An Opposing Opinion

[RI Bills Fan]

This is from the WSJ, (via Yahoo). So it should be considered a credible source. BUT! It goes directly against what seems to be the prevailing wisdom (?) of PPP, so Flame Away!

[VABills]

Washington Post puts Opeds from opposing forces in there as well. Doesn't mean the facts are right. Opinions are just that opinions.

[Bishop Hedd]

This is from the WSJ, (via Yahoo). So it should be considered a credible source. BUT! It goes directly against what seems to be the prevailing wisdom (?) of PPP, so Flame Away!

Watch out! They're getting their signs and teabags ready!

 

You do realise for most here it has nothing to do with healthcare but rather seeing Obama fail.

[PearlHowardman]

Bottom Line: Barack Obama was elected to clean up the mess that George Bush left. In 2012 Mitt Romney is going to be elected to clean up the mess that George Bush AND Barack Obama left.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Watch out! They're getting their signs and teabags ready!

 

You do realise for most here it has nothing to do with healthcare but rather seeing Obama fail.

You give me the creeps, man.

[PearlHowardman]

Obama's health care plan is NOT similar to the national health care plans in Canada, England, or any other country. It IS similar to what they have in Massachusetts.

 

And what they have in Massachusetts is NOT working. Remember, Republican Scott Brown ran in a platform of voting AGAINST Obama's health care plan. He signed his campaign signs with "41" meaning he would be the 41st Senator to go against Obama. THAT alone is what got him elected!

 

Brown won the Massachusetts special election because the citizens of Massachusetts KNOW that their plan is not working. Even former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a chief architect of the plan, admits that it doesn't work they way they intended.

 

Obama seems to have forgotten this.

 

So, Obama is going to take the failed Massachusetts health care plan and try to implement it nationally.

 

Great!

 

This is a BIG reason why Mitt Romney (R ) is going to replace Barack Obama (D) in 2012. Romney's campaign slogan will be "I Told Ya So!"

[Alaska Darin]

An opposing opinion? It's a horribly written piece, which is typical of Arends.

[3rdnlng]

Watch out! They're getting their signs and teabags ready!

 

You do realise for most here it has nothing to do with healthcare but rather seeing Obama fail.

 

You just continue to display your black belt in assclownery. Yes, I want to see Obama fail to turn this country into another European style socialistic semi democracy. As for healthcare, anybody that thinks that legislating the insurance companies into allowing anyone to obtain insurance regardless of pre-existing conditions with a small "fine" for not having insurance in the first place is an answer is deluding themselves into a unicorn believing world. The older people and the ones "at risk" will be paying a large premium to allow the young and well to pay a small fine and not have insurance until they get ill. Your ignorance is of epic proportions.

[IDBillzFan]

You give me the creeps, man.

....aside from the fact that he's wrong, again. Most here against this health care bill have repeatedly provided reason after reason why the program is a bad idea. And it's not a question of whether Obama will fail, but rather a question of when.

 

At this juncture, all the yibber-yabber is about the 216 votes, and the costs, and the duping of the doc fix, and abortion, but as I've mentioned before, there is one major underlying problem that will KILL Democrats in November: unemployment.

 

Most people smarter than Hedd (and that's most people) realize that one of the reasons unemployment is stuck is because businesses are crapping purple Twinkies over the new taxes they're about to face with this program. Passing this program only makes this last considerably longer because companies already treading eroding margins are going to have to cut back.

 

Keep in mind that the brief hiring of 750,000 census people will make March/April/May seem better, but come September/October, those numbers fly up again, and all the perceived benefits of this health care bill will mean nothing to a country stuck in an economic rut.

 

Oh, and this bill does nothing to increase competition and reduce costs, but that's for another thread.

[Chef Jim]

Watch out! They're getting their signs and teabags ready!

 

You do realise for most here it has nothing to do with healthcare but rather seeing Obama fail.

 

If we wanted Obama to fail or at least look as a failure in the eyes of history we'd be rooting for this thing to pass.

[3rdnlng]

....aside from the fact that he's wrong, again. Most here against this health care bill have repeatedly provided reason after reason why the program is a bad idea. And it's not a question of whether Obama will fail, but rather a question of when.

 

At this juncture, all the yibber-yabber is about the 216 votes, and the costs, and the duping of the doc fix, and abortion, but as I've mentioned before, there is one major underlying problem that will KILL Democrats in November: unemployment.

 

Most people smarter than Hedd (and that's most people) realize that one of the reasons unemployment is stuck is because businesses are crapping purple Twinkies over the new taxes they're about to face with this program. Passing this program only makes this last considerably longer because companies already treading eroding margins are going to have to cut back.

 

Keep in mind that the brief hiring of 750,000 census people will make March/April/May seem better, but come September/October, those numbers fly up again, and all the perceived benefits of this health care bill will mean nothing to a country stuck in an economic rut.

 

Oh, and this bill does nothing to increase competition and reduce costs, but that's for another thread.

 

I was at a little birthday party last night and sat across from a smartass attorney and his liberal wife. The subject of this plan came up and I made a comment that Caterpillar Corporation claimed that it was going to cost them an extra 100 million a year if this plan went through. They asked me how that could be since they already provided health insurance for their employees. I think they almost understood once I explained that everyone's insurance costs are going up to pay for the ones that either can't afford it now, or to make up for the fact that young, healthy people will now have no incentive to buy insurance until they become ill. So, Caterpillar is less competitive with the increased cost and loses business. They have to then lay people off. Eventually these people go on some subsidized plan that in turn has the effect of raising taxes. No vicious circle here, eh?

[IDBillzFan]

I was at a little birthday party last night and sat across from a smartass attorney and his liberal wife. The subject of this plan came up and I made a comment that Caterpillar Corporation claimed that it was going to cost them an extra 100 million a year if this plan went through. They asked me how that could be since they already provided health insurance for their employees. I think they almost understood once I explained that everyone's insurance costs are going up to pay for the ones that either can't afford it now, or to make up for the fact that young, healthy people will now have no incentive to buy insurance until they become ill. So, Caterpillar is less competitive with the increased cost and loses business. They have to then lay people off. Eventually these people go on some subsidized plan that in turn has the effect of raising taxes. No vicious circle here, eh?

I honestly find it increasingly amazing that people with the ability to read and add could find this bill worth supporting as if THIS is the only way to help the helpless, which is really the only justification. Any time you argue against this, a liberal says "Well, we're doing it for Natoma! We're doing it for those who don't have coverage," and I realize that it is terribly sad that the world is about to learn the ill-gotten plans of a liberal party will create more long-lasting problems than they could ever think they're solving in the short term.

[DC Tom]

This is from the WSJ, (via Yahoo). So it should be considered a credible source. BUT! It goes directly against what seems to be the prevailing wisdom (?) of PPP, so Flame Away!

 

Great. Then let's ditch this abortion of a health care "reform" and institute a socialized program.

[Thirdborn]

I honestly find it increasingly amazing that people with the ability to read and add could find this bill worth supporting as if THIS is the only way to help the helpless, which is really the only justification. Any time you argue against this, a liberal says "Well, we're doing it for Natoma! We're doing it for those who don't have coverage," and I realize that it is terribly sad that the world is about to learn the ill-gotten plans of a liberal party will create more long-lasting problems than they could ever think they're solving in the short term.

 

I truely believe that your avatar is sexy sexy sexy.

[Wacka]

Tomorrow, I see the stock market falling several hundred points.

 

 

Wait till the supporters of this start having their taxes raised for several years and then realize none of the "benefits" go into effect until 2013 at the earliest.

[Spiderweb]

....aside from the fact that he's wrong, again. Most here against this health care bill have repeatedly provided reason after reason why the program is a bad idea. And it's not a question of whether Obama will fail, but rather a question of when.

 

At this juncture, all the yibber-yabber is about the 216 votes, and the costs, and the duping of the doc fix, and abortion, but as I've mentioned before, there is one major underlying problem that will KILL Democrats in November: unemployment.

 

Most people smarter than Hedd (and that's most people) realize that one of the reasons unemployment is stuck is because businesses are crapping purple Twinkies over the new taxes they're about to face with this program. Passing this program only makes this last considerably longer because companies already treading eroding margins are going to have to cut back.

 

Keep in mind that the brief hiring of 750,000 census people will make March/April/May seem better, but come September/October, those numbers fly up again, and all the perceived benefits of this health care bill will mean nothing to a country stuck in an economic rut.

 

Oh, and this bill does nothing to increase competition and reduce costs, but that's for another thread.

 

That's all well and , well not so good. It is about really doing what is right. Deny the fact that health care in the USA is more than double (per person) than that of Canada, Japan, Germany, and Great Britain (as published recently by the AARP). Deny the fact that despite this massive cost already being borne by every citizen (in lower wages, etc., as no company pays this on top of your compensation as it is a part thereof), we have the highest infant mortality rate of these nations. Deny that we lead this group in preventable deaths (primarily because we have so many uninsured). Deny the fact that virtually every other country (top 20 economic powers) all have a nationalized health care plan (some are private but very tightly regulated and the pre-existing condition here exclusion is not allowed elsewhere).

 

Economic drain? How about the spiraling costs (more than double in the last 7 years, again AARP). Where do you think this money comes from? The sky? It comes at the expense of the purchase of durable goods, services, etc. The drain on the economy is exactly why reform is needed. The voracious appetite of the Health Care industry for more funds is insatiable. Unless your are in the Health Care industry, you lose. If business is to rebound, it will require citizens to have the finances to purchase their goods and services. Remember that approximately 70% of our economy is consumer driven. To continue to deny that the current system is broken is beyond any logical intelligent thought. When do we finally admit we have a serious problem? When our cost become three times as much as the countries referred to above? Four times? Five Times?

 

We have an employer based system and if it worked, fine, go with it, but business has failed in this area. In the mid eighties, HMO's became popular, and numerous providers became available. Costs seemed to be somewhat under control. Unfortunately, the many providers became fewer and fewer as Humana, and United Heath are (just to name two) began buying up smaller providers. Rates again then started to grow at rates far exceeding inflation. By 1992 it was clear to most where this would all be headed, yet, the money and power preserved and blew apart any chance of reform under Clinton. It's taken 17-18 years to get this debate back on the table, all while medical costs continued to sky rocket. Yet you see no problem?

 

Nice of those who stand against this bill to fill themselves with self righteous indignation, but what is your plan? Do you even recognize there is a problem? Those against the bill suggest reform is needed, but not this, lets start over and do it right. That's what was said back when Clinton's attempt to reform Health Care failed. Does starting from scratch mean waiting almost another 20 years? By then Medical costs will have tripled again, or more. The bill passed tonight doesn't meets by beliefs either. It's not strong enough. Yet, the opportunity for another chance in getting things started could be far too late for me, and/or my children.

 

Just as an aside, Nixon himself was working on a National Health Care plan that never made it to the House or Senate, but even he saw that something was going to be needed to be done.

 

It's time for we Americans to come to grips with the fact that even though we may be a great nation, we are not always right. Health care is an area we have failed upon to date.

[Alaska Darin]

That's all well and , well not so good. It is about really doing what is right. Deny the fact that health care in the USA is more than double (per person) than that of Canada, Japan, Germany, and Great Britain (as published recently by the AARP). Deny the fact that despite this massive cost already being borne by every citizen (in lower wages, etc., as no company pays this on top of your compensation as it is a part thereof), we have the highest infant mortality rate of these nations. Deny that we lead this group in preventable deaths (primarily because we have so many uninsured). Deny the fact that virtually every other country (top 20 economic powers) all have a nationalized health care plan (some are private but very tightly regulated and the pre-existing condition here exclusion is not allowed elsewhere).

 

Economic drain? How about the spiraling costs (more than double in the last 7 years, again AARP). Where do you think this money comes from? The sky? It comes at the expense of the purchase of durable goods, services, etc. The drain on the economy is exactly why reform is needed. The voracious appetite of the Health Care industry for more funds is insatiable. Unless your are in the Health Care industry, you lose. If business is to rebound, it will require citizens to have the finances to purchase their goods and services. Remember that approximately 70% of our economy is consumer driven. To continue to deny that the current system is broken is beyond any logical intelligent thought. When do we finally admit we have a serious problem? When our cost become three times as much as the countries referred to above? Four times? Five Times?

 

We have an employer based system and if it worked, fine, go with it, but business has failed in this area. In the mid eighties, HMO's became popular, and numerous providers became available. Costs seemed to be somewhat under control. Unfortunately, the many providers became fewer and fewer as Humana, and United Heath are (just to name two) began buying up smaller providers. Rates again then started to grow at rates far exceeding inflation. By 1992 it was clear to most where this would all be headed, yet, the money and power preserved and blew apart any chance of reform under Clinton. It's taken 17-18 years to get this debate back on the table, all while medical costs continued to sky rocket. Yet you see no problem?

 

Nice of those who stand against this bill to fill themselves with self righteous indignation, but what is your plan? Do you even recognize there is a problem? Those against the bill suggest reform is needed, but not this, lets start over and do it right. That's what was said back when Clinton's attempt to reform Health Care failed. Does starting from scratch mean waiting almost another 20 years? By then Medical costs will have tripled again, or more. The bill passed tonight doesn't meets by beliefs either. It's not strong enough. Yet, the opportunity for another chance in getting things started could be far too late for me, and/or my children.

 

Just as an aside, Nixon himself was working on a National Health Care plan that never made it to the House or Senate, but even he saw that something was going to be needed to be done.

 

It's time for we Americans to come to grips with the fact that even though we may be a great nation, we are not always right. Health care is an area we have failed upon to date.

I'm totally against this plan and everyone else should be too. Frankly, I'm tired of the "we'll fix it later" idea because it's nothing more than a panacea. Social Security isn't fixed and it's totally !@#$ed. Medicare isn't fixed and it's totally !@#$ed. DoD gets more and more expensive and suffers from the same worsening ailments that has always plagued it. This will be no different.

 

The fact of the matter is the government is the largest reason why health care is expensive and they refuse to give up that monopoly. This abortion of a bill does little to solve that and will in fact make it even more expensive because it ignores the basic fundamentals of how things have to work to drive down costs. Is college less expensive now that government is enormously involved in it? Nope. What about prescription drugs? Nope. Energy? Nope. Government doesn't fix problems, it causes new and more expensive ones because our elected leaders don't understand blowback - they understand power and payola (the big reason they took economy of scale purchasing for prescription drugs off the table BEFORE the debate even began because they KNEW big pharma would use their money to kill it all by themselves).

 

Ask the government why they started closing DoD medical assets and pushing people to the civilian side during the Clinton Administration (which has continued unabated).

 

At the end of the day, the American people are getting exactly what they deserve. We were shopping at Costco the other day and at least 75% of the people walking around in there were grossly overweight. I'm just stunned that health care is expensive.

[/dev/null]

Tomorrow, I see the stock market falling several hundred points.

 

I disagree. Market isn't going to tank in one session.

 

It'll be relatively flat with gradual downward momentum for the foreseaable future

Until inflation kicks in, then the market will jump to adjust to the lower value of the dollar. And everyone will celebrate the Dow 20k by going to McD's and ordering from the $5 extra value menu

[3rdnlng]

That's all well and , well not so good. It is about really doing what is right. Deny the fact that health care in the USA is more than double (per person) than that of Canada, Japan, Germany, and Great Britain (as published recently by the AARP). Deny the fact that despite this massive cost already being borne by every citizen (in lower wages, etc., as no company pays this on top of your compensation as it is a part thereof), we have the highest infant mortality rate of these nations. Deny that we lead this group in preventable deaths (primarily because we have so many uninsured). Deny the fact that virtually every other country (top 20 economic powers) all have a nationalized health care plan (some are private but very tightly regulated and the pre-existing condition here exclusion is not allowed elsewhere).

 

Economic drain? How about the spiraling costs (more than double in the last 7 years, again AARP). Where do you think this money comes from? The sky? It comes at the expense of the purchase of durable goods, services, etc. The drain on the economy is exactly why reform is needed. The voracious appetite of the Health Care industry for more funds is insatiable. Unless your are in the Health Care industry, you lose. If business is to rebound, it will require citizens to have the finances to purchase their goods and services. Remember that approximately 70% of our economy is consumer driven. To continue to deny that the current system is broken is beyond any logical intelligent thought. When do we finally admit we have a serious problem? When our cost become three times as much as the countries referred to above? Four times? Five Times?

 

We have an employer based system and if it worked, fine, go with it, but business has failed in this area. In the mid eighties, HMO's became popular, and numerous providers became available. Costs seemed to be somewhat under control. Unfortunately, the many providers became fewer and fewer as Humana, and United Heath are (just to name two) began buying up smaller providers. Rates again then started to grow at rates far exceeding inflation. By 1992 it was clear to most where this would all be headed, yet, the money and power preserved and blew apart any chance of reform under Clinton. It's taken 17-18 years to get this debate back on the table, all while medical costs continued to sky rocket. Yet you see no problem?

 

Nice of those who stand against this bill to fill themselves with self righteous indignation, but what is your plan? Do you even recognize there is a problem? Those against the bill suggest reform is needed, but not this, lets start over and do it right. That's what was said back when Clinton's attempt to reform Health Care failed. Does starting from scratch mean waiting almost another 20 years? By then Medical costs will have tripled again, or more. The bill passed tonight doesn't meets by beliefs either. It's not strong enough. Yet, the opportunity for another chance in getting things started could be far too late for me, and/or my children.

 

Just as an aside, Nixon himself was working on a National Health Care plan that never made it to the House or Senate, but even he saw that something was going to be needed to be done.

 

It's time for we Americans to come to grips with the fact that even though we may be a great nation, we are not always right. Health care is an area we have failed upon to date.

 

OK, so what does this Bill do to lower costs?

[John Adams]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...2557501242.html

 

This is a good "What the Bill means to you right now" article.

Watch for coverage changes. If you're uninsured and have health problems, you may become eligible for a special new federal high-risk insurance pool this year. This is likely to be a good deal, so don't miss out: Watch for more information on hhs.gov and associated sites.

 

If you have coverage, insurance that was in effect before the bill becomes law is grandfathered in. Still, some provisions in the sidecar bill, like bans on lifetime benefit caps, would apply even to those plans.

 

That would solve a big problem for people such as Amy Wilhite of Marblehead, Ohio. Her family is insured through her husband's employer, but her 12-year-old daughter, Taylor, a leukemia survivor, has already gone through more than $1 million of medical care in her life and is approaching a $1.5 million cap. Taylor has been delaying or forgoing some care to stretch out coverage as long as possible.

 

"We shouldn't have to pick and choose what we want to do," Ms. Wilhite said.

 

This change, as well as rules against insurers' yanking policies if you get sick, and forcing family policies to generally include kids up to age 26, takes effect six months after the bill becomes law.

Journal Community

 

Find a doctor. There could be shortages. Including the reconciliation package, the bill is ultimately expected to add around 32 million people to the insured population, with the big influx starting in 2014. Provisions aimed at boosting the supply of primary-care physicians likely won't kick in fast enough to keep up with the flood of new patients, at least in certain parts of the country. Make sure you are on a doctor's dance card before he or she stops taking new patients.

 

Consider long-term-care coverage. One of the underlying bill's biggest and least-understood provisions is a new voluntary long-term care benefit that would pay cash to people who become disabled. You get the benefit only if you pay premiums into the program for at least five years. You will likely not be able to opt to do this until 2011 at the earliest, but start factoring it into your planning now and watch for information on the hhs.gov sites. Insurers will likely develop supplemental products for the benefit, which isn't expected to cover round-the-clock care, says John Rother, executive vice president of AARP, the big seniors group.