(FINALLY a reponse to a direct question)
So I am going over the Health Care debate and what’s in it and what’s not in it… its is bringing up very specific questions for me and I guess others who, while they want health care reform, do not believe the government can run it well. Anyway, it looks like one asnwer has been given about end of life counselling. From what she states it seems like just what it should b, that you should, if you want to, be able to talk to your doctor about how you want it all to end.
For some reason medicaid/medicare didn’t pay for that, but it will after the bill is passed.
The only thing for me is that how come you couldn’t do that in a normal doctors visit? Do you have to have a special visit to the doctor just for this? And if you do medicaid (and apparently plenty of for profit health care insurances) won’t be paying for it… but exactly how would they know that I went just for that?
In any event, I am glad thtis question for me is resolved. While it does bring up other questions (like the ones above), at least its not the outragous “death panel” that we keep hearing from the right (sadly it still doesn’t asnwer the question of if… IF… we go into another recession or the cost of the bill rises astronomically, how will we bring health care to everyone then and how will the limied money be allocated).
Until next time! And remeber, be grown, be sexy! Don’t just look good, do good; be involved and educate yourself.
A most interesting debate has come up on TechCrunch (one of my favorite industry tech blogs) and its about old media and why its dieing such a death.
I have to quote this for your guys because this is what I have been thinking for a while:
QUOTE from TechCrunch:
When it comes to a certain type of highly visible breaking news, no-one can argue that social media kicks the mainstream media’s ass. At any given disaster, there’s possibly a 0.01% chance that a professional journalist or photographer will already be on the scene, compared to 100% odds that there’ll be some dude with a camera-phone there. And as for asking tough questions: yep, bloggers are pretty good at that too – hardly a syllable can slip from the mouth of a politician or public official without it being torn apart by an army of ‘fact-checking’ bloggers, hungry for content.
And yet, I argued back, after camera phone dude helps us establish that the plane has crashed, who can we trust to tell us why it happened? While bloggers can own the first five minutes of any breaking story – a plane crash, a fire, a burglary – it’s always going to be the professional reporters who own the next five days, or five weeks. They walk the streets, work their contacts and – yes – trawl the blogosphere for eye-witness reports, and then take all of that information, analyse it, follow it up and ultimately provide an account of events that readers can trust.
Or at least this is what they used to do. If that were still how journalism works then the unpaid bloggers wouldn’t have a hope of competing. But unfortunately, thanks to a succession of journalistic fakes and the constant tabloidisation of the press, that trust is gone. Why should someone – either an advertiser or a reader – be prepared to pay for a newspaper when they can get the same old lies and fluff from the blogosphere?
I am currently trying to find the pros and cons of the Health Care Debate/Reform that is currently taking attention of Congress and I am seeing what I already thought I saw but can now put to words: That most media outlets HAVE NOT done any research or indebth reporting on the pros and cons of the current health care issues (except for Fox News and you already know what they think of it).
So why are they not doing this? Why is it when they have a hard hitting story, they dont give the indepth reporting online?
More on this later.
(its great that we have people in the White House who are willing to dicuss)
After listening to this I feel a little bit better about the plan… but there is just one issue I have when it comes to the question of rashining of care. I will agree that it already happens and even to some extent in the governments Medicaid/Medicare program, but I think the question people have about rationing is truely this: If, and let me say the word again, If, the cost of this government insurance option ends up costing billions or even trillions of dollars more than projected, will there be a possibility of rationing? If there is rationing, how will it work? If the cost ends up being so high AND there is another recession, what happens?
We need to know the positives AND negatives of the plan and mediate the negatives.
Sadly, this particular video does not asnwer this question which is what many opponents and even people who WANT health care reform are truely asking. What happens if… it costs more than the 1.4 Trillion dollars… What happens if… the government is caught with its pants down and can not pay for the people who are on the plan… If the White House and anyone else who truely wants health care reform to happen, then these “what if” scenerios need to be answered.
You can always plan to succeed, but also prepare for failure.
Lets be grown out there people… don’t get violent, but discuss this issues. Lets also be sexy… look really good while your asking thoe questions in your designer footwear and in style fashion sense.