This is already shaping up to be a bad year for brick-and-mortar department stores across the country. While I'm sure the right (hi, Dan!) will say this is just a fact of life in "Obama's America," the fact is, we shop differently than we used to. Other than some after-Christmas shopping for each other at Kohl's at steep discounts, The Other Half and I buy almost everything online these days. And for all the worries people have about identity theft online, we all saw what happened at Target, right? That was in person shopping there.
Target is having a bad year, obviously, and along with closing some stores (much like JC Penney, Sears and others), they're going to stop offering insurance to their part-time employees. And this--I'm certain--will be a major issue for conservatives (hi again, Dan!). But is it a problem? Is it possible that these workers might get a better deal on the healthcare exchange? Maybe so. . .
[Excerpt]
Why Target’s Part-Time Employees Will Be Better Off Under Obamacare
Chain retailer Target announced on Wednesday that it will stop offering health insurance to employees who work less than 30 hours per week, instead sending these workers to Obamacare’s insurance marketplaces to buy new plans.
The announcement was quickly picked up by conservative outlets as proof that the health law is giving workers short shrift. To the contrary, these part-time workers will most likely be better off under Obamacare plans, and Target’s decision to shift the employees into the marketplaces is definitive proof that the health law is doing exactly what it’s intended to do. . .
The whole idea behind the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act (known derisively as "Obamacare" because conservatives previously used "Hillarycare" and are out of tricks) is to do a little arm twisting so that people not likely to consider getting health insurance do so. Kind of like automobile insurance. Except that not everybody needs a car, but nearly everybody will eventually need health care, or they will die prematurely or live miserably. Rare is the "never sick a day in his life, never broke a bone, cut himself, sprained an ankle, or got a burn, and lived to be 100" person.
All of those cuts, breaks, burns and diseases need treatment, and if they're uninsured, they'll go to an emergency room. Which we all end up paying for anyway. So, you tell Joe-I'm-24-and-Invincible that he has to get at least a minimum level of insurance, since he just might get cancer or gonorrhea even though he doesn't think he will. By the way, ever get chemo in an emergency room? Yet another issue that health care reform can help out with.
Now, I don't know about the individual mandate's Constitutionality, though I'm pretty sure you could call the fine for not getting insurance a tax. That's what I'd do anyway. But I do know that the individual mandate was a Republican idea, and it only became unconstitutional when President Barack Obama proposed it. Telling, that.
Which is a long way to go to tell you that Mitt Romney went on The Tonight Show starring Jay Leno and basically argued for the individual mandate. Because if he's saying that a 45-year-old can't just jump into the insurance market when he gets sick, and that people need to be long-term enrolled in insurance to get more of it, and. . .well. . .do you see where I'm going?
[Excerpt]
Human Monopoly Logo Mitt Romney Explainers Jay Leno: Uninsured Poors Should Die Already (VIDEO!)
Monocled toff Mitt Romney went on the Jay Leno Ha-Ha and Teevee Newz Hour to explain some cold hard FACTS to The Chin: You cannot wait until you are ill to buy insurance, gentles, even if there is no human way to afford it on your sad loser unemployment check! It just doesn’t work that way, good fellow! And if you work in a brake shop, and are uninsurable because you work in brake dust all day, the owners of the shop have already bought you insurance so just what is your problem, kind sir! (It is cute that Mitt Romney thinks that just because you work full-time, your job gives you “benefits.”) . . .
Last time, they applauded loudest for "most killingest Governor" over Rick Perry's execution record. This time, it's for letting uninsured people just DIE! And they got so upset about former Congressman Alan Grayson said the very same thing about the GOP's health plan: die quickly.
[Excerpt]
Tea Party Debate Audience Cheers Idea Of Letting Sick Man Without Insurance Die
. . .In Tampa, Florida at the CNN/Tea Party Express debate Monday night, the tea party-filled audience literally cheered aloud for the uninsured to be allowed to die. . .
Whatever your feelings about health care reform, most people would agree that getting rid of a "preexisting condition" being a disqualifier for insurance is a good thing. Particularly for children. But the ingenious insurance companies have found a way around that: don't insure children at all! Brilliant! And diabolical.
[Excerpt]
Health Insurers Up The Ante Over Pre-existing Conditions Rule By Denying Coverage To Children. What Next?
Well! That worked well, didn't it? (As opposed to Medicare for all, I mean.) Possibly the president and our congressional leadership is beginning to understand just what happens when you invite the health insurance vampires into your house: . .
Most of us would suffer in comparison to Rick Sanchez, with his made-for-TV-news looks, but that Rick Scott guy just looks John Waters creepy, doesn't he? And not in a good way. Plus he oozes insincerity. Or maybe he just oozes. Sanchez does an admirable job grilling him.
When it comes to the health care issue, I'm not fully versed on the minutiae. But as an adult in America, do I really need to be? Who hasn't had the experience (or known somebody who has) of going through medical/dental procedures, and had to deal with insurance companies? Who hasn't felt like they pay too much for insurance, for too little benefit? Just about everybody has a horror story of their own, or of a close family member or friend.
I've heard several stories about eternal waits in emergency rooms. I've heard several stories about declined coverage for people who thought they were covered. I've had to pay for procedures and medicines I thought I was covered for. I know about the entire divisions of insurance company employees whose only job is to try to deny coverage. Any reason will do. They'll even deny coverage for no good reason, and wait to see if the claim is resubmitted, or if you just pay it out of your pocket. Then of course, most of us know of someone who has fallen into financial ruin due to a medical crisis.
So, how is it that right-wing talk radio, FOX "News" and conservative politicians have been moderately successful in convincing their base that a federal health care plan is a bad idea? Somehow, they're convincing a group of people--which must have a large percentage of people who should know better--that we have "the best health care system in the world!" They demonized European and Canadian health plans, as though nobody here in the states has experienced it while travelling, or knows people from those countries. How are they having anysuccess at selling their "let's leave it the way it is" agenda?
There are a couple of things I can think of. 1) The Karl Rove reality altering machinery isn't completely broken down yet, and some people just reflexively believe what comes out of it. 2) Every single issue in America has come down to a left-right divide, and since Democrats are for a health care plan, a Republican has to oppose it by default.
That's all I've got. But figuring out what the Republicans are up to is a lot easier than sussing out why their followers believe it. Clearly, the GOP/RNC want to stall, stall, stall on health care, so that President Obama gets either a watered-down, "pleases nobody" plan, or they want it--and him--to fail utterly. And they want this to happen as close to the 2010 political season as possible. They want one or both houses of Congress back, and they see this as their best shot to do it. Which it is. Given the cast of clowns in their all-star roster, all they can do is hope for failure on the other side. It's just amazing to me that they've had any success so far. But we should never underestimate the right-wing base's ability to ignore their own experience, and believe what Rush Limbaugh tells them.
I picture George W. Bush like a kid with a new toy, when it comes to his veto pen. I mean, did he ever bust it out in his first term? Then he gets an opposition party (such as they are) in Congress, and suddenly he's very fond of the sucker.
I think this brings to a grand total of seven times he's used it, though he may have snuck in others. This time, after all, it barely made a blip in the news. In any event, he seems to use the pen only to be defiant.
[Excerpt]
Bush Vetoes Expansion of Child Health Care Program
President George W. Bush vetoed an expansion of a U.S. children's health insurance program today for the second time, saying the Democratic majority in Congress ignored his objections and refused to negotiate.
Administration officials said the veto would be sustained, as was the president's rejection of a similar measure on Oct. 3. . .
Our fearless leader may have decided to take a new approach to his "no child left behind" puzzle. Maybe he thinks if fewer children can get the health insurance they need... then surely, due to medical reasons, there will be less of them to have to try & teach... It's brilliant. Only a monkey could of thought of that! Bush is just thinking of the children...
