[quote]borrek wrote:
<<< Again, here we are with totally imaginary magnitudes. This is more fairy tale than parable…
Do you really genuinely believe that 50% of Americans will decide to go without insurance??[/quote]
Listen friend. I’ve been closely watching these people for over 20 years. Mark my words. Regardless of which precise mechanisms under which it happens, we will have fully socialized single payer healthcare in what was once the United States. That has been the holy grail, the grasping groping religious mission of liberals forever. They will stop at absolutely nothing to see it.[/quote]
I can see why you guys think that, but I just don’t believe it will happen. I have no doubt that there are plenty of full blown socialists trying their best to go all the way, but they are balanced by plenty of full blown free-market libertarians.[/quote]
borrek, I respect your optimism but if you truly believe these folks like Reid, Pelosi, and even Obama don’t want a single payer system and a socialized America, you haven’t done your homework. There are several, and I mean dozens, of speeches and audios from Barack Obama himself where he talks about having a single payer system and making America more European. I just listened to two of his speeches yesterday, as a matter of fact, and both of them dated back to the mid-90’s. I think one was 96 the other 97.
Pelosi and Obama have also been quoted several times in saying that this is only the first step in healthcare. They’re trying to do everything incrementally to save face and slowly restructure our great country. Does America have faults? Definitely, but were better than any country since the beginning of time. I believe Thomas Jefferson said that our constitution did have some faults but comparing America to European nations was like comparing heaven to hell.
And for all of you Obama lovers out there. The liberals have relied on the CBO for saying health care isn’t as bad as it looks. The CBO is now saying that Obama’s budget for 2011 will put America 10 Trillion (yes Trillion) dollars in defecit in the next 10 years.
In 2008 the average American family owed about $56,000 per household with G.W. not keeping his promises. Currently with almost a year and a half under Obama, the average household owes $72,000 a year. The CBO believes that by 2020 under Obama’s policies, the average American household will owe $170,000 per year. Now you Obama supporters, please tell me why and how you are supporting this current regime?
[quote]Fleck wrote:
And for all of you Obama lovers out there. The liberals have relied on the CBO for saying health care isn’t as bad as it looks. The CBO is now saying that Obama’s budget for 2011 will put America 10 Trillion (yes Trillion) dollars in defecit in the next 10 years.
In 2008 the average American family owed about $56,000 per household with G.W. not keeping his promises. Currently with almost a year and a half under Obama, the average household owes $72,000 a year. The CBO believes that by 2020 under Obama’s policies, the average American household will owe $170,000 per year. Now you Obama supporters, please tell me why and how you are supporting this current regime?[/quote]
Does this take into consideration the expiring of the Bush Tax Cuts? If it does holy crap he is spending a lot of money. I see my taxes going up 10% within the next 3-9 months.
I thought Obama promised to cut the deficit in half with in 2 years. I guess he meant the reciprocal of half. That is double for you Progressives.
By now, I thought someone would have pointed to a flaw in my thinking. I will provide it myself.
Why, if private insurance is put at a disadvantage as I have described it, are the insurance companies so in favor of Obamacare?
Before the mandate takes effect, there will be a huge expansion in Medicaid, which burdens state government with unfunded mandates, and which does not touch the insurance industry. But, as “insurance exchanges” start-up, they will provide a new revenue stream which will go to (presumably) competing insurance companies. Presuming a pay-out ratio of .80 to .90, the insurance companies will make a pile of money very quickly.
This in itself mitigates the risk of the shrinking, sicker, risk pool of private insurance which I have posited. But wait! There is more! As the insurance exchanges fail, or as their risk rises, the government will need to provide capital. The insurance companies will have ample protection against risk, cushioned by federal tax dollars.
Great scenario, eh? Of course, I could be dead wrong, and the insurance companies will disappear, or merge, and there will be a lot of wailing coming from very tall glass buildings. But If I am close to being right, the insurance industry has secured more revenue streams, private and public, and mitigated some of the inherent risk, at the expense of taxpayers.[/quote]
Sounds a bit like a replay of the housing bubble in the realm of heath insurance.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
My worthless excuse of a US Senator said this yesterday:
I was in the audience a month ago at a conference where he spoke. He really is a little weasel of a man. BTW, he comes from a wealthy family.[/quote]
Proof, if any was needed, that someone could go to Stanford and come out stupid.[/quote]
I’ve heard him speak up close several times. He is a fuckin dunce. His latest speech that I referred to was a rambling, somewhat incoherent pile of drivel. It was so strained that I almost felt sorry for him. He embarrassed himself.
When he mentioned how much much the stimulus plan had helped Montana I almost hollered out, “YOU LIE!” With hindsight I kinda wished I had.
[/quote]
Well, let’s give Maxy a chance to put his money where his mouth is.
Why not write him an open letter, pointing out that his fortune–which was inherited–includes a 150,000 acre ranch. If he feels so strongly that “income maldistribution,” he can do his part to solve this shameful social problem, and share that ranch with say, 75,000 homeless and poor Montanans.
You may choose to remind him of la Rochefoucauld, “Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
My worthless excuse of a US Senator said this yesterday:
I was in the audience a month ago at a conference where he spoke. He really is a little weasel of a man. BTW, he comes from a wealthy family.[/quote]
Proof, if any was needed, that someone could go to Stanford and come out stupid.[/quote]
I’ve heard him speak up close several times. He is a fuckin dunce. His latest speech that I referred to was a rambling, somewhat incoherent pile of drivel. It was so strained that I almost felt sorry for him. He embarrassed himself.
When he mentioned how much much the stimulus plan had helped Montana I almost hollered out, “YOU LIE!” With hindsight I kinda wished I had.
[/quote]
Well, let’s give Maxy a chance to put his money where his mouth is.
Why not write him an open letter, pointing out that his fortune–which was inherited–includes a 150,000 acre ranch. If he feels so strongly that “income maldistribution,” he can do his part to solve this shameful social problem, and share that ranch with say, 75,000 homeless and poor Montanans.
You may choose to remind him of la Rochefoucauld, “Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.”[/quote]
Why would he do this if the bill does not pertain to them? They are elite, and much better than the American Public. He is entitled to feel higher than the masses.
