<p>marite, I don’t’ read Kristol that often. I’m not a complete masochist. :D</p>
<p>“As for the specifics of healthcare”</p>
<p>The reason I’m not that concerned about the specifics in each plan is that each candidate’s proposal will be, at most, his/her opening salvo in a long and contentious battle with Congress. Many voices to the right AND left of Hillary/Barack are going to have input. If the plan is still recognizable when (if?) it passes at the end of the negotiation, I’ll be stunned. So it doesn’t make sense to me to distinguish between candidates based on the details of what they may propose as a first offer. They just don’t bear any relationship to what is likely to become law.</p>
<p>Hanna: Very true.</p>
<p>1of42: I don’t know what is the appropriate forum for policy debates. For me, the place to go is to specific and detailed proposals, including the pros and cons , implications, consequences of each scenario. You just cannot lay out all that in the 90 seconds that are typically awarded in debates. I am a veteran of conferences, a discussant at many. I prefer to read the papers at my leisure and digest their key points before deciding how to respond to each. And these do no have one tenth of the significance of proposals regarding health care or the withdrawal from Iraq, and so many other issues that are “debated” for the supposed edification of the American public. How does it help to know that Clinton’s proposal would cover everybody and that the cost would be $110 billions? What exactly would the coverage entail (deductibles) how would enforcement be secured (garnishing wages? do you think Americans will go for it? how about people who do not earn enough? health insurance vs. heat?) where would the $110 billions come from? I’m sure that Clinton has answers; but don’t expect her to lay them all out in 90 second sound-bites on TV.</p>
<p>Whoever proposes it, it’s just not viable unless young, healthy people are required to pay into it while they are young and healthy, to cover the costs of the old and decrepit. We already have the Medicare bureaucracy in place to do the administration.</p>
<p>True. But many young and healthy do not have the means to pay for health care. Don’t think that having the young and healthy in the system is going to necessarily reduce costs. There are lots of young and healthy out there who do not have the income to pay for health care. That’s partly why our state so grossly underestimated how much it would cost. My S was .unemployed for several months after getting his graduate degree. He applied for subsidized health care (as per state regulations); all the paper work was . done and he was told he qualified for a subsidy; at the last minute, he got a job offer, so that became moot. But his state of unemployment could have lasted far longer.</p>
<p>1of42–I believe that Obama was criticized earlier in the campaign because, as David Brooks said recently, “He speaks in complete paragraphs with six-clause sentences”–he was sounding too much like a policy wonk and people in fact wanted the oratory! On the other hand, I think he is now being urged to go back somewhat to being more specific because you have a lot of company of people who haven’t heard enough detail of his proposals on the various issues. </p>
<p>I have been learning about his positions first from his website and then from critiques in various papers, NPR, etc. I am also acutely aware as Hanna said so well above, that it is one thing to have a policy in mind, and quite another to persuade our very diverse nation and Congress to support and enact the policy. </p>
<p>One of the main reasons I support Obama is that I believe that he more than anyone else I think I’ve ever heard or watched, has the ability to persuade people to form a consensus around new policies. (I was originally a Clinton supporter, by the way). That ability to persuade comes through in his rally speeches as well as his one-on-one interviews. </p>
<p>I absolutely love listening to his rally speeches–they completely energize and captivate me. They make me want to say, “How can I help you achieve your goals?” Frankly, and this may sound silly, they just make me feel better about our country and our people. But I do not worry for one minute that he is lacking in policy positions or that he is just talk and no action. Frankly, you don’t have to go any farther than to look at his brilliant management of his campaign, and compare it to the utter failure of Hillary’s despite her monumental advantages starting out. With all the current stories of infighting within her campaign, her monetary problems, the bad financial planning, the shuffling of her staff, etc.–who could have confidence in her ability to build a cohesive team in government?</p>
<p>1of42:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Aren’t you Canadian? That being the case, you sure demand a lot from candidates in foreign countries who are running in elections in which you have no standing.</p>
<p>That being the case, you sure demand a lot from candidates in foreign countries who are running in elections in which you have no standing.</p>
<p>I would too, no matter in which country I lived. The U.S. president has a profound effect on the entire world.</p>
<p>I’m tired of hearing about how “inspiring” and “hopeful” Obama is. I want to hear about how good his policies will be!</p>
<p>Obama’s strength will be in his leadership, getting Americans to demand the things needed to be done. He will need to get us to put pressure on our elected representatives to make the tough choices, so that they won’t be afraid of being thrown out in the next election.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Sure, but that doesn’t give foreigners a voice in choosing the next president. That is reserved for US citizens.</p>
<p>“I want to see…” “I want him to engage…” “I’m tired of hearing…” “I want to hear…” </p>
<p>Or else what? You’re not going to vote for him?</p>
<p>But many young and healthy do not have the means to pay for health care.</p>
<p>Making it affordable for all is part of the reform.</p>
<p>I still like the German system, with its regulated private companies. You choose one when you enter the work force and you can never be thrown out. Your premium is a percentage of your wages (young people earn less, so pay less, mostly paying in for many years before they become heavy users). Your employer pays half of your premium, and does payroll withholding on your other half, but otherwise has nothing to do with it (you don’t lose coverage when you lose your job). If you’re unemployed or retired, your premium is zero (being a percentage of your wages).</p>
<p>Sure, but that doesn’t give foreigners a voice in choosing the next president.</p>
<p>The voice foreigners have is making us provincial Americans aware of issues important to the entire world, allowing us to choose a bit more wisely.</p>
<p>^^Perhaps you have forgotten what a ridiculous disaster it was in 2004 when some well-meaning but severely-misguided folks in England decided to take it upon themselves instruct the good citizens of Ohio on whom to vote for in the 2004 presidential election. It backfired on them big time:</p>
<p>[A</a> crazy British plot to help Kerry. - By Andy Bowers - Slate Magazine](<a href=“http://www.slate.com/id/2109217/]A”>A crazy British plot to help Kerry.)</p>
<p>I was a Kerry supporter in 2004 and basically agreed with the points the English were making. But even I and many other Kerry supporters could see how utterly innappropriate it was for foreigners to presume to instruct US voters how to vote in their own election.</p>
<p>Americans sure aren’t shy when it comes to telling foreign governments what to do – or deposing them if we feel like it – so it’s fine with me if people in other countries are part of the conversation about our government. Sure, it can backfire on them if they do it clumsily, but I’m interested in what they have to say.</p>
<p>It’s perfectly alright for Non-US citizens to have an opinion on the candidates in this election, but Not to talk of “what I want to see” when it comes to the candidates’ stand on the issues. It becomes your right to “demand” answers from Clinton or Obama concerning their plan for US Health Care when you become a citizen of the United States, and not a moment before!</p>
<p>Correct, free speech is reserved for U.S. citizens, good point.</p>
<p>It’s not about the abridgment of free speech. It’s about what’s right and proper. Do you get a say about how your neighbors conduct their marriage? You can have an opinion about that until the cows come home. But you have no “rights” as far and demanding what they can or should do. It would be just as inappropriate for us to demand a satisfactory explanation from a candidate for Canadian Primeminister concerning his stance on Quebec’s possible secession from Canada. It’s none of our business.</p>
<p>Ok, we just disagree; I want to hear what other world citizens think we should do (that doesn’t mean I’ll agree with them), you don’t. </p>
<p>In discussing any issue, I think it’s good when we can discover the fine points, the details, of how we disagree. It’s a way to move forward.</p>
<p>I’ve heard Obama speak in detail about policies before he was a candidate. He is VERY smart and informed as well as being inspiring and sharing my values. I trust that he would pick good advisors–in fact, I trust him, as fully as I distrust Bush. And I’m so proud of the American people for finally looking beyond skin color and seeing the person.</p>
<p>I think having an intelligent, articulate president would help us regain some national pride and help restore our standing with the rest of the world. Bring him on!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Exactly!</p>
<p>It’s like someone with an opinion but with no standing in the case trying get up and make arguments in court.</p>
<p>And in this case, a US election is not about what foreigners “want to hear” from a candidate. It’s about what the voters want to hear.</p>