Dems agree to drop full-blown public option

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah, I'm curious about the airline part as well.

[Tonitrus]

I dunno about regulation, but their new practice of throwing fees everywhere instead of just simply adjusting rates...among many other airline business practices I could name...make me want to flog airline executives with a heavy-duty Samsonite case.

And the TSA needs to be purged with hellfire.

[Admiral Yi]

I dunno about regulation, but their new practice of throwing fees everywhere instead of just simply adjusting rates...among many other airline business practices I could name...make me want to flog airline executives with a heavy-duty Samsonite case.

And the TSA needs to be purged with hellfire.

Why?  Why should the guys with no bags subsidize those with bags?

[Tonitrus]

Why?  Why should the guys with no bags subsidize those with bags?

It's hardly that simple.

And heck, even I don't check luggage if I can help it.  Though I have noticed that airplane boarding has become a practice of "swarm onto the plane and get your crap into the overhead space before it fills and you're forced to check your carry-on anyway".

[Grey Fox]

BS. Your Federal government already pays more money per capita then the canadian government does.

Progress.

Also if you are afraid of socialism what about you stop regulation the Airline industry?

Where did I say I didn't think that wasteful government spending per capita wasn't a huge problem as well?

I'm not sure that all regulation of the airline industry is socialist in nature, really.  What sort of regulation are you referring to?

We know how you think, always looking out for big business never for the common man.

[Faeelin]

It provides me no end of amusement how politicized such an essentially trivial aspect of health care has become.  It's approaching Swiftian proportions of absurdity.

For the left, it's a sign that we're going to actually "reform" health care, and not just pass out subsidies to insurance companies. For the right, it's a sign of the march of Socialism.

[Faeelin]

With the Senate shifting sharply away from a "pure public option," an insurance industry insider who has been deeply involved in the health care fight emails to declare victory.

"We WIN," the insider writes. "Administered by private insurance companies. No government funding. No government insurance competitor."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1209/Insurance_industry_insider_We_win.html

[Zanza]

I'm not sure that all regulation of the airline industry is socialist in nature, really.  What sort of regulation are you referring to?

I am not aware of any particular socialist policies regarding American airline - except perhaps the way most of the big carriers dropped their legacy pension costs in a chapter 11 in the last decade or so. But the airline industry in America (and basically in all regions of the world except the EU) is quite protectionists. Foreigners can't buy a controlling stake in an US airline. To be fair, that's the case virtually everywhere (even in the EU) as the landing rights are usually negotiated between governments, not between airlines and airport operators. Foreign airlines may not offer domestic flights in the US - that's allowed in the EU now.

[grumbler]

It provides me no end of amusement how politicized such an essentially trivial aspect of health care has become.  It's approaching Swiftian proportions of absurdity.

It is trivial to the extent that it is the only proven way to actually reduce the absurdly high costs of health care.

What approaches the Swiftian proportions of absurdity is the panic that can be induced among the herd by demagogues simply mischaracterizing the astonishing success of the government option in other countries.  "They are more healthy than us and live longer for half the health care expenditures!  That must be death panels1111oneoneone" 

If the US could reduce its per-capita health care costs to the levels that Germans and Brits pay, it could abolish personal income taxes and still come out ahead.

[DontSayBanana]

Seriously.  And I'll tell you, at least some of us lefties are looking for some actual reform; at my highest-paid full-time job, I couldn't afford to get coverage worth a damn- the employer-provided coverage had so many limits and strings on it (one was a cheap PPO out of the midwest with no providers here) that I ended up just having to drop it to concentrate on paying other bills.  Health insurance companies at present don't charge premiums; they commit usury.

As it stands, the insurance I have through the college is worthless.  The caps would kick in before the end of the first day of treatment if something were to happen to me, yet that doesn't stop them from charging me $100 per semester for the privilege of "having insurance."

[grumbler]

You guys are still afraid of progress socialism, eh.

Exactly.  Even when the socialist system is by far the best, all one needs to do is call it "socialist" and the herd will stampede and trample it.

[Valmy]

BS. Your Federal government already pays more money per capita then the canadian government does.

Progress.

That is sorta where I have been coming from.  If we are already bearing all the negative burdens of socialism, high taxes and deficits, we might as well try to get a few of those benefits as well but yes I know it simply is not feasible for spend as much as Canada and get Canadian results.  We would have to pay far more for that...why I am not sure...but that is the case.

Hopefully whatever reforms they do pass will have an overall positive impact.

[Valmy]

Why?  Why should the guys with no bags subsidize those with bags?

I fly Southwest and do that and somehow still pay less for my flight.  Other Airlines = fail.

[Neil]

I dunno about regulation, but their new practice of throwing fees everywhere instead of just simply adjusting rates...among many other airline business practices I could name...make me want to flog airline executives with a heavy-duty Samsonite case.

And the TSA needs to be purged with hellfire.

Why?  Why should the guys with no bags subsidize those with bags?

Because increasing mobility around the country has a social benefit.

[Grey Fox]

yes I know it simply is not feasible for spend as much as Canada and get Canadian results.  We would have to pay far more for that...why I am not sure...but that is the case.

Why not? Why would it be more expensive in the US? Usually it's Canada that is 7% more expensive then the US.