I know your post wasn't intended to make me laugh, but my sense of humor is a little messed up. You hit it right on the head though.. sure, people making 70k/year in the midwest can afford 10-15k/year for health insurance. The problem is that you can live on something like 30k/year, and lots of people do. I did so in Oklahoma for several years. I really wish the people who are going to make the decisions here had ever, ever walked a mile in your shoes.

That worked out poorly. A good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. I think one group of corporations is pretty much the same, morally and ethically speaking, as another. QED.

I sort of disagree with one thing: the "anger" the peasantry appear to feel may be genuine, but it has been created whole-cloth by the marketing and manipulation machines of the Right. It isn't natural for poor people to argue passionately against handouts.

Thank you, please don't drop off the grid entirely.

You have a really good point, it's the reason I've continued arguing in various places for a public option as opposed to just standing back appalled at the whole circus. Giving up now means that when catastrophe finally occurs, a whole lot of people will get completely screwed, and many will die. And not one of these Harry and Louise con artists will be called to account for it.

Your reply to Mackey's comment was utterly perfect (page 4 for anyone who skipped it). I can't imagine a better crystallization of the situation, both his courage in commenting publicly, in this admittedly hostile forum, on his choice, and also your deconstruction of his claims.

I'd add that people who intend to take up the mantle of journalist have a responsibility to fight, in little ways, the corrosive effects that have led us to this pass. The little ways in this case are making damn sure to preface your way to a full and balanced discussion of the various sides' positions before asking the question.

that it's not about them, or their club, or their stupid little bags of goodies, or their book deal? You're apparently in it to tell the truth, as you can find it. That's what I've seen so far, and I've been reading a couple years. Keep it up.

Your major talking point, the one thing you repeat ad nauseum as though repetition creates validity, is the 'pragmatic' argument. No bill can pass in the Senate without 60 votes. Oh noes! The dreaded fillibuster! Just the very thought of it and some of our progressive "allies" run off with their tails tucked.

Please. We need 50 votes, no more. That is, until the other Senator from Massachusetts is selected and seated. 50 votes are there, assuming the right kind of pressure is applied. If even your "pragmatic" axiom is obviously false, why should anyone listen to what you have to say?

I'm with Rance. There is a time to negotiate and compromise, and a time to ram the bill down their fucking throats. The latter approach is warranted here. Single payer, for life. If we need to make cuts to make the budget in future, we make them across the whole system at once, so nobody feels too much of a pinch. And the high earners (of which I am one) foot the bill. That's the right thing to do. There is no moral middle ground here.

Thia should be way more exciting than it is.

The thing I like best about Salon letters are ones like you wrote. Thanks.

The standard measure of unemployment simply isn't.

How many people are working for 75% of their prior wages? 75% of their prior hours? How many are working for 40%? Etc. I think by any measure including the fact that people have downshifted into the number is important, but what would be better than a raw percentage is some composite number that assigns greater weight to people who are actually not working, and a fractional value to people who are working less.

Link to some graphs in sig.

I've gotten them, at least three times. For performance. Not for time served. I can hardly imagine the positions at the end of the bell curve-- 155% for cafeteria slop server, maybe?

A kid with his kind of money and spotlight at age 20 and with a history of abusing others.. probably not. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, but he really ought to go have a couple years of alone time to think about what he did.

anyone who picks such a banner to march under ought to lose the right to vote, seriously.

It does all the standard whining about how much it will all cost. Amusing, because anyone familiar with technology knows that prototypes *always* cost a lot. Prices only come way, way down after you get good at the details. This trend will only be accelerated by economies of scale once we have enough industry in space to manufacture things. Having large power generation facilities up there is the first step on that road. Gambarinasai, Japanese kids! Take you some totoro and tentacles to the stars.

Wow, your experience is a pretty much a mirror image of my own. Neat. I think internet dating is an outstanding idea; it allows me to filter out people who are attractive but not interesting, saving vast amounts of wasted effort. Back when I was learning to be single again, I didn't even bother with the IRL approach. I ended up meeting a girl who is so unlike anyone I've ever met, finding her equivalent IRL would have been practically impossible.