"People" vs "Cost" in the healthcare reform fight

Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight has a very interesting article on the different perspectives in the war for healthcare reform. He ran responses procured by Gallup "of the rationales given by people who would tell their Congressman to vote for or against the current health care bills, respectively" through a word-cloud generator, and those responses gave an insight into the minds of those who are for and against the reform bill.

The responses given by those who are for the healthcare reform bill is seen here:

And here is the word-cloud for those who are against the bill:

What is interesting is the difference in perspectives, and it showed the difference in priorities between the two camps. I understand the love of small government and the fear of a large one, but it seems callous to me that people would let the fear of government and costs triumph over the basic fact that people need insurance; the last thing you want to worry about after getting sick is worrying how to pay to get healthy again.

But for those genuinely concerned about cost, Ezra Klein reminds us of the cost of failure if this bill is not passed. (This also goes out to my progressive friends who think this bill does not go far enough.)

The lesson is simple: The earlier you start, the more you save. And with each opportunity you miss, you lose years of accumulated savings.

We have missed the chances for meaningful healthcare reform with Nixon, Carter, and Clinton; missing this chance will be far more disastrous.