Well, maybe, but do they have the pristine reputation for strict non-partisan and unbiased reporting that you find on Real Clear? Pretty high bar, there…
I suppose it might have to do with the definition of "seriously ill. However, I’ve had serious illnesses for most of my adult life, have been covered under private group insurance for almost 30 of those adult years and have never had the kind of trouble that I have had with any government run insurance.
I think it would help you guys if you realized that excellent medical care costs a lot of money, particularly if one is “seriously ill”. So, either those who are seriously ill pay their own way thru private insurance, or everyone pays the way of all seriously ill people thru taxes. As well as taxes going to pay to cover all pregnancies, well baby care and all of the illnesses and issues young children have, not to mention the incredible expense of any baby born ill, which are the other big ticket things that private insurance companies cover now.
To forestall the claim that a “civilized country” covers everyone’s health needs, do you all really want to be paying taxes to cover cancer treatment for smokers, NICU for people who knew damn well they were likely to conceive a sick baby, ICU for drunk drivers, and everyone else that essentially brings long term high cost medical treatment on themselves?
I don’t know if you realize, but that isn’t how private insurance works. Seriously ill people in no way cover their costs through premium payments. Seriously ill people on private insurance are subsidized by the healthy people in the same pool.
The Freepers are gonna be ALL over that. (You’ve heard of “freeping”, I assume?)
Well, if they became seriously ill right after they started getting insurance, yes. OTOH, insurance companies don’t pay claims with premiums, they take those premiums and invest them as there is no way they could cover all their costs on the amount that the average person is willing to pay. They also work on getting “group rates” for xrays, and lower charges on doctors office visits. Not to mention reasonable and customary, which I cannot imagine existed before insurance companies essentially forced it on the medical community.
The thing is, even “healthy” people generally end up costing the insurance companies something, so it isn’t like they are getting in all of these millions of dollars in premiums from people who never go to the doctor, for every person that ends up needing millions of dollars in cancer care.
All you have to do is apply a bit of logic to it - the average young adult is going to spend more of the insurance money than they are going to put in, by covering pregnancy and delivery, and then all the costs of young children. Then add in the fact that families almost always pay less per person in premiums than singles. Then add in the folks who are seriously ill and require even more money from the insurance company. Do you really think that costs are covered by premiums?
While Gigobuster already explained how the poll you linked isn’t even answering the same question, would CNN work for you as a source?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/23/cnn-poll-gop-favorable-rating-lowest-in-25-years/
You call it “subsidizing,” Comrade Guevara… I call it THEFT!
Good link! Thanks.
You’re right, I couldn’t find on my favorite site RCP the poll that was referenced earlier. I notice that the CNN poll didn’t have nearly the gap of the poll listed in that objective news-only site, Kos (ie, Kos has GOP favorable rating at 14%, CNN at 36%. That’s a huge swing.)
I do think however that the RCP poll is more ‘actionable’, as they would say in my business. In other words, and as CNN suggests in your article, the coming 2010 election will be about the Dem congress vs any alternative, not so much on the GOP platform. After all they’ve been in charge since 2006 (I dont think W blocked much of consequence his last two years).
For their sake I hope unemployment is down and inflation stays down by then. Else, could be a bloodletting a la 1994.
PS Since we’ve threadjacked, let me reiterate I hate Harry. People who use OUR money to bribe senators ought to be ousted, tarred and feathered, and run out of town on a rail.
In which instance, the entire Senate will consist of Bernie Sanders. Works for me.
Legislative quid-pro-quo != bribery.
Distinguishing between premiums the and returns from investing those premiums is meaningless. If it makes you feel better, replace “healthy people’s premiums” with “healthy people’s premiums and associated returns on investment.” Regardless, healthier than expected people always subsidize sicker than expected people.
27% still sucks, regardless if the minority (at 14%F, 69%U) is “dragging it way, way down”. Even the majority (at 40%F, 55%U) is still regarded as unfavorable as well no matter which numbers you use. There is plenty of blame to go around no matter who is doing what. Can you say in good conscience that “My party’s reps sucks less than their party’s reps?” Not me…They all suck collectively, because they HAVE to work collectively to be functional.
That is my point.
Yup, pretty easily.
14% favorable is about what you get if every gay person in the country loves you, and no one else.
We know that’s not true for Republicans, so it must be some sort of serious riff raff that’s still holding a torch for em.
True. However, those healthy people who are subsidizing the unhealthy thru their insurance premiums are at least getting something for their money. Taxpayers who subsidize healthcare don’t.
I’m perfectly happy to throw in some money to piss of whining trolls. I’d see it as getting something for my money.
-Joe
14%… 4%… what’s the difference
Well, it’s certainly much smaller than the difference between 14% and 40%. 
Actually, in proportion, 4% : 14% involves a factor of just over three, while 14% : 40% involves a factor of just under three.
not sure of your point here… so he’s only lying by a moderate amount, and therefore his postings should be treated with a similar amount of distrust?
I think you mixed your apples and oranges in your comparison, sry.
Factors? We don’t need no stinking factors here!
No one exists according to factors, they’re all present according to their incidence in the total population.