Some of the Blogs I Follow and Why.

Political blog posts at Southern Beale blog can be fun to read for some of us.
The last two concern local politicians and the Obama is out to get Fox News stuff.
Read them and have a little smile or maybe you will get angry.
Personally, I think we lefties should feel so sorry for Fox, poor things. Look up the meaning of Irony and you will see how they work. (See I am still hung up on words and word play) It must be hard to find ways to look at reality and write the opposite on every story or non-story day after weary day.
Also in one of the posts Southern Beale lists a few list-keepers all Repubs. I really had not thought of political party and McCarthyism in a while but there he is a Repub.
Really I am fairly positive that pols or their staffs have lists that build through the years but most are just memories in someone's head. Do some value their bad memories so much they write them down so they can drag them out and read them over and over while figuring ways to get even? We know of some that have done so. Are we electing children?

Now on another blog I follow, All The Things I Love, for a whole change of pace read the post on books
This post also has some beautiful photos to go with it. Anyone who knows me knows how much I appreciate books and the work that goes into each and every volume.
I am scan-reading two right now. (I generally find these days I scan rather than read whole books any more. Too much instant gratification other places, maybe.
But I still love books. They are fun to see, fun to handle, and even fun to hear.
Not only those senses are involved some books have odors,not just mold, but something inexplicable.)

I can relate to these two bloggers. They are very different in writing style and in subject matter covered. However they can both be of interest.

I am sorry to report that one of my followed bloggers had a mishap, actually sounds like more that just a mishap to me. Pat, of Pat's Poetry Musings, as you can read is "Out of Commission". Fell and messed up a typist's much needed shoulder and arm.
Get better soon.

Of course, I can always recommend you read Thomas' posts. Many varied interests and an inquiring mind he will stimulate your mind too. If you like cars, politics, candy, dogs, or just about anything; you will find something in Thomas' writings.


So here you are a partial list of blogs I follow with reasons why. Just wanted to write about a few so maybe people would find something new to enjoy.

Health Care Plans Again

I am sorry but this is a long one.

Historically health care plans seemed doomed to fail. Will they again? I researched some history of previous attempts. I learned that no matter which period of time, or which party, the arguments against the plans sure sound similar. The arguments for health care plans are similar. It is just that as time progressed the costs and the problems grew. So put it off again and let's talk about the costs to our kids and grandkids.

"When on July 30, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Medicare into law at the Harry S. Truman library, he said that it "all started really with the man from Independence".**

*Poen, Monte M.,"National Health Insurance", in The Harry S. Truman Encyclopedia, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Boston: G.K. Hall & Co, 1989): 251 http://www.trumanlibrary.org/anniversaries/healthprogram.htm

The above website is excellent for research on former President Truman's views and ideas on health care in the U.S.

Here is the similar health care plan:

“The most controversial aspect of the plan was the proposed national health insurance plan. In the November 19th address, President Truman called for the creation of a national health insurance fund, to be run by the federal government. This fund would be open to all Americans, but would remain optional. Participants would pay monthly fees into the plan, which would cover the cost of any and all medical expenses that arose in a time of need. The government would pay for the cost of services rendered by any doctor who chose to join the program. In addition, the insurance plan would give a cash balance to the policy holder to replace wages lost due to illness or injury.”

Here is the similar argument against it. Just not the communist part. Now it is the we don't want to be European stuff.

“...The American Medical Association (AMA) launched a spirited attack against the bill, capitalizing on fears of Communism in the public mind. The AMA characterized the bill as "socialized medicine", and in a forerunner to the rhetoric of the McCarthy era, called Truman White House staffers "followers of the Moscow party line".* Organized labor, the main public advocate of the bill, had lost much of it's goodwill from the American people in a series of unpopular strikes. Following the outbreak of the Korean War, President Truman was finally forced to abandon the W-M-D Bill.” (same site)

Another piece of history:

“...Going as far back as pre-Revolutionary War America, virtually the only support for primary care services to the poor in the United States came via local government in the form of either payments to private physicians or the hiring of a nurse or part-time physician within the local public health department.”

Article: the AMA Faces Down FDR and Wins Physician Executive, Jan-Feb, 1993 by Norbert Goldfield

found here http://www.bnet.com

Very good articles from Norbert Goldfield on health care. I recommend you read them all. In another I found this synopsis on Eisenhower's plan.

In particular, Eisenhower recommended the "establishment of a limited federal reinsurance service to encourage private and not-for-profit health insurance organizations to offer broader health protection to more families.

...It indicates why the President of the AMA warned in his annual address to the House of Delegates that "our economic problems are not solved....As a matter of fact, these problems have increased. The socialistic trend and government intrusion into the business and affairs of the people have shown little evidence of change. The greatest battle for the preservation of democracy is yet to come.

For another, easier way to follow basic history of attempts to have any kind of health care insurance whether government or the business sector try this site: http://www.pbs.org/healthcarecrisis/history.htm

I refer again to Norbert Goldfield writing in another history of health care article in 1992. On Nixon's attempt to reform health care:

“Nixon's proposal, Family Health Insurance Plan (FHIP), called for a subsidized program for basic private insurance for low-income families and for all employers to provide private health insurance for employees and dependents. Nixon's employer mandate proposal may sound familiar, as it is very similar to Senator Edward Kennedy's current legislative proposal. When asked about this odd juxtaposition, Kennedy stated that he simply wants some form of health care legislation enacted into law.”

According to Mr. Goldfield's historical health care articles Nixon actually left much of his domestic policy to others as he felt foreign affairs were his strong suit.

The same old socialized medicine arguments came up along with others.

Health care became an issue for Reagan by the time he ran for President. Read debates with Pres. Carter for some. He was at one time hired to read a script for the AMA against Medicare and Medicaid. President Reagan did make cuts to the Carter health care budget. I found that somewhere. President Reagan is hard to research-his acting gets in the way.

So now I think I see that no matter how much the “middle-class” wants health care for all and is even willing to pay for it not much gets done. Mr. Goldfield discusses the reasons using the book, Thinking in Time; the Uses of History for Decision makers, by Richard Neustadt and Ernest May. Go to the 1992 article on Nixon and health care to get an overview of some of the book and the theories and recommendations. http://www.bnet.com

The way I see it this is like putting off so many things. Maybe like not weatherproofing or not putting in a new furnace. I could go on but let's use the example of a needing a new roof for a house for many years.

If you had done it when you first knew there was a problem (let's say 15 yrs.) it would have cost $6000 for the whole roof. You were probably better able to afford it then. Now, it will cost $6000 for ½ of the roof and the $6000 is very hard to come by. At least it would be for me. In the meantime, you lived with leaks and a yearly do it yourself sort-of fix. A ceiling may be partially ruined and you probably have mold hiding somewhere.

If you still don't fix it, your investment is going to drop even more than it has and your kid, the one that inherits, is at best ending up with less. At best he/she will end up spending more money than they can get back.

How is that for a scenario of “put off 'till tomorrow what you could do today” and the costs. So think about that scenario when you hear about the costs to future generations. And remember the “socialist” argument has been around forever in one flavor or another. It used to be called communistic now that isn't useful so it is just the dreaded socialism. And costs go up and profits go up and fewer people get health care.

Your insurance company, if you have one, is already telling you and your doctor what procedures you can or can not have. Sometimes you are the one paying them to tell you. The drug insurance, if you have it, is telling you and your doctor what drugs you must “try” first before you can take what you and your doctor have decided is the best for your body. Your doctor, if he or she is a decent one, is putting up with insurance companies not paying them for weeks. Your doctor, if he or she is not so decent, is charging more to make up for that and more. If you live in a rural or outlying area you don't always have good access to health care because there aren't enough of you to make it pay or you don't have the facilities and equipment.