Bloomberg poll shows majority opposition to ObamaCare

posted at 9:30 am on March 24, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

If Democrats felt heartened after yesterday’s Gallup poll showing a plurality of support for their new ObamaCare plan, Bloomberg’s survey should bring them back to Earth.  The survey asked over a thousand adults their opinions of the ObamaCare bill during and after its passage, and like almost every poll taken in the last several months, a majority of respondents opposed it.  Moreover, a majority also consider it a government takeover of the American health-care system:

Americans remain skeptical about the health-care overhaul even after the U.S. House passed landmark legislation that promises to provide access to medical coverage for tens of millions of the uninsured.

At the same time, most say the government should play a role in ensuring everyone has access to affordable care, a Bloomberg National Poll shows. A majority also agree that health care is a private matter and consider the new rules approved by Congress to be a government takeover. …

While more than six of 10 respondents agree the government should play a role in ensuring Americans have health care, 53 percent say the plan amounts to a government-run system. Yet six of 10 also say individuals should be responsible for making sure their health-care needs are met.

The truth is that Democrats have a tough road ahead with this bill.  Most of its benefits don’t kick in for years, but the taxes and fees start almost immediately.  Those will start impacting job creation and investment in an economy already failing to produce much of either.  The longer it takes for jobs to start getting created again, the more voters will link this to ObamaCare and the Democrats who insisted on passing it during a deep recession.

It also presents another problem for Democrats, which is that they will own every failure within the American health-care system from this point forward.  Had Republicans successfully blocked ObamaCare, they would have owned them, but now it all falls on the Democrats.  Every sob story now becomes either the fault of legislation that went too far or didn’t go far enough — and don’t think Democrats won’t use the latter to push ObamaCare into single-payer territory.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Obama’s plan is to put private insurance companies out of business. He and the rest of the Democrats have patently declared that to be their goal.

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

All this whining about Socialism (as if it’s a bad thing, by the way), because you’re being “forced” to buy health insurance, but most states “force” you to buy car insurance, and I haven’t heard you guys manning the barricades about that one, complaining that it’s a socialist takeover of your holy rights. What’s the difference? America is awash in socialism. The VA is a giant socialized health insurance racket. Anyone out there advocating taking away veterans health insurance because it’s “socialized medicine”? Didn’t think so…

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

How were people getting health care who could not afford it?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:20 AM

I worked in emergency rooms during grad school. My job was to either make folks pay before they left – if they could pay – or remind them they owed for the services they’d received. They were never turned away.

Come back sometime to comment when you know what you’re talking about.

AubieJon on March 24, 2010 at 10:24 AM

That would account for the difference in the Gallup and this poll.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM

Uhhh…yeah, genius. That’s pretty obvious at this point.

RepubChica on March 24, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Important to all: Keep in mind that the White House has been picking up “reporters” from the major networks for some time and, along with the top socialists from Organizing for America, they have created a West Wing force of commenters to inundate any posts anywhere that are damaging to The Won.

I routinely bring this up in comments at WAPO and watch how quiet they become. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Greyledge Gal on March 24, 2010 at 10:24 AM

How were people getting health care who could not afford it?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:20 AM

Do I really have to answer this?

Medicare, Medicaid, free clinics, and anyone who needs treatement gets it. Paying customers … and the tax payer pick up the tab.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Right now, the only thing that can stop them, are the governors of the states – and they have been remarkably silent. Where has Rick Perry been, where are the fine words he said during the teaparty?

Rebar on March 24, 2010 at 10:13 AM

They’re working on it – video.

Patience is a virtue.

VibrioCocci on March 24, 2010 at 10:25 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

How many times do people need to answer you? Go back up and read.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:26 AM

Do you know how Insurance Agents are paid? 85% revenue pay out will kill the industry.

I have to admit, I don’t know a whole lot about the insurance industry, but I do know stock in private insurance rose yesterday and I heard the president of CIGNA say people should not put their efforts into repealing this bill and should put their efforts into figuring out how to control costs in the future. He didn’t seem too worried (which is to say he didn’t seem worried at all) about going out of business.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:26 AM

Well pm123, so you’re trotting out the old car insurance argument again. No one makes you drive a car. My mother-in-law does not drive a car so… she doesn’t have to have car insurance. being an American citizen now means she would have to carry health insurance or face a fine and or jail. A bit of difference don’t you think.

sandee on March 24, 2010 at 10:26 AM

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

When it’s a matter of public safety and being able to recover damages in the case of an accident, the states are right to require auto insurance. Obamacare is completely different. This a redistribution of wealth, forcing the people who work and create jobs to pay for the people who don’t.

Go study history and educate yourself before posting, please.

AubieJon on March 24, 2010 at 10:27 AM

I worked in emergency rooms during grad school. My job was to either make folks pay before they left – if they could pay – or remind them they owed for the services they’d received. They were never turned away.

This is exactly why there had to be healthcare reform. People aren’t denied service in the emergency room because they can’t pay. But those costs still have to be paid for and they are a big reason why health insurance costs so much for the rest of us.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:16 AM

Do you know how the Health Insurance Industry operates, Tom? Do you know what a risk pool is? Do you know the difference between profit and loss? Do you know how Insurance Agents are paid? 85% revenue pay out will kill the industry.

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 10:20 AM

Kingjester, look at the materials I posted yesterday. The industry trade group and PWC say that the industry now pays out on average 87% of its revenue for claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Since you “know,” then you should have no problem showing me the source of that knowledge. Please either link to the language in the bill that dictates this or an analysis of the bill that says this.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:18 AM

I’m not doing your work for you. Find it yourself. It’s probably been linked several times in this thread already.

Secondly, since you obviously haven’t spent any time researching this and simply believe what the communists tell you … how do you know what you’re talking about?

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

How many times do people need to answer you? Go back up and read.

I have been reading and havent seen one answer to this question. Please repeat it.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Since the Democrats excoriated the Republicans for wanting to allow 45,000 people a year to die without insurance, can we NOW SAY:

The Democrats are killing 180,000 Americans because they didn’t immediately start health insurance for everyone?

If it was so critical, why didn’t they do that?

DEMOCRATS WANT 180,000 people to die!

originalpechanga on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

I’m not doing your work for you. Find it yourself. It’s probably been linked several times in this thread already.

No, that’s you’re job. You made the claim, it falls on you to back it up.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

That would account for the difference in the Gallup and this poll.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Uhhh…yeah, genius. That’s pretty obvious at this point.

RepubChica on March 24, 2010 at 10:24 AM

–If it was so obvious, why didn’t Ed or anyone else mention it?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Kingjester, look at the materials I posted yesterday. The industry trade group and PWC say that the industry now pays out on average 87% of its revenue for claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

That’s misleading. I’m sure a large paret of that is reserve for a flood of claims during an accident or disaster. If they paid out that much every year they’d go bankrupt.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:30 AM

Sandee: You’re also required to register for the draft, and pay taxes, and get a license to get married, and get a Social Security number to get a job – all examples of rampant socialism. Which are the things that are socialist/communist, and which are the things that are the price of living in a functioning democratic society? Will you refuse to collect Social Security when you retire, because it’s socialism? How many people who post here have ever cashed a Social Security check? Socialists!

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

I wonder if we can get a retraction from Tom Shipley. You have been beaten over the head with facts, so I would like to hear an apology to ED.

Howcome on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM

15% didn’t like it because it wasn’t liberal enough.

45% didn’t like it because it was too liberal.

cntrlfrk on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Most of its benefits don’t kick in for years, but the taxes and fees start almost immediately.

Speaking of taxes, I read on Riehl’s site that the HC bill is estimated to raise Florida’s Medicaid obligations from around $18 million now, to around $150 million in 2014, to over $1 billion by 2030. Where is all that money going to come from? Florida will either have to raise property taxes (on real estate values that are already in free-fall), or it will have to institute an income tax — and won’t that be popular! But hey, Barry won’t be running for any office again after 2014, so he won’t have to worry about it. He’s got his great historic “win” and that’s all that matters. The rest of you clinging rubes can figure out how to pay for it.

AZCoyote on March 24, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

I daresay there is not a single person on this board who is against healthcare reform.

Doesn’t mean we’re going to sit down and take the crap sandwich we’re being force-fed, simply because this is supposedly a form of healthcare reform.

lonesome_pine on March 24, 2010 at 10:32 AM

No, that’s you’re job. You made the claim, it falls on you to back it up.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Get bent. You come on here spewing the communist talking points and admit you haven’t seen either bill. You either justify your claims or stop commenting.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Medicare, Medicaid, free clinics, and anyone who needs treatement gets it.

Not everyone is eligible for Medicare and Medicaid (socialized medicine aahhhhhhhhhh!). Free clinics won’t treat cancer and other expensive illnesses.

And yes, people can’t afford care still get it. Or try to at least.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:33 AM

This is exactly why there had to be healthcare reform. People aren’t denied service in the emergency room because they can’t pay. But those costs still have to be paid for and they are a big reason why health insurance costs so much for the rest of us.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

So Obama’s theory is to make it worse on us by forcing us to pay – through our taxes – for those folks who routinely show up in emergency rooms with stomach aches because they don’t want to go to work and need a doctor’s excuse. That’s what it amounts to.

And if it’s such a freaking emergency, why does it not kick in now? Why does the “better healthcare” not begin now? This is one big money grab and you know it.

AubieJon on March 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM

FYI: Unscientific poll from the Fox News site (over the last several days):

Is health care bill a victory for America?
Yes. It’s not perfect, but it’s a giant step in the right direction. 49% (264,350 votes)

Unsure. I agree that the health insurance industry needs reform, but is this the answer? 3% (17,030 votes)

No. This is just a giant tax package wrapped in 2,700 pages stamped “health care reform.” 47% (252,945 votes)

Other (post a comment) 1% (5,464 votes)

Total Votes: 539,789
View Comments (50)
Return To PollShare This
PollDaddy.com

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

How many who support the Health Insurance Takeover have ever earned a check in a capitalist system?

Purchased a home with money earned from Capitalism?

Retired with money earned from Capitalism?

But, hey, lets throw all that out the window because Obama wants Socialism.

cntrlfrk on March 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 9:44 AM

What a marvelous job of cutting and pasting the email you got from Axlerod!

lovingmyUSA on March 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

This is really the defense you are going with? One day of market activity?

Bottom line is that we all know what the NeoComms plan is, and you know it as well but are being purposely obtuse.

We each have our sides, and there is no further debate required. I just wish we would split what was once America and be done with each other.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Do I really have to answer this?

Medicare, Medicaid, free clinics, and anyone who needs treatement gets it. Paying customers … and the tax payer pick up the tab.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Not to mention, most states have their own plans for affordable or gratis health care based on income, the fed aside. But the ognorants probably don’t know this, I’m sure.

RepubChica on March 24, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Will you refuse to collect Social Security when you retire, because it’s socialism? How many people who post here have ever cashed a Social Security check? Socialists!

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Did you miss the movement to privatize Social Security?

But no worries there, honey. I’m only 26 – by the time I retire, there won’t be a Social Security.

lonesome_pine on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

It’s not like buying a certificate of deposit. There’s no penalty for cashing out early.

Everybody in America was ordered to buy insurance, and the expanded benefits won’t kick in for years. These companies WILL pay their dividends for the next few years despite global recession. That makes them excellent short-term investments.

But when the death-spiral begins, and the general public starts maxxing out the office visits and small surgeries and chiropractic and counseling, and the insurers are on the hook for every terminal and chronic illness in America…then the bubble will burst and they’ll be dumped.

Chris_Balsz on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Private insurers stock rose because they will have more people to insure by mandate. They will also be able to raise premiums, as long as they are raised uniformly the way I read it (they can’t raise rates just one you because you have a pre-existing condition, but they can raise them on all on their books every year if they so choose). And, as it stands now, they will have the enforcement of the US government if everyone who can enter the “system” doesn’t, ensuring payment of premiums. A person would be dumb not to invest in something that is that guaranteed a high return. And we thought the Mafia was bad…..

It is the “first step” because they will modify it in coming weeks/months/years by adding the “public option”, thereby putting in place the lowest health insurance subsidized by the American people. It will undercut private insurers to the point that it will not be cost effective to stay in operation, leaving only the government plan. That is there end-goal. That is the reason why they had to pass something, anything.

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM
15% didn’t like it because it wasn’t liberal enough.

45% didn’t like it because it was too liberal.

cntrlfrk on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

–So if many of those 15% now have decided the bill, now passed, is better than the previous situation, that would account for the Gallup poll results.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Kingjester, look at the materials I posted yesterday. The industry trade group and PWC say that the industry now pays out on average 87% of its revenue for claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM
That’s misleading. I’m sure a large paret of that is reserve for a flood of claims during an accident or disaster. If they paid out that much every year they’d go bankrupt.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:30 AM

–It was a health insurance association trade group. Should have had nothing to do with property claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:37 AM

–If it was so obvious, why didn’t Ed or anyone else mention it?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

You don’t need to state the obvious, snitch. That’s why. It’s called having a good sense of your readership.

RepubChica on March 24, 2010 at 10:37 AM

I have to admit, I don’t know a whole lot about the insurance industry, but I do know stock in private insurance rose yesterday and I heard the president of CIGNA say people should not put their efforts into repealing this bill and should put their efforts into figuring out how to control costs in the future. He didn’t seem too worried (which is to say he didn’t seem worried at all) about going out of business.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:26 AM

OK, Tom. For the next 3 years, insurance companies are going to raise premiums like crazy. That is because (a) there are less people buying insurance because they are now unemployed — that makes the pool of purchasers smaller and the costs need to be redistributed between that smaller number which means larger premiums per insured — which is why Anthem BC in California raised their rates and not because they are demonic ogres; (b) The Obamacare mandates do not go into effect for 3-4 years (whenever they actually get the massive framework set up which may take longer than they currently say.

That means lots of money going in before the insurance companies are hit hard with new mandates.

One who buys stock, buys it to watch it go up and get out at the top, if possible. There are a couple of years before the top will come but once Obamacare goes into full force and effect, the companies will go bust.

By the way, by the government’s admission most of the 32 million they say will be covered won’t be covered until 2019 — yes 9 years from now. Meanwhile, they will be collecting taxes which they will spend on everything but healthcare insurance reform because there is no lock box! They can borrow the money just like they have from Medicare and Social Security. Do you realize the Federal Government owes the Medicare Trust Fund $32 Million dollars as of the last audit???

Doesn’t matter because by then we will have given amnesty to 11 to 20 million more currently illegal aliens and our economy will have long since gone bust.

Greyledge Gal on March 24, 2010 at 10:38 AM

I have been reading and havent seen one answer to this question. Please repeat it.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

I can’t help you. Only you can help you, but I’ll give it a try. The government is now going to force millions of people to now buy expensive insurance policies. Some will be subsidized but the insurance companies will still get a flood of new comers.

In the short term … first year or so, these companies will make nice profits, but then the whole thing will collapse … just like the government caused housing bubble.

The government is intentionally creating an insurance buble that’s not sustainable. It will collapse because the government is mandating that these companies pay out 85% of their yearly intake. That is unsustainable. It’s intentional and will lead to the eradication of private insurance so people are trying to make money while they can … just like the housing market did before it collapsed.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:38 AM

Did you miss the movement to privatize Social Security?

But no worries there, honey. I’m only 26 – by the time I retire, there won’t be a Social Security.

lonesome_pine on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Smack!

Everybody in America was ordered to buy insurance, and the expanded benefits won’t kick in for years. These companies WILL pay their dividends for the next few years despite global recession. That makes them excellent short-term investments.

But when the death-spiral begins, and the general public starts maxxing out the office visits and small surgeries and chiropractic and counseling, and the insurers are on the hook for every terminal and chronic illness in America…then the bubble will burst and they’ll be dumped.

Chris_Balsz on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Correct you are Chris. Timing is everything

JusDreamin on March 24, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Free clinics won’t treat cancer and other expensive illnesses.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:33 AM

Really? Please tell my wife who is a nurse practitioner who specializes in oncology that since she and the rest of the staff recently treated an “undocumented worker” cancer patient for three years. Want to guess what the patient paid?

Also quit pretending like you give a fvck about health care for all. We know it is a load of sh1t just like everything else you on the left hold dear.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

So you agree with me that this bill does not put insurance companies in danger of going out of business.

If a government option was passed as part of this bill, you’d have a case that it was the first step toward fazing out insurance companies to a single payer system (and that would be debatable as well), but a public option is NOT part of this plan. And given that the Dems barely got a bill without the public option through with a supermajority, I don’t think you guys have to worry about the public option being a reality anytime soon.

But you’re exactly right, stocks went up because private insurers will get more business because of this bill. This bill is good business for private insurers.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM

lonesome_pine: No, I think EVERYONE missed the attempt to privatize Social Security, because it FAILED. No one wants to privatize Social Security – we like it socialistic, the way it was meant to be, and the way it is. And you can’t simultaneously claim it’s communism and also complain that it’s going to be bankrupt by the time you retire! If you believe it’s evil socialism/communism, you should be happy that it will be bankrupt, or at least indifferent, because I assume you would never take that commie check each month anyway, right?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:41 AM

–It was a health insurance association trade group. Should have had nothing to do with property claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:37 AM

Well then they should run the government if they can operate a private business like that. I didn’t see your link but I find it very difficult to believe. Especially when the past regulations dictated 65%.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:42 AM

conservatives are bitter and cling to their polls.

sesquipedalian on March 24, 2010 at 9:53 AM

I can always count on you for my comic relief…Is there a special rate that Axlerod pays you for one-liners?

lovingmyUSA on March 24, 2010 at 10:43 AM

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:41 AM

I don’t recall calling it Communism or complaining. Just stating the facts.

I have to pay it out of every paycheck. Theoretically, I’m supposed to get paid back every cent I put in. But it doesn’t work that way. Instead of going towards my future retirement, it pays for everyone else. Especially since the baby boomers are retiring.

So, yeah. I paid into it. I should get money back. But I won’t.

lonesome_pine on March 24, 2010 at 10:44 AM

How many people who post here have ever cashed a Social Security check? Socialists!

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM

So your hippie NeoComm granddaddy forces a lefty program on us which uses the police power of the state to take money away from us, and their only avenue to recoup a part of that money is to cash the check from the program that means they are suddenly a supporter of the program?

It takes some seriously adolescent and warped logic to make that idiotic argument.

Oh and I can’t wait to have this “hypocrisy” trap debate further with you child…get ready.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 10:45 AM

FYI: Fox News poll pre-passage. Less than half the sample wanted the bill repealed.

34. Which one of the following comes closest to what you would like to see
lawmakers do next if Congress passes a health care bill — would you like
lawmakers to repeal the bill, expand the bill, or leave it as is?
Repeal Expand Leave as is (Don’t know)
16-17 Mar 10 45% 29 18 9
Democrats 14% 51 24 11
Republicans 77% 9 8 6
Independents 45% 24 22 9

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:46 AM

PM123,

You cannot be that stupid to equate auto insurance with this mandate to buy health insurance. Then I found the answer in your second post. Yep you are that stupid.

1. The draft-The price we pay to live in a FREE society.

2. Pay taxes-Taxes pay for the military and other vital services.

3. Marriage License-Why I ever did this is beyond me.

4. SS#- The government has to be able to tax you, and this is the way it is accomplished.

5. Why the hell would anyone who payed into SS deny their benefits when they reach the age. Oh, how well is SS doing financially anyways?

6. None of those are anywhere close to forcing someone to buy something from a third party simply for being.

Howcome on March 24, 2010 at 10:47 AM

ObamaCare is not a takeover of the existing U.S. health care system.

It is an effort to destroy it.

The single payer system comes later after millions of Americans have been dumped from employer health plans and can no longer afford the spiralling cost of individual health insurance policies. Spiralling costs no doubt spurred on by all sorts of unreasonable federal government mandates. At that point our always benevolent federal government steps in to “fix” the mess they themselves have created.

I personally don’t think we’ll ever get to that point though. The U.S. will default before it truly nationalizes the health care system. The U.S. is facing fiscal tsunamis from Medicare and Social Security as well as an aging population that will ravenously consume medical care in the years ahead. Canada and Western Europe didn’t have these problems when they embarked upon their glorious single payer experiments.

Mike Honcho on March 24, 2010 at 10:48 AM

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 10:41 AM

That’s the stupidest “logic”. People are FORCED to pay in to Social Security. Most of the people who oppose it now probably would have opposed it when it began. Unfortunately, that position did not carry the day and the program was implemented. Now that it’s implemented, the only way someone of your persuasion could levy a charge of hypocrisy is if the government were to offer people the opportunity to opt out and someone who said they were opposed to Social Security did not opt out.

That is the only logical form of hypocrisy possible in this situation.

Now, since you’re clearly illogical, I don’t suspect you’ll grasp this concept.

venividivici on March 24, 2010 at 10:49 AM

How many pens did it take for the Big O to sign the Health Care bill?

TimBuk3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:54 AM

I don’t think you guys have to worry about the public option being a reality anytime soon.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM

The ENTIRE bill is a public option.

The government controls every aspect of it. Get a damn clue.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Tom_Shipley

Guess who’s picture is next to ‘Willful Blindness’ in the dictionary?

stvnscott on March 24, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

So you agree with me that this bill does not put insurance companies in danger of going out of business.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM

I hate to quote myself:

It is the “first step” because they will modify it in coming weeks/months/years by adding the “public option”, thereby putting in place the lowest health insurance subsidized by the American people. It will undercut private insurers to the point that it will not be cost effective to stay in operation, leaving only the government plan. That is there end-goal. That is the reason why they had to pass something, anything.

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

So no, I do not agree with you. A little reading comprehension can go a long way. Here are ’20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms‘:

The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.

1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employees’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.
You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).

7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d)(1)(A))

8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).

9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 50 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).

11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))

12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A)).

13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).

14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)

15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).

16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).

The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).

17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)

18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).

19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).

That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).

20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

Not only will it kill insurers, it will kill other businesses, investors, and the public access to health care. It also allows for govenment money to go to abortions. In three words, THIS BILL SUCKS!

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 11:00 AM

I don’t think you guys have to worry about the public option being a reality anytime soon.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM
The ENTIRE bill is a public option.

The government controls every aspect of it. Get a damn clue.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Exactly.

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 11:01 AM

and don’t think Democrats won’t use the latter to push ObamaCare into single-payer territory.

Exactly!!!

Stacy, who spoke to Rush yesterday basically said it was just a matter of time. However, Krautheimer last night said that Insurance won’t go anywhere, but will be under complete government control. Which is right? Who knows…but one way or the other, a complete takeover or coup is being perpetrated here.

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 11:03 AM

And given that the Dems barely got a bill without the public option through with a supermajority, I don’t think you guys have to worry about the public option being a reality anytime soon.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM

What makes you think that they will not try and attack it to another bill, undetected? It doesn’t have to be only in a “health care” bill to be passed. They attached the school funding to this monstrocity, which had nothing to do with health care! Are you really this dense, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Try and use some critical thought, if you can.

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 11:05 AM

And given that the Dems barely got a bill without the public option through with a supermajority, I don’t think you guys have to worry about the public option being a reality anytime soon.
Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM

“Herr Hitler has given his word — and I am pleased to accept his word– that he seeks no further concessions from Czechoslovakia” – Neville Chamberlain 1938

Chris_Balsz on March 24, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Very good. I was trying to access this page yesterday from Drudge but it was down due to the volume their server was experiencing. So Obama supporters will have to get jobs and start paying taxes? Silver lining in some of this, afterall.

RepubChica on March 24, 2010 at 11:07 AM

They have Rachel Maddow selling it like shamwow on MSNBC who come the polls aren’t going up? Oh that’s right MSNBC’s 6 viewers are still torn on supporting Obamacare.

Dr Evil on March 24, 2010 at 11:08 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

I have been reading and havent seen one answer to this question. Please repeat it.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Right here you lying sack of cold donkey crap!

Stocks went up, you stupid jacka$$ because the insurance companies are going to raise their rates before this government takeover kicks in. You Progressives exhibit your complete ignorance of the free market every time you pass a law to punish free market businesses. The free market will ALWAYS pass the penalties and fees onto the consumer.

csdeven on March 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM

IMHFO we are all missing the point.

I always thought there would be a point when the government would decide were so deep in debt it would need to take over something, either oil, agriculture, or something to pay off debt.

Instead it took over one of the biggest businesses we have. Health Insurance.

They are already touting how it will reduce deficits (taxing more than spending). Once they begin to ration care and limit what they pay out to doctors, while still charging us the same, the balance will go into the general fund to be spent on whatever they choose.

It’s merely a new tax. Call it whatever you want, but the government just dodged the huge uprising from raising income taxes to 50% by claiming they are giving us Health Care in trade.

One big Shellgameponzischememanbehindthecurtain.

cntrlfrk on March 24, 2010 at 11:13 AM

Patience is a virtue.

VibrioCocci on March 24, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Patience?

If the republican “governors alliance” (why is this the first time I’m hearing about this group?) couldn’t get together BEFORE the bill was voted on, and as a unified press conference demanded that the bill be killed, then they have no leadership at all.

It was an obvious move, that could well have made a difference, that opportunity is lost forever. Rick Perry talked tough during the teaparty, why isn’t he leading this alliance and putting both feet on the brake pedal on 0bama’s radical agenda?

The republicans have a golden opportunity to step up and actually make a difference. It’s time they threw off the shackles of the “old thinking”, that the democrats are the honored opposition, and start playing for keeps – they are the enemy of this Republic and it’s a winner take all battle royal with no rules. That does not just apply to the republicans in Washington, even more so it does to those in state goverments.

Rebar on March 24, 2010 at 11:17 AM

There just ain’t enough lipstick to make this Frankenpig look good by November.

Star20 on March 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Not only will it kill insurers, it will kill other businesses, investors, and the public access to health care. It also allows for govenment money to go to abortions. In three words, THIS BILL SUCKS!

No one on Wall Street seriously believes it will kill insurers, not even the CEO’s who run insurance companies. The 15% cap on non-health care related expenses is very generous. Good insurance companies don’t exceed 10% today.

The biggest threat to insurance companies as they exist today is a number of provisions in the bill that allow some participants to start testing major changes to the way health care is provisioned. One main reason that health care costs run so high in the US: the system rewards procedures and tests instead of results. If doctors and hospitals are rewarded for results, the amount of paperwork required (and insurance processing) could eventually drop like a rock. This won’t kill insurance companies, but simply force them to downsize.

As for all your specific complaints, I don’t agree with the entire list but think you make some very good points that have merit. I only wish that the Republicans were as focused as you on specifics, and recommending ways to improve the current legislation. If you remember the situation a year ago, most Republicans would have claimed a major victory in killing the public option and in restricting the availability of funds for abortions. And in fact, Republicans were very successful on those fronts. Yet because more recently they decided that killing the bill was politically viable, the earlier goals were entirely abandoned.

As a result, Republicans have lost the opportunity to take credit for shaping major aspects of health care reform while instead remain hell-bent on promoting wild claims of a government takeover and some master plan for repeal, which is politically impossible given Obama’s veto option. I only wish Republicans would rewind to their strategy of mid 2009 when killing the public option was considered the goal- and finding other ways to improve the legislation was their focus. The health care system needs both parties working on refining the legislation that’s already passed. Only then will it ultimately lower costs for everyone.

Republican strategist David Frum wrote an op-ed piece that explains the problem
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/us/politics/23repubs.html

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 11:33 AM

Could you all please back off the personal attacks for a minute? I’d love to actually debate here, but it gets a little wearying with all the accusations of stupidity and such.

How is mandated health insurance any different from mandated old age insurance, which is what Social Security is? How can one be socialism and the other a “safety net” to which you are entitled because you’ve “already paid into it”? I fail to see the distinction. How many of you are working hard to repeal Social Security?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 11:36 AM

It was a health insurance association trade group. Should have had nothing to do with property claims.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:37 AM
Well then they should run the government if they can operate a private business like that. I didn’t see your link but I find it very difficult to believe. Especially when the past regulations dictated 65%.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Here’s the link: from a PWC report at http://www.americanhealthsolution.org/assets/Uploads/risinghealthcarecostsfactors2008.pdf

“About 87 percent of the costs of health
insurance are benefits paid out. Administrative costs and
profits account for the other 13 percent.”

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 11:39 AM

As I asked earlier, if this bill is the first step to putting private insurers out of business, why did their stock rise yesterday?

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Stock prices are based on predictions on the SHORT-TERM direction of a company’s profits. In the SHORT TERM, mandates to buy health insurance (and fines for those who don’t) will bring the industry some new, healthy customers, which led to the stock price rise yesterday.

But over the LONG TERM, when government agencies start reducing Medicare benefits, and doctors start charging private insurance companies higher prices to cover their losses, and government agencies impose limits on premiums and excise taxes on Cadillac plans a few years from now, insurance companies will be faced with decreasing revenues and increasing payments to patients, and their stock prices will tank.

ObamaCare has created an artificial future boom-and-bust bubble in the health insurance industry. Investors are getting in now to take advantage of the early boom. If this law is not repealed or significantly scaled back by a Republican Congress, investors will probably bail out of health care by 2013, just before all the benefit mandates kick in, and private health insurance will collapse.

Steve Z on March 24, 2010 at 11:42 AM

I can’t help you. Only you can help you, but I’ll give it a try. The government is now going to force millions of people to now buy expensive insurance policies. Some will be subsidized but the insurance companies will still get a flood of new comers.

In the short term … first year or so, these companies will make nice profits, but then the whole thing will collapse … just like the government caused housing bubble.

The government is intentionally creating an insurance buble that’s not sustainable. It will collapse because the government is mandating that these companies pay out 85% of their yearly intake. That is unsustainable. It’s intentional and will lead to the eradication of private insurance so people are trying to make money while they can … just like the housing market did before it collapsed.

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 10:38 AM

–Aren’t only 50 to 60 million Americans uninsured? That’s approximately 20% of the population. And the insurance companies already pay out about 87% of their revenues as claims, so they’re not going to be selling the new policies below their costs. How is this anything like a bubble?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 11:43 AM

How is mandated health insurance any different from mandated old age insurance, which is what Social Security is? How can one be socialism and the other a “safety net” to which you are entitled because you’ve “already paid into it”? I fail to see the distinction. How many of you are working hard to repeal Social Security?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 11:36 AM

Social Security is now a lost cause. Once an entitlement program is fully implemented and people are drawing benefits, it can’t be repealed for obvious reasons. Most true conservatives would love to be able to opt out. I would certainly love to have that money to invest myself since I am so much better at managing money than the gubbermint.

In any case, the discussion is not about Social Security. It is about the gubbermint taking over 17% of the economy when it has show no competence in any of its attempts to control or run any other program or industry and the power over our personal lives that comes along with that takeover.

stvnscott on March 24, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Stocks went up, you stupid jacka$$ because the insurance companies are going to raise their rates before this government takeover kicks in.

Given the current rate of healthcare inflation, rate increases are no surprise. Long-term reductions in cost are important but won’t happen immediately.
There are countries like India with outstanding medical schools and no shortage of docs who’d like to move to the US. Why is no one seriously talking about importing medical expertise, esp. to work in rural and other areas where physician shortages are already acute?

Second, look at the long list of major US corporations who support the current healthcare reform (esp. in manufacturing). The cost of healthcare in this country places the US at a huge competitive disadvantage. Only reform at the national level can significantly address problems related to cost structure.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 11:47 AM

stvnscott: The government is incompetent in running any large program or industry? Does that include the military, which is by far the largest bureaucracy and industry in America? Do you advocate strongly for the government to get out of the war-making business? How is that gargantuan bureaucracy exempt from your wrath? Is it particularly well-run? Or do you ignore any flaws in it’s management because it is “protecting our freedom”? How do you justify that?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Whoever is making the SS argument, you can’t refuse SS payments after a certain age. My friend’s father, who is well off, tried. They made him take it after 72.

Health insurance is now nationalized. It is the public option. They’ve all stated it. Biden – “we now control the insurance companies.” Sebelius – “the goal is to cut profits (for pharma). They will make about $90 billion less w/this law.” And Dingell – “It takes time to control the people.”

How anybody thinks this is a great idea, I have NO idea. You really should get the hell out of the USA. Go where they have this already. It is failing in Europe and it will fail here, only you might be one of the unlucky sick ones during the experiment that they leave to die w/an aspirin.

JAM on March 24, 2010 at 11:56 AM

stvnscott: The government is incompetent in running any large program or industry? Does that include the military, which is by far the largest bureaucracy and industry in America? Do you advocate strongly for the government to get out of the war-making business? How is that gargantuan bureaucracy exempt from your wrath? Is it particularly well-run? Or do you ignore any flaws in it’s management because it is “protecting our freedom”? How do you justify that?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Oh, the predictability!

1. I set you up for that.
2. While our military is the pride of the world in its effectiveness, it is still terribly inefficient in its operation. It would be bankrupt if it were a business.
3. The military is constitutional.
4. Even if I let you have that volley, one success in a long string of failures does not a good track record make.

stvnscott on March 24, 2010 at 11:56 AM

ObamaCare has created an artificial future boom-and-bust bubble in the health insurance industry. Investors are getting in now to take advantage of the early boom

Kaiser Foundation and every major, independent healthcare research firm disagrees with you. You’re painting an over-the-top worse case scenario.

The American healthcare system is a bloated and inefficient machine that’s driving the country deeper into debt. As Republicans have pointed out, one out of three dollars in the system doesn’t even go toward healthcare. The reform legislation that’s passed isn’t even that radical. It’s greatest promise lies in provisions that allow some small-scale changes to occur on a trial basis that may result in huge efficiency gains. The long-term success of reform depends upon future changes that scale out those changes that prove to be successful in reducing cost while maintaining quality of care.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM

pm123,

A couple of misstatements on your part.

I am not aware of any state which REQUIRES non-drivers to obtain a driving license.

Similar for a marriage license.

Social Security taxes are REQUIRED only for individuals who work.

There is a link between an activity and corresponding government imposed licensure/fee.

Please list ONE activity that the Government requires payment for, which the only qualification is LIFE.

Regards,

the Dragon on March 24, 2010 at 12:00 PM

OT a bit:

Another poll (on-line, so not scientific) with “good news” about Republicans:

http://news.harrisinteractive.com/profiles/investor/ResLibraryView.asp?BzID=1963&ResLibraryID=37050&Category=1777

Majorities of Republicans believe that President Obama:

Is a socialist (67%)
Wants to take away Americans’ right to own guns (61%)
Is a Muslim (57%)
Wants to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to a one world government (51%); and
Has done many things that are unconstitutional (55%).

Also large numbers of Republicans also believe that President Obama:

Resents America’s heritage (47%)
Does what Wall Street and the bankers tell him to do (40%)
Was not born in the United States and so is not eligible to be president (45%)
Is the “domestic enemy that the U.S. Constitution speaks of” (45%)
Is a racist (42%)
Want to use an economic collapse or terrorist attack as an excuse to take dictatorial powers (41%)
Is doing many of the things that Hitler did (38%).

Even more remarkable perhaps, fully 24% of Republicans believe that “he may be the Anti-Christ” and 22% believe “he wants the terrorists to win.”

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:00 PM

Please list ONE activity that the Government requires payment for, which the only qualification is LIFE.

Regards,

the Dragon on March 24, 2010 at 12:00 PM

-Sales taxes, utility taxes and property taxes come to mind. Unless you think you LIFE doesn’t require food, clothing, heat and air conditioning or a place to live.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:02 PM

stvnscott: The government is incompetent in running any large program or industry? Does that include the military, which is by far the largest bureaucracy and industry in America? Do you advocate strongly for the government to get out of the war-making business? How is that gargantuan bureaucracy exempt from your wrath? Is it particularly well-run? Or do you ignore any flaws in it’s management because it is “protecting our freedom”? How do you justify that?

pm123

Talk to any military brass and you will find out that is NOT well run b/c it is overseen by the govt. So much abuse of that budget. Alot of it w/defense cotracting. Dianne Feinstein’s hubby knows a thing or two about that! If defense spending could be cut b/c the govt. could actually root out the abuse, I would be all for it. But the govt is utterly incapable apparently of doing that. Which puts another lie to Obamacare, which is predicated on cutting 100′s of billion in waste out of Medicare. If they were suddenly so efficient, don’t you think they would have done it already?

JAM on March 24, 2010 at 12:03 PM

stvnscott: The government is incompetent in running any large program or industry? Does that include the military, which is by far the largest bureaucracy and industry in America? Do you advocate strongly for the government to get out of the war-making business? How is that gargantuan bureaucracy exempt from your wrath? Is it particularly well-run? Or do you ignore any flaws in it’s management because it is “protecting our freedom”? How do you justify that?

pm123 on March 24, 2010 at 11:49 AM

pm123, you are straining so hard to catch us in a gotcha moment. SS is a joke of a program, but typical example of what happens when you let individuals with zero business credibility dictate policy. I have been consistent in my disdain for that program, and others including wishing for the Dept of Education abolished and government education to go along with it.

Military bureaucrats also deserve a serious audit. They are building high end condos down in the resort town that I live in right on the Gulf of Mexico. Total waste of money considering this money should be going to the grunts. Here is the difference, however, the federal government is constitutionally mandated to defend the country so the best we can do minimize the abuse of power.

How about we see who the real hypocrite is here?

I bet you are a global warming cultist yet waste hours a day on the carbon spewing computer. You probably have multiple flat screens and multiple ipods.

I bet you donate little to nothing out of each paycheck all the while demanding the government force us to pay for your pet causes.

If you care so much then why have you not offered to pay for someone’s health care out of your own pocket?

If you care so much about the homeless why don’t you offer to let one stay at your house with you?

If you care so much about the poor why don’t you sell your donate your computer to some who is less fortunate that you?

Compassion is so shallow and hollow when you are doing it with other people’s money.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM

How anybody thinks this is a great idea, I have NO idea. You really should get the hell out of the USA. Go where they have this already. It is failing in Europe and it will fail here, only you might be one of the unlucky sick ones during the experiment that they leave to die w/an aspirin.

JAM on March 24, 2010 at 11:56 AM

–The fact that you (and a bunch of people who post here) don’t understand how others might think this is a good idea shows you need to talk to people with different views more or read blogs or papers with different views. That’s your failure, not ours.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Sales taxes, utility taxes and property taxes come to mind. Unless you think you LIFE doesn’t require food, clothing, heat and air conditioning or a place to live.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Wait, so food didn’t exist until your mama government enacted a sales tax? What a terrifying view into the mindset of a government drone.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Please list ONE activity that the Government requires payment for, which the only qualification is LIFE.

Tax on checking account interest is a good example, assuming that owning a checking account isn’t an activity per se. The federal right to impose taxes doesn’t require any activity other than breathing within the borders of this great nation.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM

The federal right to impose taxes doesn’t require any activity other than breathing within the borders of this great nation.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM

You are a dictators wet dream…

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Yes, this bill puts a lot of regulation on private insurers, but a lot of industries have regulations placed on them by the government. And I have not once heard people call those regulations a “government take over.” You know why, because they are not.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:13 AM

Risk management. That is what the industry was originally designed. What Congress did was completely change its designation beyond the scope of its capabilities.

It cannot be denied that health insurance was intended as risk management only.
It cannot be denied that our government has legislation that moves the industry beyond its intentions.

You didn’t have an aquisition of companies by government. You had a complete overhaul of the industry in which companies operate. That is a takeover in its most absolute sense.

anuts on March 24, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Sales taxes, utility taxes and property taxes come to mind. Unless you think you LIFE doesn’t require food, clothing, heat and air conditioning or a place to live.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Wait, so food didn’t exist until your mama government enacted a sales tax? What a terrifying view into the mindset of a government drone.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:07 PM

–Who said that food didn’t exist before taxes? All I said is that you have to pay taxes on food, etc.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:16 PM

-Sales taxes, utility taxes and property taxes come to mind. Unless you think you LIFE doesn’t require food, clothing, heat and air conditioning or a place to live.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:02 PM

I don’t have to BUY anything. I can grow and kill my own food, harvest rainwater (that is where my municipality gets it), wear animal skins, etc.

Property taxes means one has to engage in PURCHASING property. So a property tax is reasonable.

You are an ignorant moron.

csdeven on March 24, 2010 at 12:20 PM

All I said is that you have to pay taxes on food, etc.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:16 PM

An individual can grow his own food.
An individual can choose not to own a home.
An individual can choose not to use the AC.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:22 PM

Tax on checking account interest is a good example, assuming that owning a checking account isn’t an activity per se. The federal right to impose taxes doesn’t require any activity other than breathing within the borders of this great nation.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM

OWNING a checking account provided to you by SOMEONE ELSE is an ACTIVITY that requires more than being born. Otherwise babies would emerge from the womb with checking accounts.

You are an ignorant moron.

csdeven on March 24, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM

Ha, I see HA commenters have totally made you lose your mind, you have become a total blithering idjot!!!

lovingmyUSA on March 24, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Yes, this bill puts a lot of regulation on private insurers, but a lot of industries have regulations placed on them by the government. And I have not once heard people call those regulations a “government take over.” You know why, because they are not.

Tom_Shipley on March 24, 2010 at 10:13 AM

When they get into

-requiring permission to open such a business
-what you can charge
-who can be a customer
-what percentage of your revenues go to what activity
-what you must sell
-what states you can sell it in

then it has been taken over.

The FAA does not tell Southwest Airlines it must fly nonstop to Dubai for $500 roundtrip every Tuesday from John Wayne International, no carryon bags allowed and lunch is to be either lemon chicken or tuna salad. The FAA regulates. It has not taken over.

Chris_Balsz on March 24, 2010 at 12:26 PM

Tax on checking account interest is a good example, assuming that owning a checking account isn’t an activity per se. The federal right to impose taxes doesn’t require any activity other than breathing within the borders of this great nation.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM

That would require me to own a bank account, would it not.

Chris_Balsz on March 24, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

“OBAMACARE INSURANCE FOR DUMMIES”….
Excellent!!!!!

lovingmyUSA on March 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM

It is so entertaining to watch this puerile generation attempt to justify their childish political philosophy. I have similar debates with my young children who attempt to argue that eating M&M’s for dinner is the morally correct thing to do.

ClassicCon on March 24, 2010 at 12:32 PM

I don’t have to BUY anything. I can grow and kill my own food, harvest rainwater (that is where my municipality gets it), wear animal skins, etc.

Property taxes means one has to engage in PURCHASING property. So a property tax is reasonable.

You are an ignorant moron.

csdeven on March 24, 2010 at 12:20 PM

–So how are you going to continue to connect to the internet (you pay taxes on phone and cable) or get electricity or gas or propane to heat your tent? Your own farts?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 12:35 PM

Republicans have lost the opportunity to take credit for shaping major aspects of health care reform
bayam on March 24, 2010 at 11:33 AM

Republicans were kept out of the entire bill writing process, and all, I mean all of their amendments were tabled! They lost that battle when the Democrats took control of the House. They gave their ideas, and they fell on deaf ears.

Rep. Paul Ryan has a plan, that he introduced prior to final passage of this “bill” in the Rules Committee, which Rep. Slaughter heads. Ed did a post on it, showing that Republicans did have ideas on solvency. Ryan’s plan would make Medicare solvent as far as the eye could see, without taking benefits away from those currently on the doles. It was scored by the CBO, and by the Actuary of Medicare.

Here he is telling Rep. Slaughter about it in the rules committee, and shows how ignorant she is about his plan. And here Ryan explains the double counting, with one representative saying it is OK to count money twice!

CBO, page 4:

In effect, the majority of the HI trust fund savings under H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would be used to pay for other spending and therefore would not enhance the ability of the government to pay for future Medicare benefits.

He is talking about the supposed money they would save under the plan, but that isn’t real money. They will not know how much could/would/will be saved for some time.

They have lost all the responsibility of shaping reform, and it is solely on that of the Democrats. No more passing that buck.

Patriot Vet on March 24, 2010 at 12:37 PM

I don’t know why you all can’t understand the sound reasoning behind Obamacare!

If someone breaks a leg, the solution is to break everybody’s leg!!!

/sarc>

landlines on March 24, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3