Another 2 cents worth. This bill isn't perfect, and has a long way to go. Does it help some more that others, probably. But our whole government is set up so that HUGE changes cannot be made. That's why they call them checks and balances. Do I think this bill is a small step in the right direction. Yes, and I hope there are many more small incrimental steps that make it better for each and every American.
This is a very complicated subject of course. It is a prime example of the philosophical conflict between the rights of the individual and the good of the whole. In reality I think it is a microcosm of our current political and philosophical divide. There is a lot to like and a lot to dislike. Our world is changing. It seems that we are at the tipping point on many subjects. The out come of this struggle will have repercussions throughout the systems that govern our lives. Who has looked at how other countries have arrived at their current health care systems? Who has done a study of how we arrived at our current health care system? How did we end up with a system that is so different from most of the industrialized world? I don't have those answers, do you?
Oh, Larry, Another thing. I think you might want to recant your judgement of those who are happy that it passed. That is quite a bit different from being happy with the bill itself. I am happy that it passed. For the last 50 years I've been watching health care change for most of the population. As the population grew larger, to the point that there is a huge divide between the best and the worst. Even though both ends of the spectrum are growing, it seems to me that the group at the worst end is growing faster than the group at the best. This seems to be the case with most things in our society. Who knows?
Since I don't know how to do graphics on this computer I will attempt to describe what I envisage.
Draw a line between two points. Use a scale of 1 to 100 above this base line and draw another line. Use the second line to represent the population of the US. Use the scale to represent how each element of the population compairs to the rest of the population.
75 years ago you would have a huge hump down around the 25% area. 50 years ago, much of that hump would have moved to the 75% area. 25 years ago the hump would have spred out and decreased in height. It would have existed between the 25% and 75% area. I think now you would find two distinct humps one centered at the 25% and one centered at the 85% area and the line between those two humps sagging to a low around the 45% to 55% area. I'm sure one of our resident mathmematicians can explain this in a much clearer, more accurate way. What we need, is to drive this bimodial chart back to a monomodial chart with the top of the hump at around the 90% point.
You explained it just fine Robbie. I had to read it twice. The sagging hump is the concern. (sounds kind of funny). I recant the "fool" part, the juvenile cheering I heard coming from the House Floor put me in a bad mood. I still think it's too early to be jubilant, and I'm REALLY sick of closed-minded Republicans and Democrats playing the bipartisan game with our lives.
I saved this last night. The chart is in three parts and is very interesting in comparison with world stats. Sometimes news feeds from other countries are clearer than our own. It relates to what Robbie has so well outlined.