walkitout (walkitout) wrote,
walkitout
walkitout

horrifyingly bad coverage of the house health care bill

http://www.womensenews.org/story/commentary/091112/ageist-health-reforms-can-be-lethal

I've attempted twice to unsubscribe from Women's E-news, which I have received as e-mail for years, and generally been happy with as they cover women more than anyone else. They have always had a sickening tendency to believe whatever the hell the medical establishment in this country says, right down to negative commentary on breastfeeding and midwifery (altho more recently they have been improving).

But this was so bad I was shaking I was so mad. The idea that it is unfair to older women to pay more for health insurance, and that older women and younger women should be charged the same as that is more "fair" is just another transfer of wealth from younger people to older people. And it's not like we haven't already seen a shitload of that in our country.

She also mischaracterizes the expected savings in Medicare, in a way that makes her sound more like a Fox News pundit than a writer for Women's E-news. And then she has the gall to suggest that "hospice for all" would be a disaster. Well, it _would_ be for the hospital administrator who raised that prospect. For the rest of us? She thinks she can can predict your age based on how you wanted to be treated when you are elderly.

This is _exactly_ the kind of crap that causes women of a certain age to predict that, "oh, your biological clock will start ticking". Bullshit.

Both my attempt to unsub using the unsub e-mail on the e-mail, and the unsub e-mail on the website have failed. So I'm going to use what platform I have. Don't trust that woman. And question that source. It's so much more shocking when the sewage is being spewed by a source that was once worth patying attention to.

ETA: Would it be _so freaking hard_ to advocate a progressive income tax to pay for this program? There is already stuff in every bill to provide assistance in paying premiums to people who are poor, supposedly the category she is most worried about. Funding that assistance is a valid issue. Why transfer wealth from all the young women who are almost by definition poor? Why not pick on high income people specifically?
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments