Nathan Newman wrote:
>Which is why at the moment I'm much more excited by the "fair share"
>legislation targetting employers like Wal-Mart than single payer
-Wow. This is surreal, looking-glass stuff. Let's see, which is more -wonkish: "play or pay," which involves laws with complex tests like -"employers in this state with over X employees who pay less than y% -of their payroll in health benefits shall be required to contribute -z% to a fund..." or "Everyone resident in the US should be covered by -publicly administered and funded health insurance"?
The wonkishness I mentioned in Pay or Play is not in the details, but in the academic arguments over whether it's the best, most efficient system in the abstract. Which I agree with as I've said repeatedly. If single payer had a good political chance, I'd be supporting it in a second. But we're pretty damn far from it and most of the single payer arguments I've been hearing recently are from conservatives or moderates who use its abstract benefits to argue against employer mandates like the Wal-Mart bill.
And then you make the weird argument: -So Wal-Mart will be the piggy bank for universal coverage? A company -with about $10 billion in profits, that, if evenly divided, could -provide health insurance for about 2 million people? Who's going to -cover the other 43 million?
Of course not-- the goal is to move towards employer mandates on all employers, purchasing pools with subsidies for smaller and lower-income firms, and expanded coverage for everyone not working.
I believe Working Families is looking at legislation to require health benefits from all employers in New York with 100 employees or more, which would cover a heck of a lot more than Wal-Mart.
-This is sad, Nathan. I used to disagree with you about the Dems, but -always thought you were fundamentally on the right side of the big -questions. Now I'm really beginning to wonder.
Since this is a tactical debate, I'm somehow wondering why you're jumping there, but then that was the original point. People take tactical differences and jump to accusing people of selling out or siding with the DLC.
-- Nathan Newman