The Busma Picayune

Oct
7th

Wed

What we have in this country is a government attempting to punish people for trying to fight pain and incarcerate people for seeking harmless pleasure. It’s insane. There are no arguments for prohibition that make even the slightest sense. And yet, doing the right thing is apparently a non-starter for the current federal Congress. Because the Democrats, by and large, are a bunch of principle-free panty-waists. And because the Republicans, who should be defending individual freedom, have sold their soul to a bunch of puritans and hypocrites….

— Andrew Sullivan

Oct
4th

Sun

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

I love me some Blondie!

tuneage:

Blondie - “Sunday Girl”

I try to listen to as much of the music in my iTunes library as I can, but there’s always something excellent I neglect for whatever the flavor of the week may be. This morning, as I quickly scrolled through my library, I realized that the classic, new-wave/pop of Blondie’s Parallel Lines would be the perfect counter to the dreary day outside.

Everyone already knows the break-out hits from the album (“Heart of Glass”, “One Way or Another”, and even “Hanging on a Telephone”), so I think one of the lesser known (and aptly titled to be today’s post) tracks is in order. “Sunday Girl” is a simple song that hangs almost entirely on the straightforward bass line and light-hearted lyrics, and that’s precisely the thing I was looking for.

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

Avril Lavigne’s rendition of the Spongebob Squarepants theme. Nice!

Oct
3rd

Sat

They say that the Olympics will come to Chicago if we’re fortunate enough to be selected, but really it’s coming to America, and I can’t think of a better city to represent the United States than Chicago … This country supports your bid, strongly.

— President George W. Bush

Oct
2nd

Fri

katieschenk:

winstonwolfe:

(via biteofpythias)

The Olympics in South America?

It will be the first time skiing is an event at the Summer Olympics.

Damn. I’d been trying to think of a cocaine joke for the last hour and you nailed it.

Sep
27th

Sun

I’ve never supported all the moves of a few years ago to ban gay couples from adoption. Because they’re all these kids out there looking for a home. And the standard on all adoption cases is, what is the best interest of the child? And there are plenty of cases where the best interest of the child is to let the gay couple take them and give them a loving home. So I said, you know, I realized that I was over 60 years old, I grew up at a different time, and I was hung up about the word. I had all these gay friends, I had all these gay couple friends, and I was hung up about it. And I decided I was wrong.

That our society has an interest in coherence and strength and commitment and mutually reinforcing loyalties, then if gay couples want to call their union marriage and a state agrees, and several have now, or a religious body will sanction it, and I don’t think a state should be able to stop a religious body from saying it, I don’t think the rest of us should get in the way of it. I think it’s a good thing not a bad thing. And I just realized that, I was, probably for, maybe just because of my age and the way I’ve grown up, I was wrong about that. I just had too many gay friends. I saw their relationships. I just decided I couldn’t, I had an untenable position.

— President Clinton on gay marriage and why he changed his mind. Good stuff.

Sep
21st

Mon

Too often today in the United States, if you talk about helping the poor, they call you Christian. But if you actually try to do something to help the poor, they call you a Socialist.

— Rev. Jim Rigby, echoing Brazilian bishop Dom Hélder Câmara (via squashed)

Sep
13th

Sun

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

I am digging this new Jack Peñate stuff. It’s a lot of fun!

Sep
12th

Sat

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

hospitalbeds:

Lou Reed - Perfect Day

What a fine song for a fine day …

Aug
20th

Thu

Pros and Cons of the Healthcare Reform Proposal(s)

squashed, as usual, provides a great service by summarizing what’s in the current version of the health care bill:

Adeventhis asks,

Can someone explain to me, or point me in the direction of a website that can explain to me, in a clear, 10-yr. could understand, nonpartisan matter the elements, pros and cons of the proposed HealthCare reform?

In full disclosure, I have some partisan leanings—but I’ll do my best to put them aside. I’ll do my best for 10-year-old, but it’s complex enough that it will take a pretty gifted 10-year-old to understand. Fortunately, I also have some conservative followers who will be very quick to let me know if I fail to set them aside. (I’ll update this.) I should also caution that none of this is set in stone yet.

Pros:

Everybody can have health insurance if they want it.

Insurers will not be able to stop paying for people who are sick, even if they lose their jobs.

People who cannot afford health insurance won’t have to pay as much money.

People who are already sick will be eligible for healthcare.

In the long run it will (hopefully) reduce medical costs significantly. Rising medical costs are the main reason the long-term budget projections are so alarming. Something has to be done. Unfortunately, this bill might not do enough. While there will definitely be some savings, it’s not clear that they will be as transformative as hoped.

Health insurers can no longer cap coverage. In other words, they will no longer say that they have spent enough on you and you’re on your own for the next hundred thousand dollars. This should reduce medical bankruptcy.

There will be increased competition in the insurance market. It might be from a public option. It might also be from some kind of non-profit, state-specific co-operative. This might push the healthcare companies to lower costs and provide better service.

Cons:

For the first ten years, it will cost about $100 billion a year. This is about the yearly cost of the Iraq War.

The bill might increase the cost of health insurance. This depends on whether the gains from increased efficiencies and increased competition is outweighed by the cost of providing additional benefits.

The Individual Mandate. You will have to either buy health insurance if you don’t have it or have a 2% tax increase. This insurance will be subsidized—but there is no guarantee that the subsidy will suffice for your specific situation.

There will be a tax increase on very high income people. If you are making more than half a million (or maybe a full million) you will have about a 1% tax increase.

Other stuff that might be good or bad, depending how you see it

Increased government involvement in healthcare. Government already pays for huge amounts of healthcare—so this won’t be anything new.

Additional regulation on insurance companies. This might increase costs. It will increase quality.

Physicians will have increased access to information about what treatments are most effective for their cost. If two treatments work equally well and one is cheaper, doctors can recommend that one. This was almost universally considered a good thing until a few years ago, but some people have started criticizing it lately.

Large employers may also have to offer health insurance to more of their employees. If they do not, there may have to pay some extra tax.

Things that aren’t true:

Death Panels

Nazis

Inability to choose your doctor

Healthcare will be “rationed.” My conservative buddies will claim that this will “inevitably lead” to rationing. I disagree. I do think we can agree that there is nothing in the healthcare bill that will reduce the amount of healthcare available. The topic of what counts as “rationing” healthcare (and whether we already do it) is complex and contentious—but the healthcare bill will not directly cause additional rationing.

Bureaucrats will tell doctors how to do their jobs (in ways that they don’t already do).

Did I miss anything important?

The Busma Picayune

Twitter Updates

Pros and Cons of the Healthcare Reform Proposal(s)