Health care reform: The motives behind the opposing parties

Published on August 17, 2009 By aroddoold In Everything Else

While some conservatives claim that Obama wants to kill your granny I hesitate to accept that as Obamas sole reason for pushing the health care reform.

From the private insurers point of view it makes perfect sense to oppose the reform ... if they didn't, they'd face an immense decline in profits if either the government option provides better care or if regulations bar insurers from avoiding costs by their current methods.

But it's a bit too simplicistic to merely claim that one party acts out of altruism (or a loathing of old ladies) and the other out of greed.

So, what do you think are the driving motives in this dispute ?

(Note that I don't ask you what you think is the better solution.)

Pro (Motives of the health care reform advocates):

The Believe that health care is a right, not a privilege (file under altruism).
Desire for more government control.
An excuse to raise taxes (no one wants to pay more taxes without a good reason).
Desperation (they can't get private insurance and hope for the public option).

Con (Motives of the health care reform opponents):

Greed / seeking profits (Insurance companies will lose money if forced to provide care to sick)
Selfishness ("Why should I pay for your surgery?").
Government shouldn't do health care because they are incompetent ().
Poor people should die sooner than later.
It is not clear how the reform can be financed.
A deal with drug companies prohibiting the government to negotiate drug prices can't lower costs.

Two key issues that make the health care reform necessary in the eyes of the proponents are quailty and cost.

Quality has been discussed to death and information (and misinformation) is freely available.

Cost is harder to estimate - one simply can't understand what estimated costs of trillions of dollars over decades means for your paycheck. So I started a different thread where I want to compare the personal average cost of health care in different countries.

The personal Cost of Health Care - An international comparison

For example: German average gross income is about €2,500. After deductions (including health insurance) a single person without kids gets to keep about €1,500.

And what can germans do with that money in germany? Why, buy beer, of course. €1,500 get you 1,200 litre of high quality Pilsener beer - twice as much if you don't care about quality and go for the cheap labels.

Health care costs: €185 per month (currently $264)

Cheers!

Comments (Page 22)

316

psychoak

on Aug 25, 2009

I get to be a racist. Sweet.

It's them damn black people! Seriously!

Iowa, the bottom of the list, 2.7% black. Louisiana? 32% black. We should just exterminate the black people and then there wont be any high murder rates! ZOMG!!!

If anyone takes that seriously and decides I hate black people, please sterilize yourself. Immediately.

I know the bars look really cool, but you're just as dumb as the idiots in the drive by media when you fall for such narrow minded crap. Population demographics are and always have been the primary contributor to crime rates, and it doesn't even take thirty seconds to find out for yourself. Start here.

317

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Spooky

reply 65

Quoting cuckaroucha, reply 62Slightly off-topic...I countinually find it distressing that the same people who pushed for a war in Iraq, costing trillions to save the Iraqis is unwilling to have the government pay to have people in America recieve free care.Indeed.

Quoting Lugh, reply 64You don't have a right to FREE MEDICAL CARE... you have the right to pursue happiness and if being healthy is part of that mandate then YOU better get yourself some.Some americans are just twisted. They want to have "the right to bear arms", but having the right to free medical care seems to be beyond their comprehension.

The fact that is ISN'T FREE seems beyond the comprehension of others too...

318

Moosetek13

on Aug 25, 2009

How about this?

We just do away with any kind of insurance for anything - for everyone.

Let everyone pay for what they need on their own, or through the simple charity of others - or suffer the consequences thereof.

Because, you know what? Once everyone has 'insurance' premiums at a cost below that of the actual care or benefits they receive - whether it be for car or house or health or whatever - there will be some (many) that will be 'opted out'. Because you can't pay for something with not enough money. It will always turn into a system where the 'most important' get covered at the cost and detriment of the 'least important'.

The whole 'insurance' game has never been more than what we had in the early 1900's with the mob demanding 'protection' money. It has simply grown/evolved into a 'legitimate' business, which now the government want's a piece of.

319

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Spooky

reply 65

The right to bear arms guarantess me my right to defend myself... from everyone... including the police, Gov't or any other power foreign or domestic. Thanks its a keeper.

Once again your FREE healthcare isn't free its bought and paid for with your taxes. How'd you like to have 15% more income a year because YOU and Your countryman are being upstanding responsible people and actually accountable for your own health?

Too much to ask... ??

We the people didn't push for a War in Iraq... if you look we the people were quite a bit distressed about the "Bush family war" and there is AMPLE protest that is lodged all over this world wide web.

320

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Aroddo

reply 66

Quoting Lugh, reply 63Eveyone dies. The less able to pay should die sooner rather than later. Insurance is supposed to be for emergencies. Not maintenance.
Is this sociopathic opinion right-wing or republican mainstream? Because it surely isn't christian.

Quoting Lugh, reply 63They are like starving Ethopians with their hands out having rice ladeled into their grubby little hands twice a day with a glass of water on the side.

They never HAVE to get up and grow food to feed themselves someone else does it for them.
This isn't only racist, it also shows off your stellar stupidity and ideological ruthlessness.

Ethopia (and twenty other african countries) had a drought period in 1984 that lasted two years which resulted in a hunger crisis that cost more than a million lives.

I completely fail to see how you can gloat about something like that.

Damn ... let myself get off topic by this abomination.

Let's chalk this motive up as "Because poor people deserve to die."

Some of the world's largest purges of hatred are Christian led.. so don't get on your I'm with Jesus soap box..

And if citing an actual example of a people that totally mismanaged their own care during a problem and came running to the world for help, is racist you sir are a fool.

I wasn't gloating either. Glad you saw it that way. PS the KKK is a Christian organization.. they'd like to talk to you about how to better serve your people (chances are you won't agree with what they intend is best for your people as they are full of hate)

Again if you want to run a CHARITY WARD... do it with your OWN MONEY...

Goodwill does it

There are VAST number of Christian Charities too numerous to count that do it too...

The GOVERNMENT doesn't and shouldn't be involved in CHARITY WORK...

There are two kinds of folks in the world, Those that provide (for themselves and others) and those that don't. This measure is MOSTLY supported by those that don't.

You shouldn't be interested in free health care for junkies, the unemployed, the catastrophically ill.

Were you aware that 70% of all your medical costs are spent in the last 5 years of your life?

That's right.. 70% of the money you spend on medical care will be spent in a last gasp effort to live just a little bit longer.

Instead of logically assessing how much your continued existence is worth and deciding that exiting with dignity you will go kicking and screaming. Why?

Doesn't paradise await the faithful? I know it does for me.

321

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Obscenitor

reply 201

Quoting Aroddo, reply 199@Primal Zed

But isn't that an unchristian philsophy?

Many americans and much more republicans seem to share your life philosophy while at the same time calling themselves devoted christians.

Isn't that a contradiction?Yes, it is a contradiction. Previously the working class voted against the wealthy because it was in their best interests to do so, but there was a great cultural backlash in which the working class people, aka the christian folk, were duped into voting against their own interests.
When people get pissed at abortion, gay marriage, Wall Street, or the liberal media what do they vote for? They vote to cut Sean Penn's and Michael Moore's taxes. They vote to derugulate the media further, they vote to privatize social security and roll back medical care. The republican party made a brilliant transformation, they mire voters in a culture war and demonize any mention of class warfare. We're worse off than we were in the gilded age and it's still moral rhetoric that's deciding elections.

The only time the Republican party has delivered on any of its promises was when Bush appointed justices Alito and Roberts to start the slow process of overturning Roe v. Wade by the only means modern society will let them.

The people here who are opposing the health care bill are the fringe. The average republican is a con, not a mod, and they're christian. They want everyone to get health care, they just don't trust the government to do it. They don't believe any of the extreme (regardless of how true they are) views expressed here that boil down to "fuck the poor." The objectivists and libertarians are NOT a major part of the electorate, but the cons still vote for their policies because they've found a nest to roost their moral perspectives in that party.

Overtunring Roe V Wade is a bad idea... do you want Rapist babies brought into the world because the law doesn't allow for their elimination?

322

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Obscenitor

reply 266

Quoting psychoak, reply 264If your mind were present, you'd be scary. It obviously doesn't function at that level though. Your great aunt would never have gotten five years of top notch care anywhere else in the world. Top notch has never been affordable in anything. You get to have one or the other, there is no both. Medicare has demonstrated this abundantly by giving us a rapidly expanding budget shortfall.I may have misspoken when I said top notch, I didn't spend the whole five years with her and I didn't meet her doctors. It's possible she had treatment delays and that she didn't have the most advanced cancer team in the world. What she did have was extensive coverage and a dignified passing. If they rolled back medicare people would be dying miserable deaths and bankrupting their families.
When it comes down to it anyone with common sense knows that's true and if the Republicans tried to end Medicare they would lose elections for the next decade at least, so while it may be fun to approach the issue from an abstract Randian or libertarian perspective, I'd be much interested in hearing about a politically viable solution beyond just tort reform.

She could have had a much less painful and more dignified passing at Hospice, with charity care paid for by those that support that sort of thing. It would have been sooner and she would have suffered less.

And ending Medicare doesn't bankrupt families, unless they are simple enough to sign away everything to keep mom and dad alive 2 years more...

323

Leauki

on Aug 25, 2009

do you want Rapist babies brought into the world because the law doesn't allow for their elimination?

Yes.

It's not the baby's fault now, is it?

I can understand that it's very hard on the mother and I even agree that abortion would be fully justified in the case; but I would want the baby to be brought into the world.

Who am I to want bad things, like death, for innocent people???

324

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Moosetek13

reply 318

How about this?

We just do away with any kind of insurance for anything - for everyone.

Let everyone pay for what they need on their own, or through the simple charity of others - or suffer the consequences thereof.

Because, you know what? Once everyone has 'insurance' premiums at a cost below that of the actual care or benefits they receive - whether it be for car or house or health or whatever - there will be some (many) that will be 'opted out'. Because you can't pay for something with not enough money. It will always turn into a system where the 'most important' get covered at the cost and detriment of the 'least important'.

The whole 'insurance' game has never been more than what we had in the early 1900's with the mob demanding 'protection' money. It has simply grown/evolved into a 'legitimate' business, which now the government want's a piece of.

I like this idea. However, the VAST majority of sheeple are incapable of thinking in terms of long term (more than a month away) planning ..

Insurance as a medium SHOULD be available for EMERGENCIES.

The problem, the biggest problem, with Healthcare is that it seems MANY people want other people to 'care for them'.

I have never asked anyone outside my mom and dad to help me with managing my Juvenile Diabetes. I have lived almost 30 years with a disease that kills if untreated.

I have had to make choices, not all of which I liked, to work for companies large enough to provide insurance coverage for 'pre-existing conditions'

I manage as best I can. I own my own home. I haven't ever maintained a long term relationship out of respect for those I love and not wanting or desiring to saddle my care needs onto anyone else.

I don't need America to provide me my health care. If they can't I can do it myself, it just gets expensive.

I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that my death will be 16ish times more likely to be from Heart Attack or Stroke, which run on both sides of my family.

It isn't YOUR concern to care for me.

It isn't MY concern to care for you.

I happen to know a great deal of people that would gladly do so, but my own pride won't allow them to.

Americans on the whole seem to be getting progressively weaker, mentally, physically, spiritually.

The overriding reason? PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

No one is willing to hold themselves responsible for their own failures.

325

Lughsan

on Aug 25, 2009

Leauki

reply 323

do you want Rapist babies brought into the world because the law doesn't allow for their elimination?

Yes.

It's not the baby's fault now, is it?

I can understand that it's very hard on the mother and I even agree that abortion would be fully justified in the case; but I would want the baby to be brought into the world.

Who am I to want bad things, like death, for innocent people???

You realize you are rewarding the rapist?

326

Leauki

on Aug 25, 2009

You realize you are rewarding the rapist?

No. Please explain.

Do you think the rapist wants the child to be born or in any way benefits from the existence of his biological child?

It seems logical to me that the rapist would want the child to be aborted.

327

EadTaes

on Aug 25, 2009

Actuly no some rapist rape for the thrill to rape others are turned on even more by knowing that their act will bring forth a child. You can't think logicaly with criminals they ahve a twited midn that is why they do twisted things. Indeed it does nto mean that teh child of a rapist will be a bad person. However it forces the persont hat was raped to bear the child of the person that caused them greta harm. To bear the child of the person that witch you hate the most in the world.

If your a women it's easy to imagine would you want to bare the child of the man you hate the most?
If your a man imagine would you want your gf/wife to bare the child of the man you hate teh most?

The answer to booth of those questions is obviusly NO ! So any woment hat gets rape should have the right to abortion.

But we are gettign off track here. This is about universal health care for all. Note that nothing is free int his world one way or and other you pay for it.

I can only tell you that having a health care system that will treat everyone and treat them all the same will more greatly benifit the U.S. then sytem that si for profit like the current one. Weatehr it should be federaly or state ran I don't know. I just know the Federal level seems to eb the only place where their is will. To that just means your federal gouvernemnt cares more for you then you private healt insurance witch they just want more of your money. The fed will probably need to raise taxes for the healt care but in general it will be cheaper per capita so if you have private health insurance the federal oen should be cheaper. But that all depend son how it is managed and on how the privite sector will try to undermine the system.

Because one thing is for sure the private sector will do all it can to make the plan fail to satisfy their own greed.

328

Leauki

on Aug 25, 2009

You tell me that one cannot think logically with criminals and then you proceed to think logically about it and focus on the criminal and what he might want or not want.

I pretty much ignored the criminal in my reasoning and focused on the child.

The point is that the child is innocent. The decision shouldn't have anything to do with the rapist but only with the child and the mother. I already said that I agree that an abortion would be fully justified. But I'd still prefer the child to live.

Focusing logically on the rapist and figuring out what his opinion is contradicts not only your claim that one cannot think logically with criminals but it also ignored the subject, namely whether or not the child should live. And it should.

Remove the rapist from the equation and think of another situation where the killing of one might be justified. For example think of a situation where someone accidentally kills another trying to save himself. Would you not agree that while the killing would be justified (in the sense that it shouldn't be punished) buit that it would be better if it hadn't happened?

329

EadTaes

on Aug 25, 2009

What i said that you can think logicaly about what a criminal will do since their behavior rarely has any logic bassing it. were logic comes in in ont eh side fo the victim and what the victim feels and what is only natural. I for one know a rape vcitime that got rape (evidently) and decided to keep the child till term. But she gave it up to adoption. Today she did take contact witht hat child again 25 years later but she stilld oesn't know if keeping it was a good choise. She doesn't hate him for the kid is a greta guy, but she doesn't love him either because of what he represents.

One I think I'll say abortion should not be mandatory but should be available for any rape victim. It's a hard choise to take indeed and yes teh child is innocent. But still even if it is the life the child will have will not be the best of lives. More othen then not that childs life will not be a happy one.

I for one weiv my blood children that I,ll have as my form of imortalaty if you wish. I live on in them after I die if you want to phrase it like that. So for me for a rapist to gain that "Immortalaty" througth a voilent act liek that is unacceptable for me. Witch si why I will always support rape victims to ahve the right to abortion.

330

Leauki

on Aug 25, 2009

But still even if it is the life the child will have will not be the best of lives. More othen then not that childs life will not be a happy one.

The mother could (and probably should) give the child up for adoption. There are so many couples who want a child and can't get one.

The rapist won't get the imortality, only the real father, the one who raises the child and fills his or her brain with information will. It is a fallacy to assume that what we are is defined by our genes. It isn't. And it is only genes that the child will get from his biological father.

What I am is not my genes but my worldview. I'd rather have my worldview spread than my genes. Having children should be for the benefit of the children, not for the benefit of some mythical idea of imortality by spreading your genes.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!