
Everyone else is precariously dependent upon bad faith negotiations with (and the “good will” of) the exploiting anti-socialist sociopath class.
+1, Ted….
Henri
I suspect that 55% have never had a real health problem. Go to the doctor once a year for your flu shot or a broken pinkie.
Socialized medicine works in everyone’s favor. You’re better off if your neighbors are healthy, you know, fewer plagues and stuffs; not to mention that healthy people can contribute more to the community. Your health costs go up when the uninsured have no choice but to use the emergency room. (which costs even more than preventive care would have cost, but they don’t have that option.)
The problem, of course, is that evil, wicked word “Socialized.” Perhaps we need a new word. How about “Republicized” ? The GOP is is kinda dumb about words …
To Crazy H,
No American politician, has proposed “socialized medicine” as you have implied. They have proposes “Medicare for all.” There IS a term for it: single payer insurance.
Medicare is a health INSURANCE program run by the government that makes payments for services rendered to PRIVATE doctors and PRIVATE hospitals (of the patients’ choice) and for drug prescriptions the prices of which are negotiated by the government with pharmaceutical companies.
Under “socialized medicine” the government directly employs doctors and may own the facilities at which they work. Presumably there may be government owned drug manufacture facilities.
I agree that a healthy community “works in everyone’s favor.”
The GOP is well more than simply “kinda dumb about words … ” It’s more accurately considered
continuous propaganda.
To promulgate the GOP’s weaponized language (“socialized medicine”), however inadvertently, hardly provides defense against the GOPs purposeful toxicity.
They probably have seen our federal government in action. This same group that brought us the NSA, TSA, CIA. INS, the IRS, never ending wars in the middle east, and the VA. Who knows what new abuses they could create if given total control over are health-care.
We would probably need to outsource the entire program to someone else like France.
:: Chuckle ::
Or maybe they noticed how the ACA put a lot of money into rich folks’ pockets…
Insurance is when lots of people pay for an unlikely event. Those who suffer the event have their losses reimbursed out of the premiums paid by all those who did not suffer the event.
With healthcare, everyone gets sick.
Employer insurance is not insurance. The employer and employees put up 110% of the money into an escrow account. The Adjuster (not an insurer) negotiates discounts with healthcare providers and figures out how much of the medical bills get paid out of the escrow account and how much the employees must pay, and this can be very affordable (or not). Everyone I’ve known who had to use the ACA got terrible support if they got sick.
M4A would be MUCH better for those of us who are not healthcare insurance executives, so, of course, the establishment media say it’s not feasible, since it will hurt all the Americans who really matter.
Sounds like early returns from the Orwellianisation of language.
Not so long ago a (center-)left reform platform could read: “We aim to reform the tax code to make it fairer, reform social security to account for recent demographic projections, modernize labor laws, empower local school boards and and mandate clean air.”
For anyone younger than 40, that very language now translates to: “The richest won’t pay taxes anymore, your social security payments will bankroll wars in the middle east, they can now make you work overtime, privatize schools, and poison the air like it is 1870.”
When all change is persistently regressive, reform itself becomes a dirty word. Might as well criticize Bernie for raising hopes as Obama conclusively proved that all hope is forlorn and change is but the sound made by a nickel that has trickled down into a begging bowl.
Note that Bernie’s platform consequently stays clear of words like “reform”. Instead they are quite specific: raise taxes on the rich, forgive student loans, and, indeed, Medicare for all. That this would do away with private health insurance schemes in their current form is itself an admission of their inefficiency.