Give me Liberty or Give me Death Panels

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

People say I make strange choices, but they're not strange for me. My sickness is that I'm fascinated by human behavior, by what's underneath the surface, by the worlds inside people. - Johnny Depp

I made a comment about the community in a prior post. The responses to it were certainly well placed, appropriate and accurate. One thing that attracted me to this forum, besides Livejournal being structured better for discussion than any other site I’ve seen, is because of the global diversity of the participants. It’s true. We don’t seem to be getting posts about America because those that used to post have left for some reason or other. I don’t think it is because of Facebook, Google+ or any other social media because those sites tend to shun political discussion. Maybe it’s because American politics has become an international embarrassment. The President is getting sued over a law that the Republicans have tried to repeal over 40 time and have shut the government down over. It’s not as embarrassing as South Korea, although I think a good fist fight in the House or Senate could raise CSPAN’s ratings.

On to the post at hand. I have always considered myself to be a left leaning centrist and supporter of Obamacare. Nancy Pelosi once said that the Patient Protection and (A)ffordable (C)are (A)ct has to pass in order to see what’s in it. I now finally understand, after 4 years, what she meant. The structure eluded me at first, but I am finally starting to see what it’s all about.

Americans, for the first time, are actually thinking about their healthcare. Provided everyone gets insured, there is no longer a deathly fear of illness or injury because of the catastrophic financial impact upon the afflicted family. Also, with the advent of high deductibles, healthcare plans are no longer being treated trivially. In order for the healthcare plan to work, the afflicted has to participate and become invested in the cost of the healthcare. I believe this is contributing, more than anything, to the reduction in the increase of healthcare costs in this country.

I’m hoping that the ACA will become ingrained as a “too big to fail” part of our government structure much like Medicare or Social Security before the next President comes into office. If necessary, modifications and improvements can be made without tearing apart the one healthcare policy this country has seen since its inception. Considering Republicans have offered no viable alternative, I don’t see any other way forward.

Comments

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

Maybe people tend to get bored with the politics of a single country after having extensively discussed the same issues over and over again for years. International politics is more diverse, thus potentially more fascinating, and provides wider opportunity for discussion of a myriad of topics. People could share things and learn things, compare examples from different parts of the world - as opposed to regurgitating and chewing old stuff till their teeth fall off. All in all, the world is a wider place than any one single country, which makes it more interesting.

I'm sorry if some people view the apparent waning of Americentrism on a previously very Americentric forum as a problem - my suspicion is that the reason for such assessment is that they don't feel particularly confident on topics they (for natural reasons) have little knowledge about - after all, we can't know everything about everything. I guess the only way to rectify that perceived problem is to post more on those Americentric topics that we all know to death, and have learned to love while being simultaneously embarrassed by them ;)

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

my suspicion is that the reason for such assessment is that they don't feel particularly confident on topics they (for natural reasons) have little knowledge about - after all, we can't know everything about everything

Which is exactly why I don’t feel comfortable, not only with international views but with American views on international policy. However, the international views on American policy give me a much better look at America from the outside in, which is of paramount importance.

It’s much like watching BBC (although it is a staunch American ally) vs CNN or Fox. I got a much more honest view of America than American journalism. I’m not opposed, and actually appreciate, the globally oriented posts. I am just concerned that the balance isn’t there. Much like when the forum was pretty much America-centric.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

I honestly can't see how seeing a more honest assessment of ourselves coming from an outside observer could be a problem, or a reason to feel uncomfortable and intimidated. In fact, hearing assessments of ourselves (preferably criticism, as long as it's constructive) from impartial sides is the best possible way to detect flaws that need to be rectified, isn't it?

Well, my approach to matters I'm unfamiliar with, is a bit different: I feel fascinated to learn a new thing and see an issue from as many standpoints as possible, rather than feeling intimidated by the experience. But people are different, granted.

IMO, the perception of imbalance that you speak of, rather stems from the gradual *change* of balance rather than lack thereof. It's just that this place is changing over time, as any other thing does. And those whom this change doesn't suit (be it for lack of knowledge on the topics that are getting precedence in general, or due to the shifting dynamics or whatever), would naturally feel uncomfortable with that change. So I feel ya bro. But my take is that there's something useful to be taken out of this situation, rather than wasting time and effort bemoaning it.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Such a thing like the perfect balance just does not exist. If for anything, at least because there as many notions of "balance" as the number of people there are.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

I, for one, enjoy reading the not-Americentric posts, and in fact that's probably the main reason I remain here (as LJ continues to die off) because there's an incredible value in gaining a perspective on events outside of one's own sphere from someone also outside of that sphere. I can hear about overseas events from Fox or CNN or MSNBC, but I'll not get the same perspective I would if I listened instead to, say, the BBC, or some other foreign service, or even better, bloggers more intimately familiar with these places such as we have here.

I don't comment on those posts mainly because I don't really have much to offer, lacking the personal knowledge of such things. But I do still read them, because it's usually quite important stuff to learn about, and I also enjoy learning about these things.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I've always known the US health care to be the best in the world - the problem with it is that too many people don't have access to that top-class health service. Obamacare may or may not have managed to address that problem. The problem with Obamacare itself is not in its intention, or probably not even in the way it's being structured and carried out - the problem is exactly what Nancy Pelosi said. A bill had to be "shoved" through the throat of the public (sorry for the worn-out soundbite that I'm using here, but that's essentially what has happened), and only THEN the public was supposed to realize what was in it. That's NOT how critical legislation should be passed in a democracy. The public needs to have time and opportunity to get informed in a calm, efficient and most importantly (particularly in the American context), RATIONAL way about the issue that's being presented to its intention - before ever presuming to start to take a decision on that issue.

On a side note, I hope I'll be proven wrong, but, given the strong American individualist inclination and the private-business obsession that's so typical of the American mentality (for good or for bad), I'm afraid I'm not seeing the concept of universal public health-care getting ingrained into the American psyche any time soon.

As for the global diversity here, I've been hearing the complaint that this place has become "too Eurocentric" way too often now (even though most international topics are not even related to Europe, or have little to do with it, and actually again involve the US policy abroad, or in the worst case are about Russia which could hardly be categorized as "Europe" anyway). I guess some people would always feel somewhat insecure about stuff they know little to nothing about, and would tend to dish it out at those who are making an actual effort to contribute something meaningful to the discourse.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

"That's NOT how critical legislation should be passed in a democracy. The public needs to have time and opportunity to get informed in a calm, efficient and most importantly (particularly in the American context), RATIONAL way about the issue that's being presented to its intention - before ever presuming to start to take a decision on that issue."

Firstly, characterizing the passage of the Affordable Care Act as having been "shoved" or "rushed" or otherwise quickly forced upon the American people with sufficient time for debate is a nice American conservative meme, but is not an accurate picture of what actually happened.

Regardless, even if it were, it's a meaningless complaint. America is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic. It was set up that way intentionally by the constitutional framers in order to avoid the problem of laws (especially in a time of crisis) being passed or blocked solely by the will of an uninformed mob inflamed by passion. Looking to the way in which far too many people are easily swayed by pseudoscience and conspiracy theory, I have a hard time saying that the framers were wrong to do so. Look at the anti-vaccination movement in this country for a perfect example of uninformed people whose ignorance is preyed upon by opportunists. Had they the right to weigh in on public health policy (rather than merely prevent their own children from being vaccinated) the recent outbreaks of easily preventable diseases would be even worse than they are. Our legislature is meant to act as a buffer against such things (though the shocking scientific illiteracy among some of our legislators demonstrates the futility of ever fully avoiding such pitfalls, and is a source of no minor frustration for many of us.)

Ultimately the public in America has no direct say in what bills become laws, nor should they. That is the business of the elected representatives alone who, ideally, have the public's general welfare at heart. This does not mean that the people are powerless. People can still respond to laws they do not like by challenging those laws in court (if those laws run afoul of constitutional principles) or by electing different representatives who will pass laws repealing the original law. They may also exercise their right to protest to put electoral pressure on said representatives before votes are cast, but there is no constitutional obligation that the public be given a time for public discussion or debate on bills before they are voted on.

(Now, I'd argue that maybe there is a MORAL obligation to do so, and note that Obama promised to put all bills online for public comment for five days before signing them. One might criticize Obama for his failure to keep that promise, but that's not the same thing as allowing public debate before the actual passage of the bill in Congress. Still, I'd agree that an ideal republic would allow for at least some form of public debate before bills are passed - but we hardly live in an ideal world, and apart from the aforementioned problems of a public grossly misinformed by competing interests, such a practice would grind the process of legislation to a halt. It's simply unnecessary, so long as existing remedies of election, protest, and judicial review continue to work well enough.)

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

And yet, the public doesn't seem to be sufficiently familiar with the intricacies of the bill. You did read what Pelosi had said, right?

America is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic

Sounds more like an excuse to me. America is not a totalitarian dictatorship, either - or rather, is not supposed to be. You do know what I meant by using the term "democracy", and I don't feel like delving into yet another endless semantic quibble.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

I've always known the US health care to be the best in the world - the problem with it is that too many people don't have access to that top-class health service.

I don’t know about the best, but it is certainly the most expensive. Therein lies the problem.

That's NOT how critical legislation should be passed in a democracy. The public needs to have time and opportunity to get informed in a calm, efficient and most importantly (particularly in the American context), RATIONAL way about the issue that's being presented to its intention - before ever presuming to start to take a decision on that issue.

But when you’re up to your ass in alligators, it becomes difficult to remember that you’re there to drain the swamp. Considering the number of healthcare policy failures we’ve had in the past, some sleight of hand was certainly in order. Obamacare was passed by a duly elected government under the rules of government. Yes, not everybody got what they wanted. But our healthcare system needed a true beginning, and like it or not, this is it. This addresses an enormous set of problems, especially the problem that our current system was not sustainable.

On a side note, I hope I'll be proven wrong, but, given the strong American individualist inclination and the private-business obsession that's so typical of the American mentality (for good or for bad), I'm afraid I'm not seeing the concept of universal public health-care getting ingrained into the American psyche any time soon.

You may have seen this in my prior posts, but I am very much opposed to the predatory exploitation that is built into our system of capitalism that is infecting out government, but the approach Obamacare takes is addressing some of this. As for universal healthcare, we already have a model that is ingrained and in place. That would be Medicare, which is available to our seniors. However, that suffers from the same money bloated problems as our healthcare system in general. Obamacare is working to preserve the very threatened sustainability of Medicare as well.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Oh, top-notch it sure is. Don't underestimate your health care. OK, even if it's not the best, it's one of the best. The quality of the health service is not the problem. Access to it, is.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

There's been such a severe push against Obamacare (be it orchestrated or not) that I suspect the moment a Republican gets into the White House, it'll be repealed. And many deluded folk will rejoice at the event, genuinely believing that their grandmas have been saved from the dreadful Death Panels.

I said it on that thread, and I'll say it again. I still do believe FB, G+ and the likes are the main culprits for the exodus from LJ, and the gradual waning of TP's activity over the years (although it does indeed remain one of the very few places on LJ where politics could be discussed in an open manner). And let's not forget the many stupid stuff that the new LJ owners have done since they bought the platform, which has contributed to driving people off LJ in general. That, and the fact that most trolls we were able to detect here, have now been kicked out, and have figured they'd better stop wasting time trying to get back in under the form of one sockpuppet or another, and find other outlets to exercise their douchebaggery with impunity. But that's another story altogether.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

There's been such a severe push against Obamacare (be it orchestrated or not) that I suspect the moment a Republican gets into the White House, it'll be repealed. And many deluded folk will rejoice at the event, genuinely believing that their grandmas have been saved from the dreadful Death Panels.

As I’ve said in the OP, Obamacare is becoming so ubiquitous that repealing would have a disastrous effect on our healthcare system. Besides, there is no Republican viable alternative. Most Americans oppose the total repeal of the ACA.

And let's not forget the many stupid stuff that the new LJ owners have done since they bought the platform, which has contributed to driving people off LJ in general.

I learned a while ago to avoid the LJ editor when I can. I use Microsoft Word and Live Writer to post directly to LJ without going through their editor. I agree that much of the downtime has contributed to the death spiral of LJ in general.

That, and the fact that most trolls we were able to detect here, have now been kicked out, and have figured they'd better stop wasting time trying to get back in under the form of one sockpuppet or another, and find other outlets to exercise their douchebaggery with impunity. But that's another story altogether.

You are a very angry young man. LOL

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Nah, I'm a cynical and often sarcastic man, but truly angry, very seldom I am. And neither am I that young any more. :-P

Yes, Obamacare has been designed in a way that the very act of removing it will be a disaster. Moreover, people are already starting to get access to health-care they didn't use to have access to, so I'm guessing there'd be a lot of drama if anyone attempts to repeal it.

Which is not to say that an attempt won't be made.

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

While it is still not a single payer system, I think it is a step in the right direction.

Young adults fail to realize that without insurance, the cost for even a simple arm fracture will hit $5k in ER costs alone.does not take much to put yourself in a financial hole for several years, along with student debt, cost of living, etc.

The medication I take to cure my hep c is over $9,000 a week for 24 weeks. My copay is $5 a month. Without health insurance, I'd probably be on a VA transplant list, playing the 'if we delay long enough the patient dies' game.

I do not blame ACA for the gridlock that has immobilized any progress for the globe. If not that, it would have been something else. It seems POTUS only have one shot at major legislation, then have to spend the rest of their term defending it from the vultures.

Good post.

Edit: I looked into ACA as an alternative to our current plan. It actually was comparable, given we would be bumping the financial ceiling and paying top dollar for the premium.

I call that a critical safety net.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

I find it a lot more interesting that the international posters tend to post about American issues much more than American posters post about international issues. That says a lot, methinks. If anything, I believe we can all learn something both about ourselves and about other places from people living abroad and looking at things from a slightly different perspective.

As for the ACA, good luck to it. Now that the website is up and running, let's hope people would stop freaking out so much and would realize that it's essentially providing a service to them that other countries have been taking for granted for decades. Which brings me back to the ending of my first paragraph. (See what I did there?)

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Don't be so pessimistic about American politics. Compared to most other countries (including mine, actually), it's like a mild soap opera (rather repetitive at most times, I admit) in relation to a horror movie.

Mark my words, you guys will be just fine. I've always been amazed at America's resilience and ability to fight its own demons. Including this irrational pushback against a health-care policy that should've been a no-brainer a long time ago (and really is, in most of the rest of the developed world, and even some not-so-developed parts of it).

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

I feel like I am attending an international Peace Conference.

And I like the feels.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Frankly, after yesterday's hostility around here (the embers of which are yet to be fully extinguished, it seems), I don't mind cuddling around a bit and perhaps having a nice cosy old-fashioned circlejerk. With lots of rakia if possible.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

Don't be so pessimistic about American politics. Compared to most other countries (including mine, actually), it's like a mild soap opera (rather repetitive at most times, I admit) in relation to a horror movie.

At least with a horror movie, you know who the bad guy is.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

I liked the "echo chamber for centrists" part, I will give you that. =)

[telemann.livejournal.com]

I don’t think it is because of Facebook, Google+ or any other social media because those sites tend to shun political discussion.

Well, there is a lot of political discussion on those forums. But I agree, it's not that big of a factor for your observations here.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Let's see now. For the last month or so, there have been 5 posts about American issues, 5 about European issues, 3 about Middle Eastern issues and 1 about more general issues. The remaining ones being fun offtopic. November: American issues 16, European issues 9, Middle Eastern issues 1, Latin american issues 1, Asian issues 1, general issues 4. I could go on, but I think you're already getting a pretty clear impression. I'm still wondering what's this Eurocentric imbalance that you're seeing here. At what point does the amount of Americentrism get to your liking?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

When all of the posts are about 'Murica. Are Freedom!!!!!!

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Yeah I suspected so.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

I certainly miss Paft's posts. I wonder what happened to her; she hasn't posted in a long time.
And she was certainly a big fan of the "global" posts here.