« Government Revisions To "Reality" | Main | Ronald Reagan Would Be Proud »

02/07/2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

BJ

I have a different take on it:

"Obama — What is absolutely true, I think, in this country, there's no reason why, if you get sick, you should go bankrupt."

Obama believes we should continue to feed the health care beast, regardless of cost. As a result, he is a huge supporter of corporate America. Dr. House admitted there are too many profit seeking hands in the pot, because many assume there is an unlimited amount of money available for health care, and the taxpayer will ultimately bailout the system (boy are they smoking something). I've never seen a cost projection for the final bill, but as of March 2010, the true cost of health care reform was projected to be $940 billion. Does anyone believe those costs wont be passed onto the poor, directly or indirectly? What impact will it have on the cost of labor, and as a result jobs? Do you really believe congress didn't leave a loophole or two in place for the wealthy to exploit, or that they can't create them before they have to start paying increased costs?

"The whole package will cost roughly $940 billion over 10 years to provide expanded insurance coverage, according to CBO. "

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/20/news/economy/cbo_reconciliation/index.htm

"The time to fix health care costs was 20 years ago."

This I agree with 100%, but Americans would never have supported the truth even back then. Many Americans, if not most, feel entitled to more and better health care than "they" personally can afford. That is why they insisted on health insurance, to spread the costs around. The problem now, we can't afford the premiums, so want the government, i.e. the taxpayer, to forcible inject even more money into the system. If as Obama has stated, everyone is entitled to unlimited health care, who is ultimately going to pay for all that care?

Many Americans operate under the assumption that there is an unlimited number of health care professionals, and they will be providing care for free. If you aren't paying for your health care, and neither is your neighbor, then who is? Yep, bring on some more of that government debt.

Interestingly enough, some of the foriegn health care systems some Americans have been idealizing are broke too, for the same reason, no one wants to pay for the health care they receive.

BJ

How did I manage to overlook this:

"Obama — Absolutely. Bill, I didn't raise taxes once. I lowered taxes over the last two years."

He didn't, then what is this?

"Increase the Medicare tax on high-income households:"

"The reconciliation bill, like the Senate bill that passed into law earlier this week, will raise the percentage paid by high-income individuals by 0.9 percentage points, so an individual would pay 2.35% on his wages."

Wow, Obama obviously has no clue about what he has been signing into law, but then, neither does congress.

Bill Sadler

Isn't the problem health insurance is tied to your employment? The 50% that own 2.5% account for most of that 30 million uninsured. Medicaid will get cut to pay for the deficits, so we will have a country where if you are poor or old, too bad.

The money paid by companies to provide health insurance is not fairy dust money. The cost of goods and services provided include the cost of that health insurance. So the objection to Obamacare is an objection to government paying the cost, not the cost. Government does not do things efficiently, but private insurance companies are strictly driven by costs, and the those costs are minimized by minimizing the amount of health care provided.

The huge amounts of money spent on health care is another discussion. We spend the most and have far from the best health care. So my concern is how to provide the best care for the lowest cost to everyone. The "best" care cannot be a CAT scan for a sore thumb for everyone, but there should be some definition of basic health care.

Loveandlight

The time to fix health care costs was 20 years ago.

I certainly agree that the time of which you speak was 20 years ago. When healthcare reform (as inadequate as "Hillarycare" was back in 1994) was sunk by the entrenched interests, I knew that the USA would never have a national health service such as the one enjoyed by the citizens of the UK. I've long felt that we should have just let the South go its way back in 1861. Good riddance to bad garbage! (Do you honestly think that enacting substantive healthcare reform would have been so difficult without the former CSA being part of our national polity?)

And I know damn well I'm as doomed as holy crap. I'm diabetic, and once I no longer have insurance to pay for diabetes-care, my days will be numbered as my blood sugar levels go up, up, and awa-a-a-ay! I am aware that it is not unusual for untreated diabetics to die of something known as a "silent heart attack", or a myocardial infarction with no obvious pain or other symptoms. I would consider that a very kind and merciful end.

Jason

Dave - Thanks for bringing us back to our bearings after an incredible superbowl featuring the wonderful Christina Aguilera and Jerry Jones' rock as hard field - makes you long for the good ole days of 1967 and the Ice Bowl (for some reason life seemed simpler, and we could just have a game at -15F and just be happy). Anyway...great post as usual. Keep em comin!

Loveandlight

PS: I feel sorry for those Democratic Party Kool-Aid-drinkers (what's so frustrating about them is that they're usually more than smart enough to know better) who think that "Obamacare" is substantive healthcare reform. The eagerness with which the Kostards guzzled the artificially-flavored sugar-water on that one drove home the realization that they're almost as much mental prisoners of the Box of which our illustrious blog-host speaks as the right-wing dittoheads (though the latter has a much more slavish devotion to every particular of the party line). The ditto-heads and teabaggers were in Orwellian rare form themselves in denouncing Obamacare as alternately Naziism or Stalinism (which of those two was it?) when the truth was Obamacare was originally Bob Dole's 1994 counter-proposal to "Hillarycare", only "Dolecare" (unless I'm sadly mistaken) included the public option!

The comments to this entry are closed.