So, the premise by the Dems was that health = economy because it could contain ballooning medicare costs in the future. But WHERE was the focus on Preventative care that will reduce medicare as ppl get old. It appears to be more of a PR issue/campaign that was solved the issue. Don't we all know a vice-president somewhere with a health plan and smokes/not exercise because of the stress of the job? How's that going to help this person who may need lung cancer treatment at retirment and medicare pays for it??
Again with Balance: sometimes u need to listen to what the public says but sometimes you need to NOT listen to them. Because somethings leaders are wrong and somethings ppl are wrong. So choose you leaders well, and for leaders choose you immediate team well. Here the leaders are doing the wrong thing in listening to ppl and NOT listening. Some immediate examples may be Obama's quick move to appease the public with maybe over-regulation of the finance industry. Imo, that is not necessary.
So, here is the disconnect: that it's good for ppl to have health insurance even after losing their job. Well, if it was easy to get a 2nd job, then you can just get the 2nd health insurance. Duh. And for some reason, hc is staggered over 10 years when immediate demands are for something to do NOW.
Which brings the question: why do ppl care more for something short-term vs a long-term overhaul that will affect to many things to come?
- I believe the answer is that health is more of a stagnate thing; that most ppl are healthy for the most part. Sure they should be eating healthier, etc. But economy is what they are doing Now and time is a wasting (on their Life - lost of a year or two : and a lot of ppl need structure and can't create it for themselves - it's hard). Empirically, it's the society (economy) vs the body (self). Ppl like to interact with ppl and work for a cause (even if not own, but adopted). They are submitting to be part of society (group survival over self -unselfishness). Plus, it keeps for Mental health as the ability to find new opportunites creates happiness which by some experiments is related (via placebo maybe) to the bodily health of a person. I guess most Presidents would not want to deal w. the day to day operations of getting a steady rate. But it doesn't have to be that way. You can focus on the same conceptual designs on the economy that is done for things like healthcare. Long prosperous times have been based on technological progress: ie. the internet, Star wars, bronze, etc. I doesn't just have to be boring like interest rates, etc.
Ultimately, in 1-1.5 years we should revisit the health debate: perhaps we will be ready for it by then. :)