Hate this steaming turd of a bill? Blame Bush

[DarrinS]

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/21/mad-about-obamacare-blame-bush





Despite an overwhelming public backlash and the likely political ramifications, Democrats cut deals and twisted arms and got the votes they needed, winning by a 219 to 212 margin. While the reconciliation process still remains, it’s a sideshow at this point. The United States is a presidential signature away from having national health care.

Suffice it to say, as somebody who has spent the past year working to expose the devastating consequences of this legislation and who values individual liberty, this is a sad day. And I’m working on a longer piece right now for tomorrow’s site about the ongoing fight against its provisions, which just got a lot harder. But as upset as I am, I can’t pin the blame entirely on Democrats.

The reason is that by passing this bill, liberal Democrats were just doing what liberal Democrats do – raising taxes and expanding the role of government in our lives. Liberals have been working for decades to impose national health care on America. It’s been their Holy Grail. It should have been apparent to everybody that once they took over Congress and the presidency that it would be their top domestic priority. All of the leading Democratic presidential candidates proposed health care plans roughly along the lines of what passed today.

The question conservatives should be asking though, is how did we get in this position in the first place? How come, over the course of two elections, Democrats were able to take back the White House and amass substantial majorities in both chambers of Congress, allowing them to enact this sweeping legislation with no Republican votes – and huge defections in their own party? How could a generally right-of-center nation be taken over by liberals from Chicago and San Francisco?

The answer, of course, is that none of this would have been possible without George W. Bush -- or more broadly speaking, Bush era Republicanism. While they were in power, Republicans squandered an opportunity to push free market health care solutions. When they did use their power to pass major legislation, it was for policies like the big government Medicare prescription drug plan, which was (until today) the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society. They took earmarks and doled out farm and energy subsidies. They earned a reputation for fiscal recklessness and corruption and incompetent governance. President Obama ultimately forced through the health care bill in spite of the political consequences to his party because he’s ultimately a true believing liberal. But it was only because of the failures of Bush-era Republicanism that an ideological liberal with little experience was able to capture the presidency on the abstract notion of change.

Today will be largely remembered as the biggest legislative victory for liberals since Medicare in 1965. But it should also be remembered as the day that Bush cemented his legacy as one of the most destructive presidents for advocates of limited government.

[boutons_deux]

"an overwhelming public backlash"

You Lie

[DarrinS]

"an overwhelming public backlash"

You Lie




People love this thing. You'll see in November.

[boutons_deux]

32M people with access to health care love this thing.

Heretofore uninsurable people with pre-existing conditions love this thing.

Magic Negro's proposal for immigration reform will be tough and fair. Latinos will love that thing.

Millions of jobs were saved by the stimulus. People love that thing.

You'll see in November, and in 2012.

[DarrinS]

Millions of jobs were saved by the stimulus. People love that thing.




:lmao

[Stringer_Bell]

Suuuure, blame Bush for the Republicans not being able to get things done NOW. It's not his fault he had to focus on critics attacking his foreign and domestic policy on terror (in addition to always being made fun of because he wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed), maybe then he'd have had time to work on free market solutions AND saving wall street. People act like he just sat there and did nothing...he was a war President and don't you forget it!

[boutons_deux]

Stringer_Bell, that's really excellent sarcastic humor and dubya/dickhead/Repug apologetics!

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[DarkReign]

32M people with access to health care love this thing.

Thats slightly more than 10% of the population...hardly worthy of America "loving this thing".

[boutons_deux]

That's 32M potential Dem voters.

[clambake]

Thats slightly more than 10% of the population...hardly worthy of America "loving this thing".

if they're required to "contribute" to the healthcare system, they'll likely stop abusing it.

[z0sa]

Can't say I'm pleased with our lawmakers

[SnakeBoy]

The answer, of course, is that none of this would have been possible without George W. Bush -- or more broadly speaking, Bush era Republicanism. While they were in power, Republicans squandered an opportunity to push free market health care solutions. When they did use their power to pass major legislation, it was for policies like the big government Medicare prescription drug plan, which was (until today) the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society. They took earmarks and doled out farm and energy subsidies. They earned a reputation for fiscal recklessness and corruption and incompetent governance.

Interesting that the author fails to mention the primary reason Democrats were able to build such large majorities....Iraq.

[florige]

Obama and the Dems just fullfilled a campaign promise and pretty much catered to the base. Alot of independents are either against it, or not sure wtf.

[jack sommerset]

People love this thing. You'll see in November.

Buttons is a troll. Everyone knows most americans hate this bill. Polls,town meetings, protest, marches and ELECTIONS(mass,virgina, nj).

[Cane]

But it should also be remembered as the day that Bush cemented his legacy as one of the most destructive presidents for advocates of limited government.

I think Bush cemented this legacy years ago. But yea, thanks to his administration the Republicans are at one of their lowest points in years and having Palin as a VP candidate sure doesn't help. The GOP has only been burying their image with negative publicity and nonsense; the kind of stuff that will shy away moderates.

[DMX7]

"Despite an overwhelming public backlash"... :lmao

[George Gervin's Afro]

Buttons is a troll. Everyone knows most americans hate this bill. Polls,town meetings, protest, marches and ELECTIONS(mass,virgina, nj).

still think it's not going to pass?:lmao

Tell us what's going to happen in November. I will bet money that whatever you predict will be 100% wrong.. like you have been during this whole process.

[jack sommerset]

still think it's not going to pass?:lmao

Tell us what's going to happen in November. I will bet money that whatever you predict will be 100% wrong.. like you have been during this whole process.

That's a lie. I said the bill would pass.

I predict you will be successful in life.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I think Bush cemented this legacy years ago. But yea, thanks to his administration the Republicans are at one of their lowest points in years and having Palin as a VP candidate sure doesn't help. The GOP has only been burying their image with negative publicity and nonsense; the kind of stuff that will shy away moderates.

Are you kidding? Palin is the Tea Party hero..they want her to run!

[Winehole23]

Interesting that the author fails to mention the primary reason Democrats were able to build such large majorities....Iraq.That's a blind spot for sure.

[boutons_deux]

"Thats slightly more than 10% of the population"

NRA's 3M gun nuts is 1% of the population ... absolutely not worthy of the power to intimidate politicians.

[boutons_deux]

"Everyone knows most americans hate this bill"

You Lie.

Repug/conservative lies about the health reform bill have misled and confused most Americans, who are disinterested dumfucks anyway.

When Americans are explained the various parts, they are majoritarily for them.

Thanks to the Repugs and the corps, there's lots to dislike, even hate, in this bill, but there's plenty of good stuff. The bad shit will be beat down later.

[Spurminator]

Most of the people who hate this thing are just following the party line.

I'm not saying there aren't reasons to dislike it, just that I don't believe most people understand those reasons, and once they start getting free shit, they will (as always) refuse to give it back. There's a reason everyone says this will never be overturned.

[jack sommerset]

"Everyone knows most americans hate this bill"

You Lie.

Repug/conservative lies about the health reform bill have misled and confused most Americans, who are disinterested dumfucks anyway.

When Americans are explained the various parts, they are majoritarily for them.

Thanks to the Repugs and the corps, there's lots to dislike, even hate, in this bill, but there's plenty of good stuff. The bad shit will be beat down later.

Try to be a good troll. You ignore what I said, polls,town meetings, protest, marches, elections (NJ, VA and Mass) and all you say is "you lie". Try a little harder. You will get more attention that way.

[jack sommerset]

Most of the people who hate this thing are just following the party line.

I'm not saying there aren't reasons to dislike it, just that I don't believe most people understand those reasons, and once they start getting free shit, they will (as always) refuse to give it back. There's a reason everyone says this will never be overturned.

I am a independent and hate this thing. Everyone does not say this will never be overturned. It ain't free, brother! Not for most people.

[MiamiHeat]

I am independent and I hate this shitty bill

Why the fuck do they think they have a right to FORCE ME TO BUY SOMETHING JUST FOR BEING ALIVE?

CAR INSURANCE = IF I WANT TO DRIVE. DON'T WANT TO DRIVE? No need for insurance

but being ALIVE = PAY up or be fined?

How the fuck does this make any sense?

and if I don't pay into the system, I GET FINED AND POSSIBLE JAIL TIME?

FUCING EXTORTION

PAY UP OR YOU WILL BE PROSECUTED AND FINED???

FUCK THIS SHITTY BILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will support any peoples who go appeal this piece of shit Obama bill and fight this mandate to buy insurance

[whottt]

Most of the people who hate this thing are just following the party line.

No I imagine most of the people that hate the thing hate it because they are going broke.

Seriously, I can tell you make a very good income by the fact that you are completely removed from this facet of our current reality.




I'm not saying there aren't reasons to dislike it, just that I don't believe most people understand those reasons, and once they start getting free shit, they will (as always) refuse to give it back.

Oh sure they do. They know very well who is going to feel the financial impact of this the most, and it's not going to be the wealthy, and it's not going to be the poor. It's going to be the people barely keeping their heads above water that feel it. They don't have $700 dollars a year to pay for some assholes health care.

They really don't have the money to pay it when the cost of everything else is rising, when credit card companies and the banking industry are raping people through direct business as well as taxes, when taxes are being added to cokes, and the price of food is rising, when unemplyment is rising and gas prices are rising.

The are 2 very detached segments of our poulation, that dont think things are much different than they have ever been before, the very rich, and the very poor.


And you are right people are going to take advantage of this, because every one is going to be trying to get theirs. It's not so much that people want it, as it is they want to get their moneys worth.

That is also why it is going to be quickly fucked up. Because people are going to use it if it is there, they are going to use every bit of it.






There's a reason everyone says this will never be overturned.

False. This is going to be a contentious issue even moreseo than Iraq was. I can't think of a single time in my lifetime that one party so totally imposed it's will upon the other, and there will be reprecussions from it.

Not a single Republican voted for this bill. It was totally imposed by the Democrats.

That is not true of any civil rights legislation.
That is not true of any medicare or medicaid or any other types of welfare legislation.
It's not true of the Iraq War.


This is not business as usual.


It's one party completely imposing it's will upon the other, and I know everybody thinks it's over and done and now and the Republicans just to accept it and move on...and you need to remember those words, because when the Republicans get back in power gthey are going to be saying them a lot. And there is a not a single thing any Democrat will ever be able to say in oppisition and not be considered a total hypocrite.

This is only going to increase the partisanship in our politics. That wasn't really needed it at this point.

[SnakeBoy]

That's 32M potential Dem voters.

Doubtful, I would venture to guess most of those are politically irrelevant. 40%+ of the population doesn't bother to vote in presidential years, 60%+ in non presidential election years. November will be about whose base is more motivated. Will it be those who think this bill sucks but it's better than nothing or those who think armageddon is upon us?

[ploto]

The funny thing-Republicans have harped on Obama claiming he has not fulfilled his promises, but his biggest promise was health care reform. Now, they are pissed that he did it. He ran on this premise and he won, so why should he not get to pass his legislation? That is how it works. I admire his willingness to do it, even if it threatens his future election.

[ploto]

Not a single Republican voted for this bill. It was totally imposed by the Democrats.

Does that not more properly point to the partisanship of the Republicans?

[whottt]

Does that not more properly point to the partisanship of the Republicans?

The Republicans aren't the ones that just forced the entire country to accept their agenda. The Democrats are the ones that did that.

It's a historic first. One party passing legislation that will affect the lives of every American, while the other party unanimously opposed it.

And if I am this pissed off and I am likely to not have to pay a dime for it...you can imagine how the people that are barely staying above water as it is are feeling. And for a lot of Americans, like myself, health insurance is not a necessity.


I don't want any healthcare that isn't catastrophic, and I don't want their fucking pills either.

You guys don't give a shit about bipartisanship, you give a shit about who just pwnt who. Remember that when the other shoe drops and it will drop unless you guys make it illegal to be Republican, which isn't out of the realm of possibility given the current climate of this country.

Just be sure to remember it was the Democrats that did it first.

[Spurminator]

No I imagine most of the people that hate the thing hate it because they are going broke.

I really don't think there are a lot of people who understand how this affects them in the least.

For example, the majority of the protesters on Obama's tax increase last year actually saw a reduction in their taxes. But they were told they should be mad about it and they'd be taxed to all hell, so they were mad about it.


Seriously, I can tell you make a very good income by the fact that you are completely removed from this facet of our current reality.

Not really. I don't make enough that my capital gains will be taxed to pay for this. I do make enough that it won't be subsidized for me, but that's fine. I have health insurance and will continue to have it past 2014 when this thing goes into full effect.

And I'm not convinced that my premiums will increase as a result of 32MM new buyers in the market for health insurance. If anything I could see this resulting in some pretty good deals offered by companies looking to attract customers. Competition and all. But I could be wrong, we'll see.


Oh sure they do. They know very well who is going to feel the financial impact of this the most, and it's not going to be the wealthy, and it's not going to be the poor. It's going to be the people barely keeping their heads above water that feel it. They don't have $700 dollars a year to pay for some assholes health care.

Depending on how poor they are, they may not have to pay for it at all.

I'm not a big fan of government-mandated expenditures towards companies but I'm also doubtful that anyone will go broke paying for it, because of the subsidies included in the bill. 4x the poverty level is a pretty healthy income when you look at average household incomes.


And you are right people are going to take advantage of this, because every one is going to be trying to get theirs. It's not so much that people want it, as it is they want to get their moneys worth.

That is also why it is going to be quickly fucked up. Because people are going to use it if it is there, they are going to use every bit of it.

We'll see. Guess it depends on whether the experience is as miserable as some expect it to be.



False. This is going to be a contentious issue even moreseo than Iraq was. I can't think of a single time in my lifetime that one party so totally imposed it's will upon the other, and there will be reprecussions from it.

Not a single Republican voted for this bill. It was totally imposed by the Democrats.

That is not true of any civil rights legislation.
That is not true of any medicare or medicaid or any other types of welfare legislation.
It's not true of the Iraq War.

This is not business as usual.

It's one party completely imposing it's will upon the other, and I know everybody thinks it's over and done and now and the Republicans just to accept it and move on...and you need to remember those words, because when the Republicans get back in power gthey are going to be saying them a lot. And there is a not a single thing any Democrat will ever be able to say in oppisition and not be considered a total hypocrite.

Hey, if the Republicans can get the public on board with giving it all back, more power to them. It would be historically unprecedented, but what the hell?

I see the Republican's unanimous opposition as a political certainty. They knew the vote count before the vote. There was no political benefit to voting in favor of the bill.

I also believe this is why there were as many Democrats in opposition as there were. It gives the Dems a sort of buffer in case voters decide to oust the proponents of this bill in November. Not sure how many of those 34 seats are up for election but I bet they're safe now.


This is only going to increase the partisanship in our politics. That wasn't really needed it at this point.

It's going to increase the partisan bickering, but bipartisanship in politics is long dead.

[Winehole23]

Solid take, Spurminator. :tu

[Marcus Bryant]

It's not just that Bush set the stage through certain unpopular acts which turned the electorate against the GOP, but rather that he set it philosophically. Is it really that big of a "change" from the largest expansion of an entitlement program in the Medicare drugs benefit and the most recently created entitlement program? Bush and Rove bet on a new demarcation in national politics, drawn largely by social issues, and generally agnostic to hostile to limitations on the growth in scale and scope of the federal government when it suited the creation of a purported new conservative majority.

[whottt]

I really don't think there are a lot of people who understand how this affects them in the least.

For example, the majority of the protesters on Obama's tax increase last year actually saw a reduction in their taxes. But they were told they should be mad about it and they'd be taxed to all hell, so they were mad about it.

A tax raise on the very wealthy is a cost of living raise on the non-poor. One way or the other. You oversimplify and generalize what they were bitching about, not all the people bitching qualified. I just don't think you really understand that taxing the rich raises the cost of living and discourages job growth and investnment.

I am not wholly against fucking the rich, in fact I quite like it in certain situations, but there is a time and a place to do it though.




Not really. I don't make enough that my capital gains will be taxed to pay for this. I do make enough that it won't be subsidized for me, but that's fine. I have health insurance and will continue to have it past 2014 when this thing goes into full effect.

Sure you will...I already said you aren't going to be impacted by this, that's why it doesn't bother you.




And I'm not convinced that my premiums will increase as a result of 32MM new buyers in the market for health insurance.

Yeah but you already have insurance anyway. Of course it's not going to affect you. What about the people that don't have it and are going to be in the penalty if they don't pay for it?

What about the people that lose their jobs because their employers don't want to pay this?



If anything I could see this resulting in some pretty good deals offered by companies looking to attract customers. Competition and all. But I could be wrong, we'll see.

It's going to devolve into a quality vs quantity situation. The government healthcare programs will continue to exploited and inefficient, and the rich people will still have viable alternatives that are much better. Basically exactly like it is now only the insurance companies are going to be much wealtheir now. Yay for them.




Depending on how poor they are, they may not have to pay for it at all.

I agree. In fact it's pretty much already better to be poor in this country than it is to be middle class. Basically the poor and the rich live better than anyone, the rich just have bigger houses.

That's why I myself an not particularly concerned with increasing my income. I like to call it romantically poor. And I don't even avail myself of government programs.




I'm not a big fan of government-mandated expenditures towards companies but I'm also doubtful that anyone will go broke paying for it, because of the subsidies included in the bill. 4x the poverty level is a pretty healthy income when you look at average household incomes.

And that's where I question just how in touch you are with this...they won't go broke paying for it? They are already going broke and this is just fuel on the fire.




We'll see. Guess it depends on whether the experience is as miserable as some expect it to be.

You notice you are one of the more cheerful and well balanced people on this forum right?

Paying 30% interest rates=miserable
Paying $10 for a movie=miserable
Auto insurance has always been miserable, that's why they had to make it mandatory. IF it wasn't miserable everyone would have rejoiced at the prospect of buying it.




Hey, if the Republicans can get the public on board with giving it all back, more power to them. It would be historically unprecedented, but what the hell?

I see the Republican's unanimous opposition as a political certainty. They knew the vote count before the vote. There was no political benefit to voting in favor of the bill.

Depends on the Republican...I'd say you are right in most cases, they don't particularly care about this bill. That said, they weren't the ones that imposed it. IT is wholly and unilaterally the Democrats that did that.

[clambake]

i remember a time when you needed healthcare.

[whottt]

No you don't. You remember a time when the cost of medical care was already artificially inflated due to insurance companies. The supplies used cost about $100 to buy for general purposes. :tu


Why do I get the feleling most Democrats were right there with Patrick Ewing when he said, sure we make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money.

Because the medical profession, laywers and the insurance companies want the cost of medical care to be outrageous, let's go ahead and make paying for insurance mandatory. That'll teach 'em a fucking lesson :tu

[Spurminator]

A tax raise on the very wealthy is a cost of living raise on the non-poor. One way or the other. You oversimplify and generalize what they were bitching about, not all the people bitching qualified. I just don't think you really understand that taxing the rich raises the cost of living and discourages job growth and investnment.

I am not wholly against fucking the rich, in fact I quite like it in certain situations, but there is a time and a place to do it though.

I mean correct me if I'm wrong but the only actual tax on individuals/households in this thing is a 0.9% increase on capital gains by HH's making $250K and individuals making $200K.

If that's going to freak the rich out then, yeah, fuck them. Job growth will grow once they figure out they need more staff to perform the work that needs to be done for them to make profit, and investment will continue because it still makes you more money than keeping stacks of money under the mattress.

It's very easy to stay rich in this country. All you have to do in order to make money is, well, have a lot of money. Put it in investments, check your portfolio, and watch your money grow. Just check the news every once in a while. I'm not gonna go all Tea Party on a 1% increase to taxes on money made that way.

If there's any time and place to fuck the rich, I think this qualifies. They'll still get the other 97.2% of the gains on their Berkshire Hathaway shares.

Hell, I say raise capital gains taxes to 10% and end world hunger.



Yeah but you already have insurance anyway. Of course it's not going to affect you. What about the people that don't have it and are going to be in the penalty if they don't pay for it?

It makes me a little uneasy from a philosophical standpoint. On the other hand, you could see it as just another form of tax. Except here it's going directly towards your own health coverage, and you can choose where it goes and how much to pay for it. So in some ways it's preferable to a tax.

Like I said, I doubt anyone will go broke paying for this because of the subsidies in place. And it's not funding something that's going to harm them. So beyond the philosophical hesitation I have about government mandating participation in insurance, in the end I don't see a lot of adverse affects.


And that's where I question just how in touch you are with this...they won't go broke paying for it? They are already going broke and this is just fuel on the fire.

How? If they're broke they don't have to pay anything, and now they get "free" health care they couldn't afford before.



You notice you are one of the more cheerful and well balanced people on this forum right?

Paying 30% interest rates=miserable
Paying $10 for a movie=miserable
Auto insurance has always been miserable, that's why they had to make it mandatory. IF it wasn't miserable everyone would have rejoiced at the prospect of buying it.

I hope people who are paying for it do use it. It would do them some good, and the rest of us too. But while I'm sure there will be long waits in the beginning, I don't see people continuing to go in to wait hours for unnecessary treatment.

[exstatic]

I am independent and I hate this shitty bill

Why the fuck do they think they have a right to FORCE ME TO BUY SOMETHING JUST FOR BEING ALIVE?

CAR INSURANCE = IF I WANT TO DRIVE. DON'T WANT TO DRIVE? No need for insurance

but being ALIVE = PAY up or be fined?

How the fuck does this make any sense?

and if I don't pay into the system, I GET FINED AND POSSIBLE JAIL TIME?

FUCING EXTORTION

PAY UP OR YOU WILL BE PROSECUTED AND FINED???

FUCK THIS SHITTY BILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will support any peoples who go appeal this piece of shit Obama bill and fight this mandate to buy insurance

It's asshats like you without insurance who have to go to the Emergency Room for any issues that caused the Govt to ALREADY be paying 47% of health care dollars BEFORE this bill even passed. Who do you think picks up that $150 minimum tab when you can't pay?

[mavs>spurs2]

whottt you're an idiot quit trying to argue politics, you're wrong buddy

ps :lmao @ u crying to kori like a little baby hairless puss

[Wild Cobra]

That's 32M potential Dem voters.
Sure, if the 20 million illegals from them vote illegally...

[whottt]

whottt you're an idiot quit trying to argue politics, you're wrong buddy

ps :lmao @ u crying to kori like a little baby hairless puss

I never said a word to Kori about it. I just asked in the tech forum how to cut someone off your profile that you don't want there. And yes, I didn't want you there, because it was a contest of wills. That doesn't make me a pussy, it makes you obnoxious and a loser.

The funny is thing is you gave up your nuts to Kori awfully easy for someone intent on not leaving my page. Talking a lot of shit about it in fact.

If you weren't a pussy you would have taken a banning over it. As it was, she didn't even have to go beyond asking you nicely.

Never call anyone a pussy again.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I will hold judgement until I hear MannyIsGod's take on this bill.

Theres so much wrong information out there I don't know what to believe until he sets the record straight.

[21_Blessings]

Suuuure, blame Bush for the Republicans not being able to get things done NOW. It's not his fault he had to focus on critics attacking his foreign and domestic policy on terror (in addition to always being made fun of because he wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed), maybe then he'd have had time to work on free market solutions AND saving wall street. People act like he just sat there and did nothing...he was a war President and don't you forget it!

Bush did sit there and do pretty much do nothing other than look like a guy you'd pound a beer with. Cheney was the brains behind the Imperialistic policy.

[Winehole23]

http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/war/empire2a.jpg

[whottt]

I mean correct me if I'm wrong but the only actual tax on individuals/households in this thing is a 0.9% increase on capital gains by HH's making $250K and individuals making $200K.

Um...I don't know what you consider that whole 2.5% annual income on uninsured families to be but it's either that or pay for the care. Tell me something, if it's not big deal then why in the hell is there a fee?


I don't see anything about what income level determines payment. I am assuming like you do that the poverty level is the line. I'm really going to be pissed if I find out I have to pay for this crap.

You refer to the costs on medicare expansion...not the same.




If that's going to freak the rich out then, yeah, fuck them. Job growth will grow once they figure out they need more staff to perform the work that needs to be done for them to make profit, and investment will continue because it still makes you more money than keeping stacks of money under the mattress.

I don't think it's particularly going to freak them out. But one of my jobs is at UT and they have thousand of emplyees that totally dick over in every way imaginable(UT is manned by all the Republicans in Austin) I can tell you right now they are not ging to pay fucking insurance for these people.



It's very easy to stay rich in this country. All you have to do in order to make money is, well, have a lot of money. Put it in investments, check your portfolio, and watch your money grow. Just check the news every once in a while. I'm not gonna go all Tea Party on a 1% increase to taxes on money made that way.

So it appears from your perspective.




If there's any time and place to fuck the rich, I think this qualifies. They'll still get the other 97.2% of the gains on their Berkshire Hathaway shares.

Except we aren't fucking the rich really. We're making them richer, and the ones we aren't are just going to do a little downsizing.




Hell, I say raise capital gains taxes to 10% and end world hunger.

Wouldn't happen, we are biologically programmed to expand to fill any vacum. That's why there are 6 billion of us, precious resource that we are, now.

The way to end hunger is for us to get smarter. Evolve beyond our biological programming. It has nothing to do with money or insurance. Good luck with that.





It makes me a little uneasy from a philosophical standpoint. On the other hand, you could see it as just another form of tax. Except here it's going directly towards your own health coverage, and you can choose where it goes and how much to pay for it. So in some ways it's preferable to a tax.

Like I said, I doubt anyone will go broke paying for this because of the subsidies in place. And it's not funding something that's going to harm them. So beyond the philosophical hesitation I have about government mandating participation in insurance, in the end I don't see a lot of adverse affects.



How? If they're broke they don't have to pay anything, and now they get "free" health care they couldn't afford before.



I hope people who are paying for it do use it. It would do them some good, and the rest of us too. But while I'm sure there will be long waits in the beginning, I don't see people continuing to go in to wait hours for unnecessary treatment.


I don't have a doubt people are going to use it Spurm. Not a doubt. I also do not have a doubt it is going to be inefficient and exploited.

IF the government can't even run it's existing programs I don't know why you think are going to succeed with this monster.

Tell me, why do you think it's going to be different?

Do you think attorney's are suddenly going to stop viewing PI as a viable source of incrome?

Do you think corrupt people that already defraud our existing systems are going to suddenly stop being corrupt?

Do you think Doctors, Pharmaceuticals and medical engineering companies are all of a sudden going to decide they have enough money? Especially when there is so much of it right in front of their eyes?

And if they don't get it, you think the politicians aren't going to? Pick your party.

[mavs>spurs2]

I never said a word to Kori about it. I just asked in the tech forum how to cut someone off your profile that you don't want there. And yes, I didn't want you there, because it was a contest of wills. That doesn't make me a pussy, it makes you obnoxious and a loser.

The funny is thing is you gave up your nuts to Kori awfully easy for someone intent on not leaving my page. Talking a lot of shit about it in fact.

If you weren't a pussy you would have taken a banning over it. As it was, she didn't even have to go beyond asking you nicely.

Never call anyone a pussy again.

No, you didn't, Kori was all over that shit like a mother bear protecting her little cubs. You cried to her, because you were getting pissed off. I've already been banned a while back and don't feel like doing it again just yet. Not my fault you failed at life, im just here to point it out.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There is a board being created to oversee insurance premium hikes and they are forcing transparency in insurance balance sheets and actuarial information. They are mandating 75% of all gross premium revenue be actually spent on medical claims. The current average 60% or so.

The above is exactly the reason why I keep mentioning the same system set up for P&C policies because it is empirical evidence of the above working.

I really wish people would actually discuss specifics instead of just blindly crying about socialism, corporate overlords and fearmongering about nonexistent future legislation.

[whottt]

There is a board being created to oversee insurance premium hikes and they are forcing transparency in insurance balance sheets and actuarial information. They are mandating 75% of all gross premium revenue be actually spent on medical claims. The current average 60% or so.

The above is exactly the reason why I keep mentioning the same system set up for P&C policies because it is empirical evidence of the above working.

I really wish people would actually discuss specifics instead of just blindly crying about socialism, corporate overlords and fearmongering about nonexistent future legislation.

I just want to be clear on this, you are an insurance agent, correct?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I just want to be clear on this, you are an insurance agent, correct?

not anymore.

[whottt]

Ok well in that case. The existing government insurance plans for the poor and needy already do not work as they are supposed to. It's doesn't take a genius to see this, and in my case I have worked in a field that collected debt from people who were supposed to be covered by medicare, medicaid and champus. This is not a lie on my part, there was an entire credit bureau devoted to collecting these debts. And you could make a hell of a lot of money doing it if if you were any good at it.

It's not that hard to go look at the recent articles in the statesmen and see the phsyciatrist that got popped for raping the medicare system for nearly a million dollars in just about 4 years. There is an entire division of local government soley devoted to this sort of fraud. Why do you suppose they need a division devoted to prosecuting individuals defrauding the system if is something that happens on a limited scale?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ok well in that case. The existing government insurance plans for the poor and needy already do not work as they are supposed to. It's doesn't take a genius to see this, and in my case I have worked in a field that collected debt from people who were supposed to be covered by medicare, medicaid and champus. This is not a lie on my part, there was an entire credit bureau devoted to collecting these debts. And you could make a hell of a lot of money doing it if if you were any good at it.

It's not that hard to go look at the recent articles in the statesmen and see the phsyciatrist that got popped for raping the medicare system for nearly a million dollars in just about 4 years. There is an entire division of local government soley devoted to this sort of fraud. Why do you suppose they need a division devoted to prosecuting individuals defrauding the system if is something that happens on a limited scale?

They are expanding medicaid and thats about it other than the prescription drug benefits of senior citizens. The vast majority of the legislation had nothing to do with the government run insurance programs.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Its like you have no idea what was actually passed.

Fine medicare is prone to corruption. I would argue that its still more efficient in distributing care than the private insurerers but that is neither here nor there because the bill does not increase access to medicare.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Under the bill, insurers would have to submit proposed premium increases for review by the appropriate state authority or the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. If any increases were deemed unreasonable and unjustified, the insurer would have to lower premiums, provide rebates or take other appropriate actions. In addition, the bill would create a new Health Insurance Rate Authority to provide federal oversight of rates, as well as helping states determine enforcement measures and techniques for monitoring market behavior. The rate board, which would include consumer representatives, insurance and healthcare representatives, and economists, would likely set annual parameters for rate increases.

www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/feds-seek-oversight-insurers-rate-increases/2010-02-22#ixzz0iykr8clE

[whottt]

They are expanding medicaid and thats about it other than the prescription drug benefits of senior citizens. The vast majority of the legislation had nothing to do with the government run insurance programs.

The government is fucking running the insurance industry. How hard is this shit to see? Geezus.

And you mean aside from that cap gains tax, law making it mandatory, and that fee that can add up for 2.5% of your income if you do not give them(the insurance companies) your money.



This is exactly what I am talking about. Its like you have no idea what was actually passed.

I know what was passed, it's not like it's exclusive knowledge. You just don't think the shit is important that I think it important. You keep telling yourself I don't know what I am talking about, it's not going to make you forcing people to buy insurance a good thing, it makes you an asshole telling other people how to live their lives. You don't understand it now but you will once that dictation is made to you on something you don't like.



Fine medicare is prone to corruption.
If I said medicare I meantmedicaid.

And you miss the point...it's that people are prone to corruption. Especially when there are huge finances involved. And the bigger the finances involved, the more corrupt people are going to be interested.


I would argue that its still more efficient in distributing care than the private insurerers but that is neither here nor there because the bill does not increase access to medicare.

Medicaid...whatever. And you think it's efficient because you haven't seen the numbers of people fucked over by it. The irony is you think the government that routinely failed to cover these people because of it's own bottomline is all of a sudden going to start getting ethical with these mutibillion dollar entities it is in bed with.

Why don't you fucking talk the details with an insurance agent if you are looking for a detailed conversation. Be sure and get back to me on how many of them are upset bout this. I know I know...it's because they are good human beings that want to help the needy :tu

[whottt]

You can lie all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is if this was such a great deal it wouldn't need to be mandated and imposed upon a significant portion of the population. The very rich and the very poor would simply go off by themselves and work things out...they wouldn't be dragging every fucking citizen of this country into it with them.

[Marcus Bryant]

You can lie all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is if this was such a great deal it wouldn't need to be mandated and imposed upon a significant portion of the population. The very rich and the very poor would simply go off by themselves and work things out...they wouldn't be dragging every fucking citizen of this country into it with them.

True, a much better point of compromise would be to provide direct assistance to those who need it rather than to regulate an industry to the point of de facto control.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You can lie all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is if this was such a great deal it wouldn't need to be mandated and imposed upon a significant portion of the population. The very rich and the very poor would simply go off by themselves and work things out...they wouldn't be dragging every fucking citizen of this country into it with them.

Jesus fucking christ. What am I lying about?

Its like your putting your hands over your ears and acreaming "LALALALALALALA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

I mean shit there is even an antifraud contingent to the bill.

Its funny you guys don't even know whats in it other than a few buzzwords that the press gives you.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

True, a much better point of compromise would be to provide direct assistance to those who need it rather than to regulate an industry to the point of de facto control.

The do that too.

Anyway, philisophically, I think your stance is naive. There are emperical examples of your ideals and that would be the American East and midwest circa 1875.

Health care is not a self correcting market any more than water is. I persoanlly like what Teddy Roosevelt did. Hes a personal hero of mine.

[Marcus Bryant]

Sure he is. Medicare care is not a "self-correcting" market as it is highly regulated and distorted by government interventions at multiple levels. And there is no comparison to water use and access.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Sure he is. Medicare care is not a "self-correcting" market as it is highly regulated and distorted by government interventions at multiple levels. And there is no comparison to water use and access.

Water is even more regulated than health care its not even funny. Or did you miss that part?

I think this is a better question. Do you think that there are no markets that do not self correct?

[Marcus Bryant]

Very few, and close to none in the long run. And there are plenty of regs in health care that distort the market and lead to rising cost, and not just on the insurance side. One obvious one is the Nixon era restriction on hospitals in local communities, favored, of course, by existing hospitals.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Very few, and close to none in the long run. And there are plenty of regs in health care that distort the market and lead to rising cost, and not just on the insurance side. One obvious one is the Nixon era restriction on hospitals in local communities, favored, of course, by existing hospitals.

We have differences at the base philosophical level.

[fyatuk]

It's asshats like you without insurance who have to go to the Emergency Room for any issues that caused the Govt to ALREADY be paying 47% of health care dollars BEFORE this bill even passed. Who do you think picks up that $150 minimum tab when you can't pay?

Stop generalizing. Some of us don't carry insurance because we wouldn't use it anyway.

I had health insurance for one year before I needed to cut it to be able to afford expenses. I never used it.

In the last 15 years, my total medical bills has been.... $600. All paid out of pocket.

There were ways to fix this shit without adding compulsory insurance. And no way compulsory insurance should be done with private companies. Amounts to a government subsidy of them.

[boutons_deux]

"were ways to fix this shit without adding compulsory insurance"

which are?

[fyatuk]

"were ways to fix this shit without adding compulsory insurance"

which are?

Oh, doing things to actually reduce base costs such as loan forgiveness and increased grants for Md, RN, and NP programs. Tax credits for keeping equipment up to date.

Open up more avenues for hospitals to recover unpaid ER bills. Also, a small tax increase to help fund ERs.

Require employers of a certain size (based on number of employees, I haven't looked to see what a good number is) to contribute to employees health care plan without providing them. Aka, employee can choose what he wants the the employer pays his share towards it.

And on a state level do the exhange to allow individuals to purchase plans at group plan rates.

Not allow insurance to cancel policies for risks that are discovered during their policy period.

Support clinics like Texas MedClinic for non-immediately-life-threatening conditions. These kinds of clinics are often significantly cheaper than the emergency room, and can usually work with patient financing.

Improve HSA's and catastrophic insurance as an alternative to current managed-health style insurance plans.

Lots of things they could have done that would have had a big impact.

Also, if you're going to do compulsory insurance, you MUST have a government owned risk pool. At least in my opinion. Leaving compulsory insurance in the hands of private businesses while just regulating their rates is utter crap.

And yes, I think the same with auto insurance, and that annoys me too. At least they don't require full coverage on auto insurance. Meanwhile, they want to require full insurance for health. Wouldn't be so bad a pill to swallow if they just mandated catastrphic coverage.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

One thing that I notice is a lot of concentration on the first person viewpoint.

"I don't use health insurance."
"I don't need auto liability coverage."

You cannot look at things like that as a policy maker in my opinion.

The reason why they mandated compulsory auto insurance was because in the early twentieth century, people were getting screwed by people not having anyway to have their liability paid for. People were injured maimed and whatnot because they didn't have health coverage and those that hit them could not pay.

The answer was to make everyone have liability insurance and then put in a system to review insurance premiums to control costs. Thats what we have here and the same exact arguments were put forth 100 years ago are being used here.

[Yonivore]

One thing that I notice is a lot of concentration on the first person viewpoint.

"I don't use health insurance."
"I don't need auto liability coverage."

You cannot look at things like that as a policy maker in my opinion.

The reason why they mandated compulsory auto insurance was because in the early twentieth century, people were getting screwed by people not having anyway to have their liability paid for. People were injured maimed and whatnot because they didn't have health coverage and those that hit them could not pay.

The answer was to make everyone have liability insurance and then put in a system to review insurance premiums to control costs. Thats what we have here and the same exact arguments were put forth 100 years ago are being used here.
Except that it doesn't work with liability insurance either. The vast majority of people responsible for urban traffic accident STILL don't have liability insurance.

All you have is a bunch of people compelled to buy insurance they rarely use. I've never been in an accident where I was found at fault but, I've been hit twice by people without insurance.

[whottt]

Fuzzy tell me something...as a former Insurance Agent...which clients did the insurance generally prefer more(as in which clients allowed them to stay in business and turn a profit)...healthy one or sickly ones?

Do you think this legislation has changed the motivations of insurance companies from one of profit to one of goodwill and altruism?


If the cost continues to go up, and there is definitely going to be an increase in insurance claims with everyone forced to have it, if they can't raise the fees on the poor and sickly, who do you think is going to end up footing the aditional costs, whether they have contributed to the rises or not?

Do you think that is anyway fair?

Just curious.



It seems to me a much, much cheaper solution, would simply be to provide medical education for free. To anyone seeking obtain it.



Not only would this increasse the number of doctors which would in turn lower the cost of medical care in the areas of supply in demand, it would also make the average person much more educated and knowledgable in terms of staying healthy. It would also keep profiteers out of a field which is a basic human right(:rollfuckingeyes) and would be more controlled by people genuinely wanting to help rather than those seeking to become rich.

And we'd never have a shortage of doctors either.

Not only that, but more minds involved in the medical field could only speed up advancements in medicine.



It would much cheaper and much more effective to simply make all forms of medical education free.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Except that it doesn't work with liability insurance either. The vast majority of people responsible for urban traffic accident STILL don't have liability insurance.

All you have is a bunch of people compelled to buy insurance they rarely use. I've never been in an accident where I was found at fault but, I've been hit twice by people without insurance.

I can make up shit too.

The vast majority of people think your full of shit.

:downspin: WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy tell me something...as a former Insurance Agent...which clients did the insurance generally prefer more(as in which clients allowed them to stay in business and turn a profit)...healthy one or sickly ones?

Do you think this legislation has changed the motivations of insurance companies from one of profit to one of goodwill and altruism?


If the cost continues to go up, and there is definitely going to be an increase in insurance claims with everyone forced to have it, if they can't raise the fees on the poor and sickly, who do you think is going to end up footing the aditional costs, whether they have contributed to the rises or not?

Do you think that is anyway fair?

Just curious.



It seems to me a much, much cheaper solution, would simply be to provide medical education for free. To anyone seeking obtain it.



Not only would this increasse the number of doctors which would in turn lower the cost of medical care in the areas of supply in demand, it would also make the average person much more educated and knowledgable in terms of staying healthy. It would also keep profiteers out of a field which is a basic human right(:rollfuckingeyes) and would be more controlled by people genuinely wanting to help rather than those seeking to become rich.

And we'd never have a shortage of doctors either.

Not only that, but more minds involved in the medical field could only speed up advancements in medicine.




It would much cheaper and much more effective to simply make all forms of medical education free.

Rhetorical question which s immaterial because they will no longer be able to ask on a application about one.

Of course they are profit motivated in a market with a vertical demand slope. Thats the whole point to needing controls.

The rest is a pretty pathetic strawman.

Were not even talking about socialized medicine but nevertheless you parrot the same nonsense.

[whottt]

Rhetorical question which s immaterial because they will no longer be able to ask on a application about one.

It's not a rhetorical question to the people who don't get sick or ill that will see rate increases.




The rest is a pretty pathetic strawman.

Were not even talking about socialized medicine but nevertheless you parrot the same nonsense.

The only nonsense is you seeming to think rates aren't ever going to rise, that they will spend money indefinitely on the extensively unhealthy :lol penalties will not be applied to the non-insured and that a government ordered mandate to buy insurance isn't socialized medicine.