[identity profile] acollectivegood.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] talkpolitics
Those who disagree with the healthcare reform law continually point to the fact that premiums are expected to continue to rise despite the law being passed.  Some even point to recent rises in premiums as evidence that the law has failed, which is particularly silly since the provisions in the law designed to bring costs down have not taken place yet.  But what about future increases?  Yes, there will be future increases, but the important thing to focus on is the trend line.  Independent analysis from a wide range of completely unbiased sources have estimated that many of the increases can be explained by aspects of the law that most would consider positive and worthwhile, covering children until their 26th birthday, eliminating co-pays for preventative care, and mandating that people not be denied because of preexisting conditions.  And even with these popular changes, the healthcare law brings down the trendline - the pace at which costs are rising.

Can it be argued that the law does not go far enough to control costs?  Perhaps.  But it does successfully control costs better than would occur if we did nothing, while at the same time instituting positive changes that most people agree on and insuring millions of people who currently are uninsured and rely on everyone else's tax dollars to pay for their care.   

More at:

Political Truth Serum: Finding the lies, omissions, and exaggerations in each political campaign

Foxes in the Henhouse: Political Leaders who have secret agendas, hidden loyalties, and dual roles

(no subject)

Date: 29/1/12 18:52 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com
I have said before that the law was a step in the right direction. The only part of it I disagree with is the individual mandate and that it did not go far enough to control costs.

(no subject)

Date: 29/1/12 21:00 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jerseycajun.livejournal.com
Policy writers, legislators and prognosticators, even when unbiased (which I find a most difficult breed to nail down) are about as reliable in their predictions and promises as weather forecasters. Maybe accurate for a couple of hours or a couple of days, but not far after, the projections and reality begin to diverge drastically. Adaptation to these variances are typically slow to emerge, if at all. Here is where I would usually give my standard spiel about these things, but since most are probably tired of hearing me say it and repackage it, I'm probably just going to start using this video as a response as it covers the basics fairly well. If you want to know specifics about what I think after watching it, I'll be happy to answer to the best of my ability.



And here are a few issues that I believe any such issue must contend with head on if one is realistic about it:

The Wisdom of Crowds. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds)

(no subject)

Date: 29/1/12 23:10 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] meus-ovatio.livejournal.com
Is that true across the board, or are people who agree with me very accurate in their predictions?

(no subject)

Date: 29/1/12 23:23 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jerseycajun.livejournal.com
You can be right, but to be right and do it by design rather than good fortune is a necessary question to ask, in general, but one that doesn't get asked often enough.

Srs question: were you being funny? 'Cause I can't tell with you sometimes.

(no subject)

Date: 29/1/12 23:13 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] meus-ovatio.livejournal.com
Also, I wonder how successful meta-prediction is in its predictive powers for prediction.

(no subject)

Date: 30/1/12 03:40 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] caerfrli.livejournal.com
I don't understand why businesses aren't clamoring for single payer instead of having to pony up for health insurance

(no subject)

Date: 30/1/12 09:14 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com
Those who disagree with the healthcare reform law continually point to the fact that premiums are expected to continue to rise despite the law being passed. -- Actually, the part I like to point out is the part where the Obama administration itself keeps picking the law apart because they've found problems that they didn't realize in the first place.

http://news.yahoo.com/piece-piece-obamas-health-care-reform-law-dismantled-170150639.html

They kinda shot themselves in the foot, but we'll see what happens when the Supreme Court takes on the law.

(no subject)

Date: 30/1/12 17:43 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com
How nice of them to find out a program was unsustainable by its third decade as opposed to all the programs that were found unsustainable by their third year.

I'm sure the Republicans have a good replacement plan for senior citizens, right?

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

DAILY QUOTE:
"The NATO charter clearly says that any attack on a NATO member shall be treated, by all members, as an attack against all. So that means that, if we attack Greenland, we'll be obligated to go to war against ... ourselves! Gee, that's scary. You really don't want to go to war with the United States. They're insane!"

March 2026

M T W T F S S
       1
2345 678
910 1112 1314 15
1617 1819 202122
2324 2526 272829
3031