?

Log in

Healthcare Bill - Chemchick [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Slave To the Bunsen Burner

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Filter A-D Filter E-I Filter J-N Filter O-S Filter T-Z ]

Healthcare Bill [Mar. 22nd, 2010|12:02 pm]
Slave To the Bunsen Burner
For anyone who doesn't understand it here is a handy link:

HEALTHCARE LINK

Happy reading!
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: fairgotham
2010-03-22 04:04 pm (UTC)
Cool---thanks! :)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 04:12 pm (UTC)

Skeptic ahoy!

Heh. I was reading that in another tab when I updated my flist.

I want to know who says these are the things that will happen (aside from Reuters, obviously). Who teased these little things out (tanning bed tax? lol) from that gigantic piece of legislation and what isn't on the list?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 04:15 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

We don't know for certain since the ammendments needs to pass in the Senate before the president will sign it into effect.

I'm sure the bill itself is much more nuanced but if I were to guess these are the "meat and potatoes" of the bill in terms of affecting the American people. There was a lot of other crap in there about certain states getting certain things and blahblahblah that wasn't included in the Reuters list.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 04:21 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Who did the interpreting though? Did some Reuters reporter read the whole thing and then write the bullet points? Or was it the framers of the bill? (Man, I sound like an ass....lol). (And why the hell did they include that bit about the tanning bed tax?!? That's what makes me think there's some serious weirdness in there that NO one even knows about! lol)

And I got the impression the Senate portion of the deal was pretty much a foregone conclusion, especially after the amendment that passed an hour after the original bill to make it totally filibuster-proof in the Senate.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 04:30 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

I don't know - you'd have to ask Reuters. I just thought it would be helpful to pass on some information to people who may not have been following the debate from day 1.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 04:37 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Sorry, I wasn't questioning your choice to post it! My tone is sounding more strident than it intends. I'm just watching this unfold and am truly, truly fascinated.

Basically, I think no one really knows what is going to happen and we're in a bit of an emotional fervor. There's those that think we should bow down to our new insurance overlords and those who think we should bow down to Obama (the group I tend to sit in) for an excellent achievement.

I just don't trust insurance or pharmaceutical companies to allow legislation that will lessen their bottom line. So I'm a little dazed :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 04:42 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Pharmaceutical companies love this bill. More people on health insurance means more people buying their drugs. Even with the tacked on slice that the government will be taking from their profits Big Pharma + the insurance companies are looking at the prospect of 40 MILLION new people that will be buying their products.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 06:41 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Yeah, that's a significant boost. I have a hard time wrapping my brain around numbers over, lets say, 10,000. So when I see billion dollar taxes being levied against pharm and insurance I get a little bleary eyed. Not to mention all the free preventative care they're going to be required to offer, and having to spend a larger portion of the pot on actual health care and not overhead/salaries. It all seems like a bunch of hokum frankly.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 06:42 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 06:59 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

That's a good outline. Thanks for the link. :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 04:42 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Looks like a members only page. I don't have access.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: feckalyn
2010-03-22 04:44 pm (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Oops, just talks about the amendment an hour after the bill passed. Nothing too exciting.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gundamtsubasa
2010-03-23 02:32 am (UTC)

Re: Skeptic ahoy!

Waut, you have to have a Members Only jacket to get access to that website? Maybe you need to hit up Goodwill and the other thrift stores around you.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: induke
2010-03-22 05:47 pm (UTC)
*A 10 percent tax on indoor tanning services that use ultraviolet lamps goes into effect on July 1.


YES! FUCK YOU, NEW JERSEY!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chemchick
2010-03-22 05:49 pm (UTC)
lol
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)