Comments on: Obliviousness http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:38:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: The Mahablog » No Room at the Maternity Ward http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-329730 Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:53:33 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-329730 [...] But I do love the way righties can’t let go of Canada and Britain whenever they go on a health care rampage. [...] […] But I do love the way righties can’t let go of Canada and Britain whenever they go on a health care rampage. […]

]]> by: The Mahablog » Why Is the Right Afraid of Universal Health Care? http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-275678 Tue, 28 Aug 2007 01:56:43 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-275678 [...] Part of the reason is that politicians — and I’m not just talking about Republicans — are in the pockets of the health insurance industry. But the larger reason is that the American Right is in deep denial about the true dimensions of the crisis and what it will take to correct it. In fact, I have yet to see a substantive discussion about health care in mass media. What I’ve seen by way of “discussion” are right-wingers screeching about waiting lines in Canada. Thus, the United States remains the only industrialized democracy on the planet without universal health care for its citizens, and the only thing most Americans know about health care in other countries is that there are waiting lines in Canada. Are there any conservatives out there who say that children should, quite simply, never see a doctor? Of course not. This is not what the debate is about. [...] […] Part of the reason is that politicians — and I’m not just talking about Republicans — are in the pockets of the health insurance industry. But the larger reason is that the American Right is in deep denial about the true dimensions of the crisis and what it will take to correct it. In fact, I have yet to see a substantive discussion about health care in mass media. What I’ve seen by way of “discussion” are right-wingers screeching about waiting lines in Canada. Thus, the United States remains the only industrialized democracy on the planet without universal health care for its citizens, and the only thing most Americans know about health care in other countries is that there are waiting lines in Canada. Are there any conservatives out there who say that children should, quite simply, never see a doctor? Of course not. This is not what the debate is about. […]

]]> by: The Mahablog » The Canada Bugaboo http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-31288 Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:49:42 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-31288 [...] Ezra Klein addresses the rightie myth that American liberals consider Canada’s single-payer health care system as the best in the world. I’ve observed this same phenomenon. More evidence that righties have no idea what we lefties really think. [...] […] Ezra Klein addresses the rightie myth that American liberals consider Canada’s single-payer health care system as the best in the world. I’ve observed this same phenomenon. More evidence that righties have no idea what we lefties really think. […]

]]> by: The Mahablog » Dear Media, Part I: Diagnosis http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-17999 Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:54:20 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-17999 [...] Take health care, for example. For years, we progressives have wanted some kind of national health care system, maybe single payer, maybe a combination of public and private systems, but something that would scuttle the bloated, failing mess we’ve got now. Many polls indicate that a majority of Americans are deeply concerned about health care in this country. Yet it is next to impossible to present progressive ideas about health care reform to the American public through mass media. Even on those programs allegedly dedicated to political discussion, as soon as a progressive gets the phrase “health care” out of his mouth, a chorus of rightie goons will commence shrieking about socialized medicne! And then the allotted ten minutes for the health care segment is up; go to commercial. [...] […] Take health care, for example. For years, we progressives have wanted some kind of national health care system, maybe single payer, maybe a combination of public and private systems, but something that would scuttle the bloated, failing mess we’ve got now. Many polls indicate that a majority of Americans are deeply concerned about health care in this country. Yet it is next to impossible to present progressive ideas about health care reform to the American public through mass media. Even on those programs allegedly dedicated to political discussion, as soon as a progressive gets the phrase “health care” out of his mouth, a chorus of rightie goons will commence shrieking about socialized medicne! And then the allotted ten minutes for the health care segment is up; go to commercial. […]

]]> by: pamela http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-17172 Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:40:14 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-17172 very good site. thx very good site. thx

]]> by: The Mahablog » Je m’amuse. http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-16909 Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:51:12 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-16909 [...] This is terrible. Yet, I am amused. Why? Because once again, righties conform to my expectations. Last February I wrote in a post called “Obliviousness” – Try to discuss national health care with a rightie, and the first sentence out of his mouth will be, “You mean like in Canada?” Then he will go off on a tirade about the problems with the Canadian system. (Unless you remind them of the underfunded British system, which is the other good “bad” example of a system with problems.) [...] […] This is terrible. Yet, I am amused. Why? Because once again, righties conform to my expectations. Last February I wrote in a post called “Obliviousness” – Try to discuss national health care with a rightie, and the first sentence out of his mouth will be, “You mean like in Canada?” Then he will go off on a tirade about the problems with the Canadian system. (Unless you remind them of the underfunded British system, which is the other good “bad” example of a system with problems.) […]

]]> by: Nathan http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-6400 Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:43:35 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-6400 We about the fact that medical errors kill more people in this country than breast cancer, AIDS and traffic accidents. I read an article in the NYT that talked about new fail safe instruments for laparosoopy. I think keeping our patients alive should be number one first and foremost. We about the fact that medical errors kill more people in this country than breast cancer, AIDS and traffic accidents. I read an article in the NYT that talked about new fail safe instruments for laparosoopy. I think keeping our patients alive should be number one first and foremost.

]]> by: Shelley http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4255 Tue, 28 Feb 2006 22:13:03 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4255 It's pretty clear to me, if you have a private health care system the one and only goal of private insurance companies is to make profit. How can their making profit benefit those of us who need medical care? It's an oxymoron to say, privatization is good for the people. It is impossible for privatization to be good for the people. They are in the business to cut benefits while having the highest legal premiums that our corrupt and paid off legislators allow them. Let's elect a strong third party that represents the masses rather than a party that only works for the corporations who fund them. Work for public financing of political campaigns to keep corporate bribes out of the hands of those who claim to represent us. It’s pretty clear to me, if you have a private health care system the one and only goal of private insurance companies is to make profit. How can their making profit benefit those of us who need medical care? It’s an oxymoron to say, privatization is good for the people. It is impossible for privatization to be good for the people. They are in the business to cut benefits while having the highest legal premiums that our corrupt and paid off legislators allow them.
Let’s elect a strong third party that represents the masses rather than a party that only works for the corporations who fund them. Work for public financing of political campaigns to keep corporate bribes out of the hands of those who claim to represent us.

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4192 Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:04:44 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4192 <i>I’m simply saying there may be a better, third way.</i> There are all kinds of ways already. If you look at all the national health care systems in all the countries that have national health care systems, which is a lot of them, you'll find several dozen ways. And since all these nations have had these systems for many years, by studying them we can see what has worked over time and what hasn't. I mentioned France because by most measures it seems to be getting the best results, but there are many other nations getting better results than we are. Or, we can do it the American way, which is to reinvent the wheel and come up with some monstrous boondoggle of a program that mostly benefits corporations and rich people, and leaves poor people without decent health care. Oh, wait, that's what we have now. I’m simply saying there may be a better, third way.

There are all kinds of ways already. If you look at all the national health care systems in all the countries that have national health care systems, which is a lot of them, you’ll find several dozen ways. And since all these nations have had these systems for many years, by studying them we can see what has worked over time and what hasn’t. I mentioned France because by most measures it seems to be getting the best results, but there are many other nations getting better results than we are.

Or, we can do it the American way, which is to reinvent the wheel and come up with some monstrous boondoggle of a program that mostly benefits corporations and rich people, and leaves poor people without decent health care. Oh, wait, that’s what we have now.

]]> by: Barry http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4183 Tue, 28 Feb 2006 06:38:32 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/26/obliviousness/#comment-4183 Yes, the RAND study randomized people to varying levels of co-pays. Those with higher co-pays consumed less healthcare. And had worse health. http://gladwell.typepad.com/gladwellcom/2006/02/gladwell_v_gopn_1.html Yes, the RAND study randomized people to varying levels of co-pays. Those with higher co-pays consumed less healthcare.

And had worse health.

http://gladwell.typepad.com/gladwellcom/2006/02/gladwell_v_gopn_1.html

]]>