-
Time to Go for the Kill
May 22, 2013 | 64 comments
-
Obamacare Implodes
May 15, 2013 | 41 comments
-
Obama’s Rising Inequality
May 8, 2013 | 101 comments
-
Downsize the Liberals
May 1, 2013 | 53 comments
-
Fight Back! Privatize the FAA!
April 24, 2013 | 65 comments
The Right Prescription
The Obamacare Disaster
So misshapen is this new law — starting with its death-panel gutting of Medicare — it can only be regarded as the beginning, not the end, of the battle to reform health care policy in the U.S.
(Page 2 of 3)
Counting just some of these cost increases, one study concludes that under Obamacare a typical family health insurance policy costing $12,300 today will cost $17,200 by 2013, $21,300 by 2016, and $25,900 by 2019. Another study concludes that insurance costs for young (up to 40) and healthy workers will double and triple in many cases.
These cost increases have already begun. But expect the liberal/left to insist that the soaring insurance costs caused by Obamacare prove that the public option, or even more overt socialized medicine, was needed after all. They will seek to prohibit the necessary premium increases, as in Massachusetts, and will be glad if that forces private insurers out of business.
Death Panels
While the liberal/left hides behind literal clowns mocking Sarah Palin for raising the issue of death panels under Obamacare, the legislation as passed documents the essential reality of the charge.
The recently released Annual Report of the Medicare Board of Trustees reveals that the Medicare payment rates for the doctors and hospitals serving seniors will be cut by 30% over the next 3 years. By 2019, those Medicare payment rates will be lower than under Medicaid. The Chief Actuary for Medicare reports that ultimately under Obamacare Medicare payment rates will be only one third of what will be paid by private insurance and only half of what is paid by Medicaid, where the poor often can’t find access to essential care.
Still further Medicare cuts adopted in the Obamacare legislation add up altogether to $818 billion over the first 10 years of full implementation, 2014-2023, and $3.223 trillion over the first 20 years, 2014-2033, for Medicare Part A (HI) alone! Adding in the cuts for Medicare Part B brings the total to $1.048 trillion over the first 10 full years, and $4.95 trillion over the first 20 full years. Eventually, as documented in the government’s own reports, Medicare Part A is cut by 60% per year, Part B by 43%!
These draconian cuts for doctors and hospitals providing the health care to seniors under Medicare were the basis for the CBO score repeatedly cited by President Obama that Obamacare would actually reduce the deficit while expanding or adopting three entitlement programs. This doesn’t even include the further cuts to Medicare Advantage, the private alternative to Medicare which nearly 25% of seniors have chosen for their Medicare coverage because it gives them a better deal, and the further automatic Medicare cuts to be adopted by the unelected, appointed, bureaucrats at the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board under Obamacare.
Such draconian Medicare cuts would create havoc and chaos in health care for seniors. Doctors, hospitals, surgeons and specialists providing critical care to the elderly such as surgery for hip and knee replacements, sophisticated diagnostics through MRIs and CT scans, and even treatment for cancer and heart disease will shut down and disappear in much of the country, and others will stop serving Medicare patients. If the government is not going to pay, then seniors are not going to get the health services, treatment and care they expect. Indeed, the Medicare Chief Actuary reports that even before these cuts already two-thirds of hospitals were losing money on Medicare patients. Health providers will either have to withdraw from serving Medicare patients, or eventually go into bankruptcy.
Apparently, President Obama’s concept of spreading the wealth includes sacking the Medicare system on which America’s seniors have come to rely for highly beneficial medical care, in favor of others who the Obama/Pelosi/Reid progressive vision deems more worthy.
As the government clamps down on private insurers as well as on payments from Medicare and Medicaid, the incentives for essential investment to maintain current facilities, expand and open new ones, and invest in and build out new innovations and breakthroughs, will be eviscerated. Investment in human capital as well as physical capital in health care will plummet, as doctors and other professionals increasingly flee health care. This effective decline in the supply of health care in the face of increasing demand will mean even higher prices and costs.
The study further explains how several provisions of Obamacare give insurers, doctors, and hospitals incentives to deny and ration health care to patients. A central component of the traditional high standard of living in America has been the best, most advanced, cutting edge health care in the world. No more. Obamacare is part of the declining standard of living for America.
America’s Coming Bankruptcy
When he was campaigning for Obamacare, President Obama insisted on national television that the mandate to buy insurance was not a tax. Now that it has passed, his lawyers are in court arguing that it is constitutional because it is a tax.
The mandate to buy insurance is economically, though not legally, indistinguishable from a tax. Even with the budget-crushing new entitlement subsidies in the Act, the insurance will be quite expensive, ranging up to 2 percent of income for people at 133 percent of poverty to 9.8 percent of income for people at 400 percent of poverty. That is like a new payroll tax, breaking two Obama pledges, since it applies just as well to those making less than $250,000 a year.
The study recounts at least 13 tax increases in Obamacare, adding up to at least $500 billion over the first 10 years, not counting the mandates. But that won’t begin to cover all of the spending involved in Obamacare, adding up to more than $2.4 trillion over the first 10 years of full implementation, from 2014 to 2024, and $5.3 trillion over the first 15 full years.
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (159) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/18/the-obamacare-disaster
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The (Real) Great Divide
- Of Wizards and Weapons
- The Demise of Money and Credit
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.18.10 @ 6:38AM
Peter,
again, thank you. Thank you for plowing through the bill so thoroughly.
Thank you for the thorough critique, from your background of knowledge and experience.
Jack Kinch(1uncle)| 8.19.10 @ 12:52PM
Very good and true. Money wasted.
All this is to insure the millions of people who were bred on welfare to vote demo.
Must STOP this .
Jennie Walsh| 8.19.10 @ 7:54PM
A lot of people are going to suffer and die because of this government takeover. This HELLthcare act must be repealed.
Linda| 9.9.10 @ 1:33PM
I will use the spelling HELLthcare from now on. It is very true.
Carol| 8.18.10 @ 7:00AM
My hate level for Obama goes up everytime I read about this Obamanation.
Even if we get enough Republicans to say they want to repeal this monster do they have the cajones?
Second, since Dictator Obama will be in office for at least another 2 years because Republicans would never impeach a half black nitwit who is destroying American deliberately - who is to say that all the Draconian measures won't be in so deep by the time 2012 comes around that it is impossible to get rid of them?
Third - advice to all: If you donate to GOVERNMENT RESEARCHERS for say Cancer or AIDS, why? You will never benefit from the research. Research yourself whose hands your donation will go to.
I myself will no longer give money to anybody in government unless it is by force.
carnot| 8.18.10 @ 7:48AM
keep a list of names for accountability purposes.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.18.10 @ 7:52AM
Some of the items Peter Ferrara left out which will ensure the destruction of the health care industry:
1. Various commissioners and commissions who will impact the health care system by mandating gender and race quotas for health care.
a. If you are a white male expect long waits for transplants as these comissions will decide who gets what based on race or gender.
2. There is a provision in the law which requires the health care companies to spend 80% of premiums on health care. Several states limit that figure to 65% by law because if you spend more then that on health care you are out of business and the states would have to pick up the slack.
a. This provision alone will ensure the rapid bankruptcy of all private health insurance.
3. You are covered whether you have health insurance or not. You can't be denied for any reasons.
a. People will simply ditch their health insurance, pay a small fine if they get caught or need to, and wait until they are ill before getting into the health care system.
b. The effect of this will also drive health insurers out of business. Even with a public option, few will buy into the system.
c. A lasting effect of this will be to ensure less then third world standard health care, since few doctors will accept the low wages such a system will have to operate with.
In short, the whole plan is a death panel.
Pat Spooner| 8.18.10 @ 9:24AM
Bill, your comments apply only to the serfs who toiul daily to survive. The elites like obama, pelosi and reid excluided them, selves for the lew and will have either very high quality gov't provided health care as they now do or they will pay privately for the best care.
Jeremiah| 8.18.10 @ 11:18AM
Seven years ago I suffered a life-threatening and completely debilitating neurological event. It was due to a rare confluence of a normal problem and a hidden physical deformity. At the time I was the single full-time parent and sole support of a teenager.
Completely disabled, I desperately sought some sort of assistance from the government to help me through until the surgery (which the doctors kept delaying because of peculiarities that unnerved them). At a Social Security office, the woman who denied me any help walked out with me to take a cigarette break. Bitterly, she told me that if I was a black woman, they had programs that would help me with a hangnail. But I was a middle-aged white man - and the only thing the government was going to do for me was take my kid if I couldn't figure out a way to stay afloat. She was not angry at me, but at the government she worked for. It opened my eyes - and rang true after all the doors I had already had shut in my face.
Obviously I survived the surgery. Not even paralyzed as I was supposed to be, just have pain and fatigue as my constant companions. Friends helped me keep afloat. I got nothing from the government except a dunning note for taxes I should have paid during the six months I was completely disabled.
I am not a man given to bitterness. But all I could think of with the passage of Obamacare was, "Welcome to my nightmare, America." If you are middle class and not an officially designated 'minority' you are a drone whose only job is to pull the wagon. When you can't anymore, better have some drones to help pull you or you just need to die and decrease the surplus population.
Clinton nee Publius| 8.18.10 @ 1:18PM
You missed a real big one. Starting next year every real estate sale in the United States will be subject to an additional federal tax of 3.8%.
The dead housing market will now be buried.
Notfar Withferrara| 8.18.10 @ 2:33PM
Please! No one missed anything. You mis-inform yourself--typical of right-wing blog posters. Read a little, educate yourself:
"Fact: There will be a tax of 3.8 percent on home sales by couples with income above $250,000, or singles with income above $200,000, effective Jan. 1, 2013.
Fact: The up-to-$500,000 exclusion of gain for couples (or up to $250,000 for single taxpayers or those who file separately) has not been changed. If you have owned and lived in your house for at least two full years within the five years before the sale, you will be able to take the exclusion of your gain.
Fact: If your adjusted gross income is less than $250,000 and you file a joint tax return (or if you file a separate tax return with income less than $200,000), there will be no additional tax. If your adjusted gross income exceeds those amounts, then beginning in January 2013 you will have to pay a 3.8 percent sales tax only on any profit after you take the exclusion of gain.
To determine the amount of tax you might have to pay, you (or your financial adviser) must determine which is less: the gain you have made on the sale of your house or the amount that your income exceeds the appropriate threshold.
For example: Your adjusted gross income is $150,000. You sell your house and make a profit of $400,000. You are not subject to the new 3.8 percent tax.
If your adjusted gross income is $300,000, you are eligible to take the profit exclusion of up to $500,000. Once again you do not have to pay the tax; your entire gain is excluded.
If your income is $300,000 and you have made $600,000, you have to pay the 3.8 percent tax. But only on $50,000, for a liability of $1,900.
Bottom line: Don't believe the rumors."
From: http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.....igh-income
Jeremiah| 8.18.10 @ 2:44PM
Hey, Notfar, almost every one of the 'rumors' coming from the right have turned out to be true. Every promise you geniuses on the left have made has turned out to be a lie. How stupid do you think we are? And how many more times do you have to be proved wrong before you start figuring out that you are the credulous dunce, not the enlightened intellectual?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.18.10 @ 7:35PM
To: NotFar With Ferrara: Your point about the real estate tax is ludicrous. So he's not taxing everybody? Everyone who knows how taxes work know that a tax on one is a tax on all as the effects ripple through the system.
Stammon| 8.19.10 @ 5:55AM
BS. A friend had to sell the family farm and is looking to buy another. He doesn't make anywhere near the income you talk about yet he had to pay this tax on the 1.5 million sale price for his 400 acres.
Notfar Withferrara| 8.19.10 @ 9:46PM
Stammon....nonsense re the tax on the family farm sale...the Medicare tax doesn't go into effect until 2013. Don't know in what state your friend resided, thus there could be lots of different taxes at play-- state and county transfer and/or recordation taxes, agricultural transfer taxes, etc. plus the sale proceeds clearly exceeded the $500K exclusion, so yes, they paid taxes just not the Medicare tax about which it is easy enough to find reliable information...a little google searching should do it for you.
O'Stalin...ripple through, trickle down, mamma grizzly, big gubbament, socialist....sometimes you have to take the time to put words together to articulate your opinion. So, please explain to us all here in your own words how our very complex tax system works. You didn't quite accomplish that.
Jeremiah...the tax code isn't a rumor...ya just gotta read it. I continue to be astonished at the extreme anger coming from the right, directed at the left, about the state of our nation. How quickly memory fades such that so many seem to have forgotten how, why and at which President's hand we've arrived at where we are today.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.20.10 @ 11:05AM
I find myself educating liberals all the time because they are too stupid to understand the consequences of their plans. It's real simple Jonathon. Anytime you tax a business there is in fact a ripple effect. Even liberal economists acknowledge that fact. All taxers in all guises are collectivists. If I run a business and collect a tax who do I collect it from if not the public? When the majority of the public grasps this fact then you'll observe a real change in dynamics in this country.
BozobamaSux| 8.21.10 @ 11:47PM
NotFar: YOUR president is a GD criminal and an inexperienced PUNK... ALL your rhetoric doesn't reverse any of the LIES that jug-eared punkazz has told... F him... REMEMBER in November, folks....
Mike Rogers| 8.19.10 @ 10:11AM
IF any health insurers are allowed to remain in business, they will most likely adopt the British model - selling supplementary insurance that pays for faster access, second opinions, and better hospital accommodations than the government plan provides. I completely agree that primary health insurance will disappear from the private sector.
Way to go, Peter - your columns are must-reads!
Linda| 9.9.10 @ 1:38PM
Amen to that! Since I am over 60, even though I paid for insurance all my life, I will be one of the 1st to be denied treatment.
AMENBRO| 8.18.10 @ 7:53AM
What astonishes me is just how many American people are sheep to the slaughter. Just roll their eyes & get a headache when these atrocities are even attempted explanation for their benefit. My Generation is going to get their asses screwed & can't be bothered.
Riiight| 8.18.10 @ 2:37PM
Plenty of sheeple here!
MichaelB| 8.19.10 @ 4:23AM
You have hit the nail on the head. Not only 'sheep to the slaughter' but blinded by a poor education system that produces dimwits like the Tea Party and the dimwits who go along with their facist views. Most of the people who use the word 'liberal' as a dirty word have never even looked the word up in a dictionary. They are simply too dumbed down to find the information that could enlighten them. The US is on a downward spiral, whoever is supposedly in charge and will not make it back. History will always repeat itself and all the great empires eventually self-destructed through greed and stupidity. America will be no exception.
Riiight| 8.19.10 @ 10:00PM
Completely agree about the dumbing down of America. Oh, and I almost forgot to thank Jeremiah for seemingly including me in what he calls "[us] geniuses on the left" Yep, Jesus, Ghandi, MLK, Jr....a bunch of genius liberals. loved being grouped in with geniuses on the left, like
Riiight| 8.19.10 @ 10:17PM
Here you go, Michael B:
Main Entry: 1lib·er·al
Pronunciation: \ˈli-b(ə-)rəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lēodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : openhanded b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way c : ample, full
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
4 : not literal or strict : loose
5 : broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
— lib·er·al·ly \-b(ə-)rə-lē\ adverb
— lib·er·al·ness noun
synonyms liberal, generous, bountiful, munificent mean giving or given freely and unstintingly. liberal suggests openhandedness in the giver and largeness in the thing or amount given . generous stresses warmhearted readiness to give more than size or importance of the gift . bountiful suggests lavish, unremitting giving or providing . munificent suggests a scale of giving appropriate to lords or princes .
Aindyin| 8.20.10 @ 3:47PM
Trouble is your not a liberal your a progressive looter. True liberals are rolling in their graves when they see what your up to.
Linda| 9.9.10 @ 1:40PM
Well, that is the plan to self-destruct America and blame it on the capitalist system.
Stephanie| 8.18.10 @ 8:09AM
This is so scary and like the Carol said above, the more I hear about his "deathcare", his defense of Islam and the muslims, his destruction of the country though all these things, makes me dispise this man, his family and his circle of jerks. I absolutely hate him and them. I didn't know I had these emotions in me, but as I see my business going under, my husband, a builder, having to do menial jobs to keep us underroof and fed, I wish someone would step up and bring forth impeachment proceedings against this man. He is a scourge on our country. Can we survive another 2 years and will the repubs do ANYTHING to change what has been heaped upon us? WILL THEY?
joe Francis| 8.18.10 @ 12:42PM
Then you get Biden as President. Obama knew what he was doing when he chose him as his insurance policy.
Z06gal| 8.18.10 @ 8:47PM
I would not mind Biden at all because he wouldn't get anything done. He is the wrong color. The libs wanted the current fraud because they knew they could get what they wanted by playing the race card if anyone disagrees. Obama is the biggest farce to have ever stepped foot in Washington and it isn't even close.
Radegunda| 8.19.10 @ 3:10AM
I think he chose Biden just to make himself look smart by comparison.
But I never bought that whole "insurance policy" theory. While Biden is a doofus who's wrong on almost everything, he isn't a malignant narcissist driven by hatred of America. He would not do half as much damage.
Will| 8.19.10 @ 3:10AM
But Stephanie, the recession started and your husband's business suffered before Obama took office. Secondly, if you're doing so bad, how is it you still can afford internet service as your husband is forced to do menial labor while you surf the web to complain?
MichaelB| 8.19.10 @ 4:32AM
Dear Stephanie, Of course they will! Sarah Palin will be your next president and will ensure the downward spiral of the US by fighting more wars and allowing the rich to get richer while continuing to destroy the middle class, something Bush so admirably started . Bush was the worst president in US history, unilaterraly invaded other countries and is a war criminal. He also got the US into $12 trillion in debt and trashed the Constitution in the process. The next republican president will ensure the downfall of the US to a third world country, a place it already is to some degree when you read the situations people find themselves in (see above where health care (sic) is denied and people are losing their jobs hand over fist. Obama was the only hope you had but because he didn't turn the disaster of the Bush years around in 3 months, he was labled useless. How stupid, impatient, uneducated and short-sighted most of us Americans are.
Ivor| 8.19.10 @ 1:01PM
I wonder why this Democrat President is accused of being a Nazi, Fascist, Socialist, etc when there was no such uproar with the previous Democrat President. Clinton also wanted to put through health care reform, even with a public mandate. Clinton and Obama were both voted into office, have many similar agendas. Obama is our president now. The majority of Americans voted for him. In this case, the extreme right has gone berserk. Perhaps they just can't stomach a black president. And how many of them call themselves Christians!
sasob| 8.20.10 @ 1:12AM
Perhaps they just can't stomach a black president.
And maybe you just like to kid yourself. Do you have any evidence of this racism, or do you just think unfounded allegations will substitute for it? Either put up or shut up.
Ivor| 8.22.10 @ 1:33PM
Yes, evidence is good. I'm looking for evidence of Nazi, Marxist, Fascist, Socialist policies. Can't find any and therefore my hunch about racism. You tell me. What Obama policies are Nazi, Marxist, etc.?
The Truth | 1.3.11 @ 8:32PM
They actually did a study in which people were described a health care policy, and either attributed it to clinton or obama. The study found that people who before the election registered high in "implicit" or "explicit" anti-black prejudice "tended to oppose Obama in part because they dislike him as a Black person."
Sure it doesn't explain all Obama hatred, but it does illustrate that race plays a part in it's opposition.
Of course, unless the "Journal of Experimental Social Psychology" is all part of the left-wing socialist conspiracy. lol
"Racial prejudice predicts opposition to Obama and his health care reform plan"
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Volume 46, Issue 2, March 2010, Pages 420-423
ahem| 8.20.10 @ 8:26AM
" they just can't stomach a black president"
You lefties are such intellectuals: everything boils down to race. (I guess if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And it's no defense against a chainsaw.)
If Obama were white, it wouldn't change anyone's opinion one whit: he's a marxist, chum--a marxist. In all that reading in history, philosophy, politics and economics that you appear not to ruffle your brain with, is evidence that everything they touch turns to shit. Ask the 100 million in the 20th century who were murdered for the sake of Marx's misguided ideas. Eventually, when you and your children are reduced to eating your lawn, even a sub-moron like yourself may see the light.
Clinton is a soft Leftist. He believes some of the same utopian crap, but he is not a revolutionary, and he loves America. Obama is a revolutionary; he hates America and he wants to destroy it. He ain't your JFK Democrat. Go back to bed.
WRTolkas| 8.18.10 @ 8:20AM
Dear AMENBRO,
You are correct, our generation are sheep. However, I expect these sheep to transform into tigers when they first feel the impact of this monstrosity of a bill. I have talked with people who voted for the great dictator. These people are now dazed and confused.
And old Chinese Proverb: The first step towards knowledge is confusion.
Champaign County Sheriffs Department reports finding a man's body in the Salt Fork River just west of the Kelly's Tavern Historical Site Bridge.
The man's name will not be released until his family has been notified. The victim apparently drowned after consuming an excessive amount of alcohol.
He was wearing black fishnet stockings, a red garter belt with matching bra, and an Obama T-shirt.
The deputy removed the Obama T-shirt to spare his family any unnecessary embarrassment.
Be safe,
WRTolkas
Nunya| 8.18.10 @ 11:52AM
LOL ;-)
Nanette| 8.18.10 @ 4:24PM
So it's come to this . . .
Don| 8.18.10 @ 8:23AM
What's the complaint. Obamacare does just what it is meant to. Reduces medical cost. It also has the added benefit of reducing projected Social Security shortfalls.
sally| 8.18.10 @ 11:26AM
Obamacare will NOT reduce medical cost; it will increase medical cost. Obamacare mandates more than 100 new agencies and 16,000 more IRS agents (to enforce everyone to get insurance). WE are all going to pay for that.
And it mandates that insurance co's cover everyone who applies, with no money caps and no time limits, and expanded coverage for all types of illnesses and conditions.
All that cost will get added onto our insurance premiums.
Use your logic here - There is absolutely no way Obamacare will reduce medical cost.
Kevin| 8.18.10 @ 2:51PM
Do you receive a paycheck from the democratic party? Do you live on Mars? Is the cool aid green?
z06gal| 8.18.10 @ 9:00PM
LOL
GavInTucson| 8.18.10 @ 11:27PM
I took Don's comment to be sarcasm, meaning that it'll reduce Social Security shortfalls by simply killing off elderly people.
Am I the only one that got that?
sasob| 8.19.10 @ 3:12AM
No, you are not the only one who got it. ;-)
Nanette| 8.18.10 @ 4:27PM
Wha . . . ? . . . t planet are you from? Spending your time in the insane asylum blogging on the Internet? Mommy and Daddy paying your way? Big Daddy (govt) paying your way? Wake up, Don.
Pat Spooner| 8.18.10 @ 9:27AM
Excellent summary but misses one item - the elites who enacted this legislation excluded themselves from coverage under the law. This fact need sto be commented upon frequently by conservative candiadtes during this falls campaigns and therafter as an additional reason for repeal.
Dan Hirsch| 8.18.10 @ 9:55AM
So I have seen a petition for a 28th Constitutional Amendment that prohibits Congress from exempting itself and its members from any legislation it passes.
Proposed Amendment # 28 to the US Constitution
"Congress shall make no law that applies to any citizen of the United States that does not apply equally to all US Senators and Representatives. Congress shall make no law that applies to any US Senator or Representative that does not apply equally to all citizens of the United States. All existing laws and regulations that do not meet these criteria shall be declared null and void!"
Maybe this would be a good place to start?
Who could possibly oppose it other than idiotic incumbents of our elected 535, their overpaid staff, and their families?
Caveat emptor - their are other proposed 28th amendments floating around - do not get the wrong one...
LiveFreeOrDie| 8.19.10 @ 2:49PM
Where can I send a donation?
dianne| 8.18.10 @ 10:18AM
And then there is the fact that companies will dump their plans and pay the fine instead, leaving their employees to go on the exchange. People of low income will benefit but check out the exchange rates for a 60 year old single woman making $52,000 a year. For 70% coverage, it will cost $10,200/year ! (Source: Kaiser Foundation website). Under my employers plan, my costs are $2400/year for 80% coverage.
Redstateboy| 8.18.10 @ 10:46AM
Maybe it's just me.. all this indepth research of a Bill to prove what a Hundred million of us already know - a 2,000+ page bill signed only by Democrats is not going to be good for this country and cost more than can be imagined.
GavInTucson| 8.18.10 @ 11:30PM
Of course we did... and they did too, but they didn't care. Even though they didn't read (or write) the bill, they knew the one thing in the bill that was most important to them.... THEY... WERE... EXEMPT!
Bob Miller| 8.18.10 @ 10:57AM
If the Demorons knew at passage what we do now...they would have passed it anyway.
Ned| 8.18.10 @ 12:47PM
Exactly right... not only did they not know what was in the bill, they didn't CARE what was in the bill... all they were concerned about was the power grab this bill represents, and - so they thought - their ability to brag about what a great thing they had done... don't hear many of them bragging now... Barry Hussein Obullsh*t's legacy is going to be replacing Jummy Carter as Worst President of the Modern Era... I'm sure Jummy appreciates that...
mwg| 8.18.10 @ 11:22AM
To all of those wanting to impeach the dictator in chief, no method of removing him before 2012 will fix this problem because the line of succession would continue on the same path. Our only hope of resolving the "Obamacare" crisis is to take back both houses of Congress from the Dems with enough majority to override any veto attempt at repeal. Thereafter, voting in enough of each party that Congress is split in majority control. This way it won't matter who is in the White House or from which party.
Voting rule to impliment term limits: Never, ever vote for an incumbant in a primary (no matter who they are or what you perceive them to be able to do). Always vote for one party in the house and the other in the Senate regardless of who you vote for as President. Vote the opposite in off year elections.
Nanette| 8.18.10 @ 4:31PM
Exactly so . . .
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 11:27AM
I have been in the insurance business for 15 years. Here is the bottom line: If these carriers are forced to accept pre-existing conditions at standard rates it is game over for the industry, period, end of story. The premiums form a reserve from which claims are paid. If you take on a known, huge, bad risk, the pool is blown to pieces & rates MUST be raised to meet the costs of the claim. This is insurance 101. ANYONE with an IQ over 50 can see this spells sure doom to private health insurance within 5 years of enacting this program on a large scale.
Paul from Sa| 8.18.10 @ 11:34AM
Steve A,
Exactly! We will not be paying for their insurance; we will be paying for their medical care.
Forcing insurers to insure people who are already sick will not work. It is no longer 'insurance.'
Forcing home insurerss to insure homes that are already on fire is not insurance.
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 11:45AM
Paul, You are 100% on it. The scary part is that I have several very intelligent, rational friends who, when confrontes with these FACTS, simply get a glazed over look in their eyes & tell me that, "well, we needed to do something." It is simply amazing. These will be the people who blame the insurance companies, following the lead of the Progressives, when it all goes south.
bcl| 8.18.10 @ 12:11PM
Remember folks, Obamacare never had anything to do with reducing costs. Its objectives were universal coverage, single payer. Not quite there yet, but the train has left the station.
JungleCogs| 8.18.10 @ 12:27PM
The health care bill had nothing to do with health care; it was all about money, power and control.
Amelia22| 8.19.10 @ 4:38AM
Paul, ask your friends if they are okay with waiting two years to see a specialist or doing without an anti-cancer drug because the government deemed it "cost-effective." That is what happens in the UK all the time.
Amelia22| 8.19.10 @ 4:40AM
Sorry, that comment was meant for Steve A.! (as far as your friends go)
George True| 8.18.10 @ 11:58AM
Steve: Amen, brother. I have also been an insurance agent for the last 21 years. During the run up to Obamacare, I felt like the proverbial lone voice crying in the wilderness. When you mandate that an insurance company has to have an 80% loss ratio (85% for large group insurers), you can call that a lot of different things, but one thing it is NOT is insurance. It then becomes a 501c(3), and even then it will be bankrupt before long.
But the CPUSA Democrats knew this. These provisions were expressly intended to bankrupt insurance companies. The loss ratio mandates ARE the public option in disguise. And Pelosi & Company were honest about their desire to have the public option, in the end, to be the only option. They knew what they were doing.
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 12:29PM
Hey George, Knowing what we know, it is hard to express to the average Joe just how sinister & truly evil this agenda is. The long term result is so catastrophic it defies logic. Good to know others see it. Carry on & maybe we can defeat these people. Regards.
joli| 8.18.10 @ 1:21PM
Many of us know instinctively how evil and sinister this agenda is. We know he was trying to sell us a bill of goods because his lips were moving.
BJensen| 8.18.10 @ 1:30PM
The only other thing I can see happening is increasing the 100% so the 80% covers their expenses. Won't that be great for us all!? I work in insurance as well, and I know that claims payouts + expenses cannot be greater than premium intake or the company risks insolvency. My thoughts are they will find a way to gin the numbers to meet that 80% payment requirement. From a business standpoint, that's the only means for survival under Obamacare. For a consumer, that means we're getting screwed.
Partners med man| 8.20.10 @ 7:58AM
Maybe, maybe not - as it CURRENTLY exists, just being over 65 means Medicare will enroll despite any pre-existing disease, ditto nearly every state Medicaid program; chronic renal failure is completely Federalised; any service-connected problem gets one full care in the VA system, despite any other pre-existing disease. Ditto several other groups - THESE ALL EXIST, prior to all the Obamacare @#$%
Paul from SA| 8.18.10 @ 11:29AM
Peter, thanks, great work.
I saw this morning that Obama has not mentioned healthcare since June 22, and Dem candidates for office are not talking about healthcare because it is so unpopular.
The more people learn about ObamaCare, the less they like it.
sally| 8.18.10 @ 11:36AM
I read an article in The New American about three months ago by a physician who said that ObamaCare will develop a list of approved diagnostic methods and treatments and then teams of govt. workers will review electronic medical systems to make sure that doctors are complying with the list.
If your doctor does not comply, neither your doctor nor yourself can appeal, and the govt. will have the authority to electronically withdraw $50,000 directly from your doctor's bank account for each "offense."
If this is true, this is absolutely against the nature of this country.
PJ| 8.18.10 @ 11:41AM
For those who think that death panels do not exist, read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/hea.....nels.html.
I have to read other countries' newspapers to find out what's happening in my own country.
When reading the article please keep in mind that there are some women who do extremely well using this drug but some who do not. FDA generally looks at averages & in this case it equals to no cost-effective benefit for society.
fantum| 8.18.10 @ 11:53AM
Breast Cancer Drug - The Start of Death Panels...
http://usataxpayer.org/htm/vids.asp?A=71514925
DO YOU REALLY EXPECT HONESTY FROM DEMOCRATS?
A Democrat lies about everything (Obama), lies about his military service (Blumenthal), sells his vote (Stupak), has an extramarital affair (Clinton), cheats on his taxes (Rangle), accepts bribes (Murtha RIP), takes bribes (Jefferson), buys a Senate seat (Jackson), backs underage sex-trafficking (Cleaver), lives with a pimp (Frank), lies about racism (Carnahan), gropes a masseuse (Gore), and on and on and on...
THEY ARE DEMOCRATS and IT IS EXPECTED OF THEM! They have no morals, there is no God, praise homosexuals, be politically correct, kill your baby, tax global warming, embrace illegals, bigger government is the answer to everything. THE MOST CORRUPT DEMOCRAT IS THE MOST EXALTED.
Health Care FACTS!
http://usataxpayer.org/?007817814
Realist| 8.18.10 @ 4:37PM
Yup
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$| 8.18.10 @ 11:59AM
I disagree that “America does need to ensure that it maintains a health care safety net assuring that no one suffers due to lack of essential health care.” That is an opinion based on morality, and has no business being enforced by any gum’mint bureaucracy. I would have no problem with stating that Americans should ensure that we maintain a health care safety net assuring that no one suffers due to lack of essential health care. But I oppose making it a gum’mint mandate. We even need to wean ourselves off the gum’mint sow’s twin teats of Medicare and Medicaid. Simply grant us the freedom to prepare for our own needs without promising bail-outs to the fiddling grasshoppers among the ants.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$
Don’t Tread on Me.
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
“The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the (ant’s) house (given to the grasshopper by the kourt), now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful (neighborhood). From Basic Jokes [ http://www.basicjokes.com/djoke.php?id=750 ]
Only 886 days to go
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 12:18PM
Gill, You are correct. The problem is that we are talking about INSURANCE, not health care. I have a friend who recently had a heart attack. He has no insurance. Went to the ER, had bypass surgery, was in ICU for a week. He paid ZERO. We are already absorbing these costs. The difference is that these costs will now shift directly to insurers in the form of claims & destroy the reserve pool & force rates up dramatically. The govmt then steps in to take control. It's all about power & control.
Nunya| 8.18.10 @ 12:01PM
This legislation was shoved down our throats by Marxist idiots, led by the King of Marxist idiots, Obama. Anyone who seriously thinks this is a solution, or will cut costs is a fool, or completely stupid. This abomination needs to be repealed en toto. I've said in the past that nobody would be opposed to a "safety net" of some sort that would protect one in the event of a catastrophic medical event. However, this monstrosity is so far off the mark as to be obscene.
Unfortunately, I have no hope that any new Republicrats elected will do a damn thing to fix it. We need some Statesmen to step forward and do what's right, unfortunately we have a Congress full of people who care nothing for the will of the People, only how to enrich themselves at our expense.
More Ned| 8.18.10 @ 12:57PM
You do have to give the Demorons credit where credit is due... they rammed this monster through entirely on brass and deception... it is the greatest usurpation of power and control in history, and they jammed it down our throats and dared anyone to stop them... worse yet for all of us, they have intentionally seeded the beast with landmines that will continue to enhance *their power and control* far, far into the future.
Any idiot who voted for these thieves and charlatans deserves what they get... unfortunately, they're dragging the rest of us down with them.
Realist| 8.18.10 @ 4:41PM
Best comment on the board . . . my humble opinion . . .
R Martin| 8.18.10 @ 12:11PM
As I read your piece I couldn’t help but wonder how much money someone would have to pay me to slog through the thousands of pages of the Bill and related documents with enough care to understand the legalize and comment on it cogently. My figure is obviously higher than yours, and I look forward to the public release of your study.
There are many intelligent comments above on the faults of this legislation. Here is what concerns me most: who in the world is going to endure the effort and expense of becoming a physician if the government is to be one’s paymaster? Death panels become redundant if there are too few health care providers—which is certain to be the case. Those people who are inclined to a career in health care are going to become orthodontists, veterinarians or cosmetic surgeons.
Repeal is the only solution. And then I hope whatever health care reform is deemed necessary starts with the strength of the system pre Obama, i.e. that most people are satisfied with the cost and quality of their employer-provided policies.
joli| 8.18.10 @ 1:31PM
Veterinarians will start underground medical clinics where people will pay fee-for-service to get care for minor illnesses. Meanwhile, your local doctor's office will shut down because it costs them $3000 to give you a $50 prescription for amoxicillin.
Partners med man| 8.20.10 @ 8:10AM
Speaking as a physician - one of my three children has chosen to go to medical school, despite my best efforts to convince her that it was an unwise choice. This is another "land mine" - because the length of the pipeline is a MINIMUM of 7-10 years from the beginning of medical school through internship and residency (not to mention additional time for any possible subspecialty fellowship...), the impact of Obamacare on the number of providers may be slow in arriving. Anyone already IN THE PIPELINE may be too committed to change career paths, so medical school applications may not decline until after the damage is done...
Icor| 8.23.10 @ 3:42AM
So you're happy with your employer-provided policy. This is NOT the majority view. Not everyone has an employer policy. Many employers are dropping these benefits because of the cost so fewer and fewer Americans will have it. Eventually, you'd lose your benefits. Then you'd probably form another opinion based on your personal situation, rather than looking at the big picture.
The Al| 8.18.10 @ 12:19PM
I think I found a typo that Mr. Ferrara might want to correct. It's at the top of the third page, first paragraph, last sentence.
"This would only follow the Medicare precedent, which was originally projected in 1965 to cost $12 trillion by 1990. But when 1990 came, it cost $109.7 billion, 9 times greater."
I think it was supposed to say "$12 billion" not $12 trillion. Medicare was projected to cost $12 billion by 1990. But as we all know that was a gross underestimation.
Jenny| 8.18.10 @ 1:07PM
Peter -- Is Abramoff paying you to write this over-emotional hype from his half-way house or are you on the dole from different lobbyists for this one?
It is clear you have absolutely no understanding of the challenges of the non-system of health care in the U.S. that is responsible for millions of preventable deaths, nor even a desire for a healthier population.
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 1:13PM
Jenny, Put the bong down & read some of the prior posts on this list & tell me where I am wrong. We will wait for your non-response.
Jenny| 8.18.10 @ 4:56PM
Steve --
As a daily reader of various health policy reports, I am always on the look out for intelligent conservative critique on health reform. I'm more curious about solutions and common ground than arguments for the sake of arguing. As this commentary was linked today to Kaiser Health News, I foolishly thought it would be more solution focused. Instead I find the hyperbolic:
"The bottom line is that you will lose your health care under this legislation, if not your job, your country as they bankrupt America, and maybe ultimately your life or the life of a loved one. "
Which lead me to believe that this piece was penned by an insurance industry shill. (The idea that the author might be on drugs -- the go-to response in this forum -- did not occur to me.)
I noticed in your comments that you too work for the insurance industry. And yes, the industry under health reform may very well be in peril if it continues to defraud customers at their most vulnerable. I can see how you might be frightened.
The main ideas in recently passed health insurance reform (individual mandate, etc.) are the ideas of republicans in the 1990s (Bob Dole, Mitt Romney etc). The legislation that passed is a free market compromise. If it fails, yes, the next step would be more akin to the socialist systems of western europe (where citizens live longer, healthier and with a higher satisfaction with their system). Seeing as how conservatives are so loathe to see the private insurance system go away, you would think they'd be more apt to support solutions that cheer for its success by including rather than excluding the industry.
And yes, I have read the whole bill. Pay me for a few hours of my time and I would gladly refute Mr. Ferrara's piece point by point!
Radegunda| 8.19.10 @ 3:19AM
It isn't a "free market compromise." It's a way station on the route to total government control, as various Democrats in moments of candor have admitted.
How do you think health care will be improved when there's already mass exodus out of the medical profession because of the government takeover?
If it's such a great plan, why did Democrat legislators adamantly refuse to put themselves under it along with everyone else?
Amelia22| 8.19.10 @ 4:28AM
Jenny, of course Steve is frightened. And so would you be if you had lived in the UK for several years as I did under their government health care. Are you prepared to wait two years to see a specialist? Three years for an operation? A year or more for an MRI? Where one-third of the nurses surveyed said they believe in euthanasia? Where 4 out of 10 nurses said they did euthanize patients (without their families permission)? You have no idea what the future is. If you did, you would be shaking in your shoes.
David Williams| 8.18.10 @ 1:25PM
Over emotional? You big silly person, after you have read the bill perhaps you could refute Mr. Ferrara point by point.
Chalkdust| 8.18.10 @ 2:33PM
Jenny, Jenny, Jenny:
Here that whistle? Thats a train and you're standing on the tracks. The next time you leave the airport for a hit or two on a fatty........well it's clear you haven't picked up a newspaper to just read in some time. Do yourself a favor and catch up on the news.
Jeremiah| 8.18.10 @ 2:53PM
Hey guys, can't you see that Jenny (and most of the other leftwing trolls here) are just government agents assigned to watch this site and try to muddy the waters? Their MO is always the same - offer few facts, suggest that everyone who sees clearly is stupid or intellectually limited - and then move on (dot org).
They think they can make freedom expire with a whimper - and from the evidence of the last few decades they had good reason for this confidence. But it is reviving with a bang and they will soon know that if they don't back off, the bang is going to be very big indeed.
Louis Jenkins| 8.18.10 @ 1:08PM
Last night I attended a town hall meeting led by our elected republican congressman. He stated that the whole Obama Care thing needed to be repealed, or cut down to nothing via a lack of program funding. But for now he and his fellow Republicans are standing dumb and blind because they are in the minority. While we keep saying this and that the bottom line is we need a group of politicians in office in efficient numbers to do just that. Nov. is coming and not soon enough.
George True| 8.18.10 @ 1:50PM
You are right, but I fear that even if Republicans take over the house AND senate, we will still have to hold their feet to the fire to get them to do what must be done. Defunding obamacare is a course of action that, while necessary, will be perceived by Republicans as fraught with political risk. We will need to be right behind them holding a knife to their back (figuratively) the entire time. We will need to constantly remind them that this is what we elected them for, and if they shirk their duty, we will throw them out too in 2012.
Tyrone| 8.18.10 @ 8:42PM
Right you are. The average (R) politician, thinks like this: Hey, I worked hard to get elected. I just want to enjoy my office now. I don't want this to be the knock-down drag-out fight that you are expecting me to make it into.
Susan Good Geise| 8.18.10 @ 1:42PM
I believe there may be an error in this article; the first paragraph on page 3 seems to indicate that the Medicare numbers projected in 1965 to 1990 are reversed. The point is that government understates the future costs, but the numbers cited in the article seem just the reverse. Clarification, please?
Mr. Rolf| 8.18.10 @ 1:45PM
Look, people: SOMEONE has to pay for all those perennially sick elderly who in an earlier age would have passed away due to natural causes. Single payer sure as hell beats dumping health care on employers, doesn't it? Merely repealing the health care legislation is not a long-term solution will not change one single bit the demographic reality: too many sick people living too long.
My solution is euthanasia. Except that we spell it as "Youth-anasia" since Americans are obsessed with eternal youth and free lunches (as the mad young will be, until they grow up and realize that free lunches no not exist).
How about it, folks? Oh, and buy a gun.
dw| 8.18.10 @ 1:48PM
What should be expected when a bunch of liberal hacks rush to take over 1/6th of the American economy. They enacted it without any legitimate review or debate, and without even reading it. Such a complex issue should have been given much more transparency and consideration by the public and any bill like this that is approved by one party is not an example of representative government. This was closer to a dictatorship action and for that reason alone the whole thing should be thrown out.
It is a disaster, which was predictable by anyone with even half a brain.
Albert| 8.18.10 @ 2:17PM
AND, they enacted it without any legal authority to do so. Obozo-care is flatly unconstitutional and We the People are under absolutely no obligation to obey any part of it. The US Constitution gives absolutely zero legal authroity to the US Government to control or manage health care or health insurance. Time for Americans to become "refusniks" and refuse to participate in this brazen corruption.
Bill Cleveland| 8.18.10 @ 1:49PM
This all comes down to a single issue. How many folks will allow Obamacare to harm a member of their family and not seek retribution. The politics of cowardice in the U.S hold most Americans in thrall - regardless of how much pain and anguish government causes their loved ones.
Today, I have perfectly acceptable health insurance for my family. I pay for it - it is mine. The result of the legislation that created Obamacare will inevitably force my heath insurance coverage into the Obamacare system. God have mercy on the people that cause my family harm, under the forced auspices of Obamacare. I certainly shall not. The scumbags remain convinced that they are not accountable for their actions. That's a problem.
Far as I'm concerned any harm to my family, due to the terms and regulations of Obamacare, would be a personal issue, between myself and the perpertrators and authors of Obamacare. It would be a matter of accountability for criminal acts against my family. No one may harm my family and just walk away. Just call me a barbarian. If you aren't willing to do the same for your family - you deserve whatever the Democrats do to you.
Bill Cleveland
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 2:02PM
Bill, You are not alone. The sick part is that when this scenario becomes a reality, which it will, those that enacted this monstrosity will NEVER admit fault. They will point to private insurers as the villian & the morons who backed them will swallow that bait & we will all be left twisting in the wind. These people must be defeated.
Mr. Rolf| 8.18.10 @ 4:24PM
"God have mercy..." 'Accountability..."
Who are you going to shoot? Where are you going to go postal?
Albert| 8.18.10 @ 2:12PM
The crooks, liars, cheats, and thieves, who wrote and "passed" this monstrosity, and the Bozo who signed it, are fond of telling the American People "we need to pass this legislation to improve health care. Things were worse before we passed it. Imagine how bad it would be if we didn't pass it?" These are the same lies told to countless Russian and Ukrainian peasants who were presented with the Communist Revolution. They were promised abundant food and steady work for fair pay. What was delivered was famine and death. Obozo-care will not improve health care and it was never intended to. Obozo-care is a vote buying scheme for Demcorats and nothing more. The purpose is to eliminate economically any political opposition to the ruling Democrats. The Soviets used forced famines and murder to impose dictatorial rule. The Democrats are using health care and death panels to create government enslavement and get a permanent ruling majority.
Amelia22| 8.18.10 @ 2:53PM
The thing is, as bad as you think Obamacare will be, it will be much, much worse. I lived in the UK for several years, and people are considered useless to society over the age of 60 as far as medical care goes. God help you if you go into the hospital with a serious problem. And if you have to see a specialist? It took my friend TWO years. It can take up to a year to get an MRI. Operations? Try two or three years for a simple operation. And how is Obamacare going to be sustainable? The UK has 65 million people and cannot afford the costs - already hospital staff is being cut across the country there. The U.S. has 300 million. Think about it.
DRed| 8.18.10 @ 3:36PM
They do live longer than us, though. Think about it.
Amelia22| 8.18.10 @ 5:39PM
DRed, no they don't. The UK also has significantly higher mortality rates with cancer than the U.S. does. Also they did a study where they found that 4 out of 10 nurses had "hastened" the death of patients that they felt should no longer be living. Government rationing? Yes.
Mik e Cor| 8.18.10 @ 3:06PM
There is a typo:
"in 1965 to cost $12 trillion by 1990"
trillion should be billion
Susan Good Geise| 8.18.10 @ 3:31PM
Thanks, I thought perhaps I had read it wrong. I hope they fix this soon. These details really matter.
DatsunMark| 8.18.10 @ 3:12PM
I want to personally thank Mitch McConnell for fighting like hell against this legislation. His serious *tut-tutting* and allowing the vote to the floor in exchange for the Dems to raise the debt limit was brilliant. (I guess he didn't realize this *was* the hill to die for).
Tyrone| 8.18.10 @ 8:48PM
There is nothing wrong with Mitch M. that a good dose of Milk of Magnesia couldn't cure.
Brent Jorgenson| 8.18.10 @ 3:24PM
Wow, I thought this article was ridiculous but the comments are even worse. What a bunch of irrational, uneducated bunch of college drop-outs you all are.
The US is 37th in overall health care yet we spend more than twice per person what any other country spends.
Obamacare is deficit neutral the first ten years & SAVES $10,000, 000,000,000 over the 2nd ten years.
Steve A| 8.18.10 @ 3:58PM
Brent, You should take your comedy show on the road. I needed that laugh. Nice to see a delusional, Progressive disciple display the results of a government run education in full view. I sincerely feel sorry for you. It's sad.
Georgie Girl| 8.18.10 @ 4:15PM
The ONLY way it can save money is to ration treatments. I already know that chiropactors will not be covered and that is just the beginning. I really don't understand - if you think other countries are so great - why don't you move there!
George True| 8.18.10 @ 5:13PM
So it will "save" ten trillion dollars over the second ten years of its existence?? I'm not sure where you get your "facts", but not even Reid and Pelosi claimed that it would save more than one-twentieth that amount over the first ten years. And even that figure was obtained only forcing the CBO to use flawed data with which to make their projection.
You would do well, son, not to pontificate on matters you clearly have not the slightest grasp of.
GavInTucson| 8.18.10 @ 11:53PM
Brent, maybe some bloggers on the Huffington Post are spouting off that $10T figure, but not even Pelosi, Reid, Obama, or the CBO are willing to lie THAT big.
Radegunda| 8.19.10 @ 3:25AM
Weren't you aware that they got that "deficit neutral" claim by including 10 years of taxation for only 6 or 7 years of expenditure? And, by withhold the "doc fix" until after the bill was passed, and then saying, oops, we forgot something, gotta add this too?
And do you REALLY believe the propaganda about what will be saved? And then you say anybody who doesn't buy the Democrat propaganda is ignorant? Weird.
Amelia22| 8.19.10 @ 4:48AM
Brent, what a comedian!! So, why is the UK losing money and cutting staff all over if government health care saves so much money? And the UK has the VAT tax (value added tax) on top of all the other taxes - still the health care system is bleeding more and more money every year. And the UK has 65 million people - we have 300 million people. Obamacare will be so much worse for the U.S.!
David | 8.18.10 @ 3:33PM
Jeremiah, sad story, and glad you made it.
Maybe whitey will finally revolt when bureaucrats, backed up by the courts, start the affirmative action, special treatement, and set-asides in healthcare based on race. It is going to happen - no doubt about it. Whitey has had it too good for too long. It is now the minorities turn.
As Bam Bam's recess appointment to head Medicare and Medicaid said (Becker I think his name is) "rationing is by definition redistribution".
And all thanks to the moronic 52% who voted for this boy. And I don't say boy in the racial sense, but because he is so inexperienced on every issue that he can't make even ONE good decision.
David| 8.18.10 @ 3:40PM
Brent, I hear Mother Jones calling you.
Bam Bam wanted to put together and ram through in a couple of months a matter that involves 1/6 of the American economy. Yet, your boy took 6 flippin' months to decide on what kind of dog to get.
Have you read any Harvard Law Review articles by him lately? Didn't think so.
Georgie Girl| 8.18.10 @ 4:11PM
I was told yesterday that chiropractic treatments will no longer be covered by medicare or obamacare.
GavInTucson| 8.18.10 @ 11:57PM
I suppose we're all supposed to be happy Obamacare covers pain pills... especially if you're a grandmother needing a pace maker.
Who needs real medicine when you can just stay high on pills, right?
Houston Shrugs| 8.18.10 @ 5:25PM
What am I doing about this?
I left my job earlier this year and for the first time in decades, have been enjoying my summer at home with my kids. Between me and my wife, we will bring in under $150K this year, so I will save tens of thousands in taxes while vastly improving the quality of our life. For those that think that this only opens up a position for someone else, well, even an average doctor can become a nurse, but most of the best nurses can not become doctors.
I refuse to go to Vegas or San Fransisco, either on business or vacation, until Reid and Pelosi are gone.
Since the government is making free money available to the banks and therefore I can't obtain any interest income on my money, I have withdrawn all my cash and put it in my safe.
I have cut my spending to the bone, no longer tip as I used to before (after all, Obama will take care of them, right?), fired my nanny, landscape maintenance service...
What are you doing about it? The only way to kill the liberal dream is by not giving them "other people's money" to play with. Take your skills, your money, your cooperation away.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$| 8.18.10 @ 7:48PM
Houston, you’ve got a problem. While I totally sympathize with the actions you have taken, in my opinion you have made a serious mistake by withdrawing all your cash and putting it in your safe. We are heading towards catastrophic changes to our economy. the whirlybird wizard in cahoots with tax cheat timmie, has already schemed to use the fed to purchase all the debt gum’mint malfeasance can create. There is already evidence that some entity with gum’mint deep pockets is gaming the DOW. Our Debt:GDP ratio is over 90% and OUR Debt is increasing at a rate 3 to 4 times faster than OUR productivity. Just the amount to service the debt is presently in excess of $152,000,000 per day. We are heading straight into either massive inflation, deflation or even stagflation. Simply sticking your dough into a safe will not work. I bought lots of silver and do not regret it. It’s value should track that of cash. That is if 2 years from now a loaf of bread costs 10 times as much as now, an ounce of silver should similarly be worth 10 times as much. Any commodity that keeps would be a more productive investment and protection of your family than simply sticking your money in a vault. Besides silver - the poor man’s gold, gold, platinum and palladium deserve consideration. I also stockpile bourbon. It keeps and it’s value should increase. I used to think that ‘Forever’ Stamps were a wise buy, but given all the problems the post office is having, I’m not so sure anymore. But do get your funds out of the safe and exchange it for something with a value which should hold up, no matter what the future brings.
Good luck and God Bless!
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$
Don’t Tread on Me.
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
“I rob banks because that's where the money is.” - Willie Sutton.
Only 886 days to go
Houston Shrugs| 8.19.10 @ 10:49AM
I agree with you. I have purchased some gold. But gold and silver are not easy to trade with (splitting it up, risk of fraud, etc.). While the fed has been 'printing money', most of this is in the form of credit and loans that are just book entries - for a loan purchased by the Fed, they just credit the seller's account with some numbers. The actual cash in circulation has not grown much, not even during the financial crisis. When actual cash notes are printed and in circulation, that is when the value will start decreasing and it will diminish in being a store of value. Credit cash is fake money. Real cash is the 'capital' on which banks can leverage, remove that and refuse to play their game.
Yes, I am also looking for land to exchange for my cash.
sasob| 8.19.10 @ 4:19AM
... even an average doctor can become a nurse, but most of the best nurses can not become doctors.
Lol! That's not what the nurses think. I've never heard of one yet who didn't think she knew more than the doctors.
somnolence| 8.18.10 @ 6:44PM
I'm sure millions share my assertion in boldly stating, just what the hell are you going to do about it if we refuse to buy it? Huh? I may very well pay the fine just not to be hassled. My income now and in 2014 will be my savings. Like the good doctor above who took a "sabbatical" I'm not about to go out and make a bunch of money to subsidize all the outlaws in the federal government. And by the way, to the 16,000 IRS "enforcers"--the jails are already full, and society will be p.o. if you throw all of us refuseniks in them.
Boston12GS| 8.19.10 @ 3:00PM
It'll be just like the gun control laws. If you're a much-convicted felon, they'll throw out the gun charges on a whim, because they have you on the rape, etc. charges.
If you're a white male home/business owner caught with an unlicensed gun, you'll get the full 5-10-15 years in jail.
Go figure.
But don't expect to be cut loose. YOU, they'll make an example of. The illegal alien who hasn't been paying payroll or FICA or anything other than the unavoidable sales tax for 5 or 10 or 15 years--he'll get a pass.
Count on it.
jschmidt| 8.18.10 @ 8:58PM
If the Republicans get control of Congress, nothing will get repealed, unless they have 2/3 control of both houses to override vetoes of oBAMA.
philfl63| 8.18.10 @ 9:40PM
I have a better idea. The gubmint gets out of healthcare (except military medicine), and we all pay for our own medical care. Problem solved. Case closed.
somnolence| 8.18.10 @ 10:03PM
I want to see the day when your neighborhood Dollar Store will accept silver or gold for the purchase of food or other items. I'll bet the majority of us are not holding our breath.
Audrey| 8.19.10 @ 4:21AM
The Obama(care) Disaster. Why the "care" bit?
besides The Obama Disaster has a ring to it - like a really scary movie or freaky theme park ride - and we won't get our money back.
Jack Kinch(1uncle)| 8.19.10 @ 12:47PM
All this is to insure the millions of people who were bred on welfare to vote demo.
Must STOP this .
Jack Kinch(1uncle)| 8.19.10 @ 12:48PM
All this is to insure the millions of people who were bred on welfare to vote demo.
Must STOP this .
BS| 8.19.10 @ 1:48PM
I think if you'll fine upon further exzamination that the majority of Red States require Public Assistance
Mississippi, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, South Carolina West Virgina and Alabama do I need to go further to make my point. Please get you head out of the sand. As soon as republicans stop voting against their own economic interest the better off this country will be.
sasob| 8.20.10 @ 1:33AM
I think you'll find that ALL states have people on public assistance - not just southern states. I further think you'll find that said people usually vote Democrat - if they vote at all.
BTW, since when is West Virginia a "red" state? It has a Democrat governor and Senators, two of its three House members are Democrats, and its state legislature is majority Democrat.
BS| 8.19.10 @ 1:27PM
I'm not sure about the credibility of the author, it appears that there is quite a bit of true mixed with falsehoods here in his article. I would suggest reviewing the following.
Why do we have to reform our health care system now?
* Currently health care costs are 17% of our GDP, and are projected to grow to one-third of our GDP by 2040.
* The primary cause of our deficit is the per-person costs of Medicare and Medicaid.
* The United States spends twice per-capita on health care than any other developed nation, leaving American businesses at a competitive disadvantage.
* If we do nothing, health insurance premiums are expected to consume nearly 40% of an average family’s disposable income within the next decade.
* The growth of health care spending is on an unsustainable course both nationally, and for American businesses and families.
* It is fiscally irresponsible to do nothing about our current health care costs.
Fact vs. Fiction
Myth: Small businesses will not be able to afford reform and will have to cut jobs.
* Our current health care system is particularly untenable for small businesses.
* Small businesses are the only group of people who still pay retail for health insurance.
* With few employees, they lack the bargaining power of larger firms and pay as much as 18% more for the same health insurance as large companies.
* The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will provide tax credits to small businesses to help them continue to offer health insurance to their employees, or offer it for the first time.
* Small businesses will also benefit from the new health insurance exchanges, giving them a place to access quality, affordable health insurance options at large pool rates.
* Reducing health care spending will help small businesses by increasing employee take-home pay and saving approximately 80,000 jobs in the small business sector by 2019.
Myth: Health reform will cut Medicare benefits to pay for health insurance coverage for other Americans.
* The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will make our entire health care system more efficient, including Medicare.
* Without health care reform, Medicare will be insolvent by 2017.
* Medicare subsidizes private insurers with $12 billion in extra payments a year to provide the same services to Medicare beneficiaries. Equalizing these overpayments could save billions of dollars that can be used to improve Medicare for seniors.
* Reform actually increases benefits for Medicare beneficiaries. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act provides seniors with a free annual physicals and free preventive services, as well as decreases the cost of brand-name drugs for seniors in the “donut hole” coverage gap.
* In fact, the Senate recently voted 100-0 to insert a guarantee in the bill—in clear, straightforward language—that nothing in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act can cut benefits for Medicare beneficiaries.
Myth: Under health care reform federal funds will be used to provide abortions.
* No federal funds can be used for abortion under either the Senate or House of Representatives health care bill.
* The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act upholds current federal law that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions unless in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother is in danger.
* The bill requires that insurance plans in the exchange keep private premium dollars and federal subsidies completely separate.
Myth: Health reform will provide benefits to illegal immigrants.
* No federal funds will go towards providing undocumented individuals insurance benefits in either the Senate or House of Representatives health care bill.
* Only legal residents of the United States will receive premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Myth: Insurance premiums will go up with health care reform.
* The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that 6 in 10 Americans—most low- and middle-income families— will see cuts in their health insurance premiums with health care reform.
* A study recently released by an MIT economist concluded that Americans buying individual coverage after health care reform will pay less than they do for today's typical individual market coverage, and would be protected from high out-of-pocket costs.
* Currently, Americans pay an additional $1,100 a year, on average, in premiums due to the unpaid costs of care for the uninsured. Requiring that every American purchase insurance will eliminate this burden on family budgets.
Myth: Health reform is a “government takeover” of the health care system.
* Health reform protects existing coverage, and encourages employers to maintain it. It builds on the private insurance market; it doesn’t dismantle it.
* It provides Americans who are not satisfied with their current coverage increased options to make informed decisions about what type of coverage they need and how much they want to pay for it.
* The CBO estimates that the number of Americans who have private, commercial insurance will increase under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Myth: Tort reform would save a lot of money in the health care system.
* Medical malpractice claims represent only one-fifth of one percent of health care costs.
* 46 states already have some form of medical malpractice laws, and none have lowered health care costs.
Boston12GS| 8.19.10 @ 2:56PM
Very aptly named for that post--"BS"
Indeed, your post IS "BS".
Don't let me convince you, however---I don't really care to. We'll just let the American electorate vote on whether they buy into your pipe dream.
Good luck (not). :-)
LiveFreeOrDie| 8.19.10 @ 3:25PM
Care to provide a source for your BS?
John DuBose| 8.22.10 @ 11:55PM
I do not believe the assertion about claims being only 1/5 of 1%. That figure leaves out the cost of defensive medicine.
somnolence| 8.19.10 @ 2:12PM
BS you still haven't addressed the fact that millions of U.S. citizens will refuse to even pay the fine. If it was enforced (and I really have my doubts that it will be, thank God) our already overcrowded jails would burst, and real criminals, namely, murderers, thieves, child abusers, etc. would roam free. Even the citizens who would comply would be enraged by that action. You simply lose your argument at any constitutional angle that the government can make someone buy health insurance. I can't wait for the chaos and potential violence to start.
Boston12GS| 8.19.10 @ 2:52PM
Don't be silly.
They'll enforce it the same way the state enforces parking tickets or the IRS enforces any other underpayment of your taxes.
You won't be able to renew your driver's license or register your car. The IRS will garnish your wages, and hit you with massive penalties and fines (far in excess of your actual underpayment).
This is old hat to the feds, they're really good at this. You think you can just blow it off? Good luck to you. They're pros--you (and the rest of us citizens) are amateurs in comparison.
Boston12GS| 8.19.10 @ 2:49PM
I live in MA, the precursor to Obamacare, and my family health insurance policy has grown to $1,300 a month for a dad, mom and two minor children.
And THAT is only after a $4,000 a year deductible. So I get to pay more than $14,000 a year, plus another $4,000, before I get ANY meaningful healthcare coverage. So I pay nearly $20,000 a year before I get ANY coverage. If ONLY I could put that $20,000 a year aside each year to cover some catastrophic event.
And in case you're wondering, NO, there is no catastrophic healthcare coverage available in this state. In fact, if I DON'T carry comprehensive medical insurance in MA, I'm fined on my tax return. Just like ObamaCare.
Are the rest of you willing to pay that much?
Get ready to spread. It's coming your way. Enjoy.
somnolence| 8.19.10 @ 3:34PM
Mitt Romney can't run away from what it is he wrought in Massachusetts. The GOP had best put on its thinking cap between now and 2014.
somnolence| 8.19.10 @ 5:21PM
The point is many people will not have any wages to garnish and they will have already withdrawn their savings in order for it to be seized. I have never heard of the feds superseding the state in the case of not issuing a drivers license renewal. And as it appears now, with Missouri and Virginia speaking at the polls, leading the way, enforceability remains distant at best. Law enforcement and even the IRS will not want to indulge themselves with the hassle on the horizon. It is not worth bloodshed either way, and predictably, it is already an utter failure for anyone that knows how to add in simple mathematics. Vigilance be ever eternal.
somnolence| 8.19.10 @ 5:27PM
The feds are only "pros" because we, the citizens, allowed them to be. Throw out a really frightening resolve to them and they may think twice. This country was born by revolution; it occurred long before 1913 with the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and interpretation of the 16th Amendment. If millions withdraw their savings, refuse to pay, go to the ballot box, etc. we will prevail over this particular tyranny.
somnolence| 8.19.10 @ 6:28PM
Oh well, by 2014 my only income will be savings and my wife will be receiving Medicare- our tax liability won't be that much anyway. A day or two before I file I'll buy a policy (only if it is cheaper than the fine), then immediately cancel within 15-30 days later until the next year when I purchase another all the way up to the year of Medicare Part A for me. Knock on wood, at age 56 I don't even take aspirin, and haven't seen a doc in nearly 10 years.
Mary K. Washburn| 8.19.10 @ 6:58PM
I have a unique idea for reforming our health care system. Get the government as far away from it as possible, pass tort reform, demand judges drop frivilous lawsuits, and to back to the great health care system Obamacare was designed to destroy.
At a loss here....| 8.19.10 @ 10:12PM
Wow, MKW, can you tell me what planet you live on so I can get some of that great health care, and meet some of those judges who file lawsuits? You only drop of lawsuit if you file it. If you're a judge, however, you can dimiss a lawsuit. Just sayin'.
Fredrick Ward| 8.19.10 @ 7:00PM
Soon enough we should petition to change our country name to Soviet Union of America.
Anonymous| 8.20.10 @ 2:38AM
Left/libtards: Detroying America for social justice!
Michele San Pietro| 8.22.10 @ 5:43PM
Obamacare is simply a monstrosity that must be dismantled before it is too late.
Not Telling | 8.23.10 @ 3:32AM
This is what you Americans asked for, and what you got. So much for the "land of the free"
http://youareproperty.blogspot.....ed-it.html
Michele San Pietro| 8.23.10 @ 5:45PM
Americans sure didn't ask for such a monstrosity.
mwg| 8.26.10 @ 2:08PM
Unfortunately, Michele, a majority of Amerians did when they bought the "change" that was offered to them. They forgot to ask what kind of change it was. This is where the old saying "Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it" comes into play.