My head hurts
Just got back from trying to get into the Eric Massa Health Care Town Hall Meeting.
I regret that I was not able to get in. I want Eric to know he has my support, that he’s doing the right thing and that most people want affordable health care for all
I should have known by the traffic that I had gotten out of work way too late to get a seat.
I should have known that standing in the hallway, waiting to get in, would require a translator as I don’t speak stupid and I’m a bit rusty on my dining room table.
The pre-event cocktail party, serving up grape Kool-aid, must have been by private invitation only. But, you could tell those who had imbibed before coming. The invitation list would have been massive. It had obviously been well attended. They must have forgotten to brush their teeth and floss, because phrases like, “Socialism”, “Fascism”, “The government can’t do anything right”, “Why should we pay for people who won’t work?”, and “Health care is an earned privilege, not a right” rolled off their tongues with the smell of artificial grape flavoring permeating their breath.
I tried, in vain, to counter their selfish rhetoric with phrases like, “We all do better when we all do better” and “promote the general Welfare”, but they’d have none of it. Nope, they were “doin jus fine” and want Obama to keep his nose out of their bidness.
It was the classic, “I got mine, too f-ing bad for you”, crowd.
The scary thing is, they’ve got the guns.
Related posts:
ladkiddo: Please go back and read what you’ve written. I respect your passion for your own particular point of view but do you think you’re contributing anything to the conversation with your tone? Stick to suggestions for substance rather than criticisms of style and perhaps that could be your earnest contribution to get an important conversation back on track.
It’s actually a lesson that all sides of this issue could afford to learn because this “you don’t agree with me so you must be an idiot” approach just ain’t cutting it.
This is the substance they gave me:
“Socialism”, “Fascism”, “The government can’t do anything right”, “Why should we pay for people who won’t work?”, and “Health care is an earned privilege, not a right”
This is the substance I gave them:
“We all do better when we all do better” and “promote the general Welfare”
What substance am I missing?
There is no earnest conversation to be had with people who are just parroting the Rush, Bill. Ann , Glenn and Sean talking points they absorb with gravid enthusiasm.They copy things off the internet and recite them as facts without doing any investigation as to their legitimacy.
If you have been following this conversation on RT, you will know that I have given plenty of substance throughout the posting surrounding health care. If I have strayed from the fold in this instance and offended our readers, then my apologies, but every once in a while, you have to let those bottled up feelings out.
My head hurts, too: http://www.thealbanyproject.com/diary/6998/went-to-massas-town-hall-am-feeling-shaken
I think that the people who were loud and obnoxious were continuing to repeat frequently debunked lies and had no interest in either hearing information or learning something new. I think that you and I are saying essentially the same thing.
Lad - Most who are there to argue won’t listen no matter what you say, but there are others there who are generally confused and need to hear your thoughts. But, you might have more success pointing out the monetary cost to all of us of people not being insured and using the emergency room as their medical care. You might also focus on the fact that this is a public OPTION. Reassure them that no one will expect them to change insurances if their family has a good plan. Also point out that a competing health care plan might help to drive down costs of the private plans. You might also talk about people being turned down from private plans for pre-existing conditions even if they are workers.
It’s a somewhat sad commentary, but most aren’t going to want change if their own situation is ok. Arguments from a humanitarian standpoint aren’t going to work well. Unfortunately, people aren’t going to listen to arguments about the general welfare, they are going to listen to arguments about how this will be good for me and my family. With so much to worry about these days, you can’t always blame them for that though. A lot of people are scared and nervous about massive changes. And, although I’m a strong supporter of the public option, I can understand the nervousness about gov’t screwing things up and complicating things (and adding to the debt).
Now, that doesn’t mean that I sympathize with the people showing up for the purpose of disrupting the meetings, but I do think it’s important to understand the people who have honest concerns and address their concerns about the impact on their lives.
agreed. Everything you say is true. If I could get people to hear me, I would say the same things you did. people are not listening. They are yelling. Like I said before, never argue with a drunk or a crazy person.
Now we’re back to the root of my concern. They disagree with you, therefore they are drunk or crazy?
Whatever good points you have in support of the broader argument get lost when you use that sort of rhetoric.
Look, they may be dead wrong. They may be manipulated by people with questionable motives. But they are genuinely angry and deserve better than to be labeled as drunk or crazy..
People in this country deserve to have health care. These are people fighting against their own best interest. That doesn’t seem drunk or crazy to you?
Who is it who said, “I refuse to have a battle of the wits with an unarmed person.”?
People may not realize what is in their best interest. That doesn’t make them drunk or crazy. I suspect that approaching people with a perception they’re drunk or crazy if they’re not agreeing with you prevents effective communication.
“The scary thing is, they’ve got the guns.”
This is why I’m a well armed liberal.
Now it is wrong for someone to exercise their rights? What next? Legalize thievery? Oh wait, that has been done.
It is the pro-government health care crowd who will not listen. Economic principles which apply to the delivery of goods and services is ignored all the time. More government health care will result in cost increases, shortages in supplies and providers, long waiting times and government rationing. That may not be your goal, but the effects are unavoidable.
Before someone goes off on a progressive rant about how I hate America, please explain to me why health care is not comprised of goods and services that respond to well established economic principles? If you can’t do that, you have no argument.
Mike,
I have known you for long enough to know that if it’s not libertarian, it’s not right. You slam progressives and conservatives alike for not having the “right idea”, which apparently involves putting on 18th century-era hats and holding “tea parties” that don’t involve boxes of tea, but rather 99 cent poster board.
The libertarian principle to everything is, essentially, let the free market run the show. The free market has run the show regarding health care just like the free market ran the show that led to the wonderful economic recession we find ourselves in now.
The American libertarians who claim that there will be “rationing” and “long waiting times” ignore the many international systems (i.e. Canada, Switzerland, etc.) that are very similar to each other, yet very different from the United States.
You also can’t determine who has “no argument”, Mike. This is reality: Our health care system is the most expensive system in the world, yet our efficiency is worse than most other industrialized nations. Those same industrialized nations who have government-sponsored programs that work (and are more cost effective) when compared to the American system.
You can go on about “well established economic principles” and “good and services,” but the fact remains that our health care system is inefficient and broken. Reforming it through the free market won’t work. We are past basic economics here. We are in a situation where if we do nothing, the health care system that promotes illness instead of wellness will keep costing us more and more money and that’s less money we have for other vital areas of our economy.
Gee whiz…I guess if MikeWNT can’t understand something it must not be true.
Boy MikeWNT, why didn’t you say so in the first place? That would have saved everyone a lot of trouble.
The president and congress could have just called MikeWNT and asked,
The scene:
The president is in the Oval Office, surrounded by the bi-partisan leadership of the congress. They appear nervous as the big guy picks up the phone and dails the number…
“Hi Mike. It’s me, Barak, do you understand that our healthcare system is one of the worse of all industrialized countries in the world? That it’s expensive, non-comprehensive, is based on a motive that by it’s nature restricts access and is a drain on our economy and has innumerable negative social consequences, including the restriction of your personal freedom of choice? Never mind the part about doing the right thing… do you get it MikeWNT?”
A pause, then a snort, “Government bad”
“Thanks MikeWNT for doing what you do. Good-bye. What’s that? Yes, I’ll have Defense Secretary Gates send another roll of ’special defense forces foil’ to the house.”
“OK folks, MikeWNT doesn’t get it, we can all move on to another issue.”
So, where does this hatred of your fellow Americans come from? Did an American knock you off you tricycle when you were a child and not say they were sorry?
OK, Mike I’ll apologize for that American…we’re all sorry.
Better now? Can you forgive America for whatever slight you think she has done to you and stop hating her?
I’m going to bed now, I hope that now that America has said sorry, you can get some sleep too…
Putting words in my mouth, now are you, Mike WNT. I said scary, not bad. They have every right to own and carry (if they have a permit)
Explaination to last paragraph: No one should profit from another person’s misfortune. It will be interesting to see you denied coverage for your pre-existing prostate cancer.
The rest of your comment is not worth my energy.
Non-responsive. You completely ignored my question, threw out the usual emotional BS. I’ll try again - please explain why health care is not comprised of goods and services that respond to well established economic principles? If you believe health care is goods and services, then the only logical solution is less government option and more private options that promote cost savings and quality increases through competition.
Free Market fundamentalism as you advocate simply doesn’t work Mike- Why? Well, the underlying assumption that we actually have a “free market”. Now you are going to go on about government controls restricting the market whihc is why it isn’t free but the reality and irony is that a “free Market” leads to monopoly as companies consolidate and control markets to increase share.
But wait - someone will come up with an invention or technology that will break the market open right? Well, maybe, many companies or individuals have benefited fork those pesky government issued protections for Intellectual Property. Is that government interference in the market?
One more thing - Only the government is strong enough to change or modify the health care system quickly. Just like only the government was strong enough to bust the trusts way back - or would you rather have trusts.
Re your good and service argument - do you really think everything needs to be bought and sold for profit? Probably - well not everything should be monetized. We as a society have an obligation to each other - that is what being a in a society is all about - at least my opinion. So health care for all or a much better system than we have now should be part of that.
Only the government can mobilize the necessary resources to get it done. We just have to disagree
I’m still waiting for an argument to defend your position. A bunch of assertions with nothing to back them up isn’t an argument. Perhaps they didn’t teach logic in the school you attended.
Just to touch on one of your false assertions - monopolies are created by government regulations, not a free market. That partly explains why we have no real choices in health care insurance and services and why costs are escalating quickly.
I’ll accept you cop-out, agreeing to disagree, since you have not and apparently are not capable of backing up your point. In essence, I am not really agreeing to disagree, but I am accepting your defeat.
And I’m still waiting for you to tell me that sun-spots and black holes are created by government regulations.
Your response is so predictable and so erroneous.
“monopolies are created by government regulations, not a free market. ”
There he goes again, Mike WNT provides proof of his ignorance or denial of America and her history. It was the progressive movement that brought about the regulation that ended the monpolies that had grown as a result of unfettered capitialism.
ladkiddo…you can’t argue with someone who makes things up as he goes along. Never let it be said that MikeWNT let facts get in the way of his ideology.
MikeWNT’s extremist and repeatedly obvious deep hatred of America, its people and values rears its ugly head once again.
Better, perhaps, to allow a nobel winning economist to explain it. Please see Krugman’s column.
If you want my understanding of why “healthcare” isn’t a market, it boils down to this:
–> Markets require a set of equivalent goods or services with well known properties and a market place where those properties and especially their prices can be compared.
–> When you need healthcare, you don’t have the knowledge to compare different treatments or providers (unless you have a medical degree and a residency in the field), you usually don’t have the time to comparison shop, and you may be limited by your insurance provider to specific providers.
–> Choosing health insurance is little better: the choice is often limited by the employer/healthcare connection we have in this nation and the policies are written in a sufficiently obfuscated legalese as to prevent comparison.
Republicans have been trumpeting the use of markets to “solve” the healthcare problem for at least sixty years (Truman attempted universal coverage in 1946 and they have been blocking it roughly every twenty years since then).
If “the market” approach that the Republicans (and Libertarians) prefer worked, we would be living in healthcare utopia right now.
Given that Republicans have dominated the Federal government and– more importantly, through the policies of Bill Clinton and Democratic “blue dogs”, the governing philosophy– for thirty years now, if we don’t have the pure “market” approach that they claim would fix healthcare, it’s because they have chosen not to implement it.
Krugman plays to the choir to enrich his own status. He may be an expert on trade theory, but is terrible when it comes to regular market forces. If you want to pay attention to a Nobel laureate try F.A. Hayek, you’ll learn much more.
Free-markets are a discovery process which leads to better services and costs.
Health care is “goods and services” - no one has been able to prove otherwise.
There is also a relatively new economic theory regarding the size of companies, countries, etc . Past a certain point, sheer size makes the delivery of goods and services inefficient, costly and scarce.
Also, Krugman is responsible for advocating the very policies that were responsible for the housing bubble.
If that were true, there would be no innovation. The consumers interaction with the market provides the data necessary to design optimal goods and services.
People generally develop a relationship with a regular family doctor, with whom the can discuss other treatment options. The last thing I want is some government bureaucrat telling me where to get health care.
Another false assertion. First, libertarians do not seek Utopia, that is what progressives and republicans think they can achieve by casting aside economic principles. No system is perfect, libertarians just advocate the one that would work the best. The system we have now is the result of government collusion with the certain components of the health care industry.
Health care does need fixing, it does not need more of the poison (government) that has wrecked the system.
Private Health Insurance companies provide no goods or services. They provide money from a pool to pay for goods and services. The fact that they can deny you coverage for something that you have been paying into that pool for years for is direct proof that this “free market” system doesn’t work and that has nothing to do with government regulations and everything to do with corporate greed.
Wake up!
We don’t have a free-market system now. We have a system defined by myriad government regulations Yes, the current system is broke. Broke because the government made it so.
Insurance is comprised of goods and services. The policies are the goods and the implementation is the service. Denying coverage is a problem that needs to be addressed, however, it is not an indictment of the market since the market is not free.
Also, what is this talk of denying coverage after paying for insurance for years? Any policy I’ve ever read has the standard exclusion for pre-existing conditions and that only applies for the first 12 months of coverage. Furthermore, if a company is allowed to deny coverage after years of payments, that is the result of not having a free-market or people would not choose coverage from that company. The negatives you speak of are the result of lack of choice. More government involvement means more lack of choice.
GREAT POINT!
Deregulation is obviously the answer. It has worked so well in the financial industry.
Why should the government bother trying to protect the citizens when the nice insurance companies are only interested in treating us kindly and providing the best possible product at the lowest cost and not at all interested in corporate jets, and fancy benefits for themselves, and multimillion dollar bonuses?
This is another false claim. The financial industry is and has been highly regulated for many years. The economic meltdown is specifically the result of government monetary policies, especially those of the Federal Reserve. I can show you thousands of pages of regulations pertaining to the financial industry, you can not show me a deregulated industry.
BTW, Congress is spending a ton of money on new jets to fly their sorry asses around.
Though not specifically about health care, I want to comment on government regulation of corporations.
What would America look like without government regulations? There is an odd notion that given freedom, companies would do what’s best for everyone. That couldn’t be farther from the truth…think of all the stories about pollution.
The high school I graduated from was built on the site of a former Remington Rand typewriter factory. When they left the area, they decided it was best for them (cheapest) to bury barrels of topic ink and benzene in the ground next to the factory. So, underneath the athletic field of my high school are leaking barrels of topic chemicals.
It is no more reasonable to expect every company to do the right thing than it is to expect every government official to do the right thing. There are plenty of examples of citizens being screwed by the actions of government officials. The difference is that in a free-market you have checks and balances that come from competition and choice. People can freely choose not to do business with “bad” companies. Competition increases innovation and keeps prices under control. When you have industries controlled by government, some of whose members are corrupt, you don’t have an easy choice for an alternative.
As far as the High School grounds you mention, I would suspect that there is probably some government collusion involved in using the contaminated property. The chemical company that had the land which is now known as Love Canal tried to warn the government about the landfill problems but the government buried the information in favor of cheap land to build a new school.
[...] was apparently a more contentious meeting at the end of the month in Victor. Not everyone could get in but there were some first hand reports. In short - it was [...]
[...] evening Town Hall meeting in Victor via The Albany Project. Our own Ladkiddo arrived late and was unable to get in. The general atmosphere at the Victor Town Hall hosted by Eric Massa was of a rude audience [...]