tumbledry

Insurance HELP

Paul Krugman is right about health care. Please allow me the liberty of bolding portions of his piece, HELP Is on the Way, with which I strongly agree:

Now, about those specifics: The HELP plan achieves near-universal coverage through a combination of regulation and subsidies. Insurance companies would be required to offer the same coverage to everyone, regardless of medical history; on the other side, everyone except the poor and near-poor would be obliged to buy insurance, with the aid of subsidies that would limit premiums as a share of income.

Employers would also have to chip in, with all firms employing more than 25 people required to offer their workers insurance or pay a penalty. By the way, the absence of such an “employer mandate” was the big problem with the earlier, incomplete version of the plan.

And those who prefer not to buy insurance from the private sector would be able to choose a public plan instead. This would, among other things, bring some real competition to the health insurance market, which is currently a collection of local monopolies and cartels.

The budget office says that all this would cost $597 billion over the next decade. But that doesn’t include the cost of insuring the poor and near-poor, whom HELP suggests covering via an expansion of Medicaid (which is outside the committee’s jurisdiction). Add in the cost of this expansion, and we’re probably looking at between $1 trillion and $1.3 trillion.

There are a number of ways to look at this number, but maybe the best is to point out that it’s less than 4 percent of the $33 trillion the U.S. government predicts we’ll spend on health care over the next decade. And that in turn means that much of the expense can be offset with straightforward cost-saving measures, like ending Medicare overpayments to private health insurers and reining in spending on medical procedures with no demonstrated health benefits.

So fundamental health reform — reform that would eliminate the insecurity about health coverage that looms so large for many Americans — is now within reach. The “centrist” senators, most of them Democrats, who have been holding up reform can no longer claim either that universal coverage is unaffordable or that it won’t work.

Continued

Al Franken and the Odd Politics of Minnesota

I love my wife Mykala because she points out wonderful articles in the NYTimes for me. Independence Days - Al Franken and the Odd Politics of Minnesota:

“Minnesota Nice” is real. It’s why you see seed art at the Minnesota State Fair, a popular local art form, expressing all kinds of political and cultural thinking. It’s hard to think of another state in the union where you’d see gay-themed art made out of mix of flax and corn seed.

Continued

Conservative for Obama

Wick Allison is the former publisher of The National Review, which describes itself as “America’s most widely read and influential magazine and web site for Republican/conservative news, commentary, and opinion.” So, you may be interested in Mr. Allison’s recent article, A Conservative for Obama:

Continued

2 comments left

Long Week + Elections

This has been the longest shortest week I can remember — that is to say, the days have been very long, to the point that I can scarcely differentiate Monday from Tuesday from Wednesday and so on. The days just blur from one to the next… I can feel my mind, like a muscle in training, becoming better and better at learning (which is helpful) but I feel my body become more and more tired. And so… I’m off to the library in a minute to see how long I can study there.

Continued

Wall-E for President

I submit this to you: the movie Wall•E is an instant classic. Instant. New York Times columnist Frank Rich, in “Wall-E for President”:

Indeed, sitting among rapt children mostly under 12, I felt as if I’d stepped through a looking glass. This movie seemed more realistically in touch with what troubles America this year than either the substance or the players of the political food fight beyond the multiplex’s walls.

While the real-life grown-ups on TV were again rebooting Vietnam, the kids at “Wall-E” were in deep contemplation of a world in peril — and of the future that is theirs to make what they will of it. Compare any 10 minutes of the movie with 10 minutes of any cable-news channel, and you’ll soon be asking: Exactly who are the adults in our country and who are the cartoon characters?

Continued

4 comments left

Parents Work for their Children

Our parents: “When You Weren’t Looking, They Were Working” by Ben Stein:

You were born on third base and your parents put you there, and you think you hit a triple. It’s not true. It’s time to give back.

Continued

8 comments left

Obama’s Speech

You know that speech by Obama? The one that tackled race in America head-on? The really good one? Here’s a spot of commentary from Daily Kos: State of the Nation:

Continued

1 comment left

Losing Faith in Humanity

Let’s speak metaphorically for a second and say I own a rock labeled “faith in humanity” — well, an event today is responsible for taking a sharp chisel and hammering off a large chunk from said rock. Here’s what happened.

The search box in Firefox pulls results from something called “Google Suggest”. Here’s a description of the feature from Google (emphasis mine):

Continued

4 comments left

Robert Anton Wilson quote

It only takes 20 years for a liberal to become a conservative without changing a single idea.

— Robert Anton Wilson

This will be useful next election

This will be useful next election - Too bad I didn’t hear about this sooner - it looks like a good resource during election times.

Police hunt farting dissident

Police hunt farting dissident - “Police in Poland have launched a nationwide hunt for a man who farted loudly when asked what he thought of the president.”

1 comment left

Same Sex Marriage: What Comes After Massachusetts and Bush?

Pure and simple, same sex marriage should fall within the lawful parameters defining marriage. The Puritanical roots of the American society are sprouting up in order to attempt to strangle an inexorable worldwide march toward more liberal social policy.

Consider President Bush’s statement from February 24, 2004. In it, he outlines why White House policy will favor keeping the traditional form of marriage. He says, “If we are to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage in America.” The big question accompanying this statement, however, is not what the White House is looking to do, but why they are looking to do it. Considering it is an election year, I would say Bush’s hand has been forced and while the administration is partly responsible for this bone-headed decision, “Bush has been under pressure from social conservatives within his political base to come out in favor of such an amendment, several versions of which are floating around Capitol Hill.” (CNN.) There is, however, a point at which the cause for the decision does not matter. It is what it is, a stunningly foolish step backwards towards limiting personal liberty.

Continued