4 ms·

partisan bile? Sounds more like the poster is an independent who's tired of Big-C vs. Big-L politics and really wants pragmatic change, not partisan line-toein

by ap22213 15y ago

partisan bile? Sounds more like the poster is an independent who's tired of Big-C vs. Big-L politics and really wants pragmatic change, not partisan line-toeing. Look, I don't know what age you are, but health care at upper-30s is no easy street, and from what I hear, it gets much, much worse. Just in the past year, I dropped 10K on health care expenses, and that is _with_ fantastic insurance. Edit: and, seriously - I'm no slouch. I'm an extremely healthy upper-30s guy who runs, weight-trains, eats like godliness. I'm guessing the audience of HN is probably lower-middle 20s. Well, trust me, health problems still creep up (on some of us), even with uber lifestyle.

anamax 15y ago
> Look, I don't know what age you are, but health care at upper-30s is no easy street, and from what I hear, it gets much, much worse. I'm "low 50s" and a fairly premium plan didn't cost me much. > Just in the past year, I dropped 10K on health care expenses, and that is _with_ fantastic insurance. Wowswers. However, if that's expected costs, that's an argument for not subsidizing you. And, if it's unexpected costs, that's an argument for catastrophic health insurance, not ordinary health insurance, which is little more than pre-paid expenses.
- ap22213 15y ago
  Yes - I see your point. Ok - A sizable portion of the 10K happened between jobs. Another large chunk was dental. So, I'm packing a lot into that number that I probably shouldn't. And, I apologize for that. I guess I'm just bitter about it. Healthcare has personally burned me, and I find it a personal distraction and barrier. But, I need to recuse myself from healthcare discussions.
  - anamax 15y ago
    > A sizable portion of the 10K happened between jobs. Huh? You started with > Just in the past year, I dropped 10K on health care expenses, and that is _with_ fantastic insurance. Are you now saying that the 10k was dominated by dental (which isn't covered by health insurance) and expenses when you weren't covered by "fantastic insurance" because you went bare? And that's somehow the fault of the health insurance system? > I find [healthcare] a personal distraction and barrier. No doubt, but the solution seems to be under your control. There are lots of things that we could do to improve the healthcare system, but we're not going to get them by making up stories.
timr 15y ago
"partisan bile? Sounds more like the poster is an independent who's tired of Big-C vs. Big-L politics and really wants pragmatic change, not partisan line-toeing." I think I'm an independent, but it's probably objectively possible to look at my position here, and claim that I'm siding with the Democrats. So be it: if the Democrats want single-payer health care, then I'm on their side, and I guess it makes me "partisan" in the eyes of people who disagree. There's nothing inherently wrong with being partisan -- the problem comes when people are partisan without reasons beyond party affiliation. Demonizing "partisanship" is a rhetorical trick that dresses up ad hominem attacks as legitimate debate.
- jacoblyles 15y ago
  "Partisan bile" refers to your snarky dismissal of the case for deregulation. There are real problems with regulation, including Sarbox. The law has encouraged cartelization of the economy by pushing firms towards acquisitions instead of IPOs. Most regulation punishes startups and protects incumbents. Sometimes the benefits are worth it but often they are not.
  - timr 15y ago
    I said that degregulation was part of the usual conservative shopping list (which it is). That particular remark was no more or less snarky than the rest. But if your primary objection is that I'm snarky...well, that's great. My argument remains. In any case, I'm the first person to admit that there are problems with Sarbanes Oxley. I think that parts of the law were a total over-reaction to the situation, solving nothing. But I'd rather see ammendments to the law than a wholesale retraction. And that's where I differ from most conservatives.

by ap22213 15y ago

anamax 15y ago

> Look, I don't know what age you are, but health care at upper-30s is no easy street, and from what I hear, it gets much, much worse. I'm "low 50s" and a fairly premium plan didn't cost me much. > Just in the past year, I dropped 10K on health care expenses, and that is _with_ fantastic insurance. Wowswers. However, if that's expected costs, that's an argument for not subsidizing you. And, if it's unexpected costs, that's an argument for catastrophic health insurance, not ordinary health insurance, which is little more than pre-paid expenses.

ap22213 15y ago
Yes - I see your point. Ok - A sizable portion of the 10K happened between jobs. Another large chunk was dental. So, I'm packing a lot into that number that I probably shouldn't. And, I apologize for that. I guess I'm just bitter about it. Healthcare has personally burned me, and I find it a personal distraction and barrier. But, I need to recuse myself from healthcare discussions.
- anamax 15y ago
  > A sizable portion of the 10K happened between jobs. Huh? You started with > Just in the past year, I dropped 10K on health care expenses, and that is _with_ fantastic insurance. Are you now saying that the 10k was dominated by dental (which isn't covered by health insurance) and expenses when you weren't covered by "fantastic insurance" because you went bare? And that's somehow the fault of the health insurance system? > I find [healthcare] a personal distraction and barrier. No doubt, but the solution seems to be under your control. There are lots of things that we could do to improve the healthcare system, but we're not going to get them by making up stories.

timr 15y ago

"partisan bile? Sounds more like the poster is an independent who's tired of Big-C vs. Big-L politics and really wants pragmatic change, not partisan line-toeing." I think I'm an independent, but it's probably objectively possible to look at my position here, and claim that I'm siding with the Democrats. So be it: if the Democrats want single-payer health care, then I'm on their side, and I guess it makes me "partisan" in the eyes of people who disagree. There's nothing inherently wrong with being partisan -- the problem comes when people are partisan without reasons beyond party affiliation. Demonizing "partisanship" is a rhetorical trick that dresses up ad hominem attacks as legitimate debate.

jacoblyles 15y ago
"Partisan bile" refers to your snarky dismissal of the case for deregulation. There are real problems with regulation, including Sarbox. The law has encouraged cartelization of the economy by pushing firms towards acquisitions instead of IPOs. Most regulation punishes startups and protects incumbents. Sometimes the benefits are worth it but often they are not.
- timr 15y ago
  I said that degregulation was part of the usual conservative shopping list (which it is). That particular remark was no more or less snarky than the rest. But if your primary objection is that I'm snarky...well, that's great. My argument remains. In any case, I'm the first person to admit that there are problems with Sarbanes Oxley. I think that parts of the law were a total over-reaction to the situation, solving nothing. But I'd rather see ammendments to the law than a wholesale retraction. And that's where I differ from most conservatives.