Obama drops the public option for health care

[Kelly the Dog]

If you could bottle and sell that optimism, you could pay for a universal health care all by yourself, and have enough left over to save the Post Office.

 

I've made countless offers of real dollars in bets on here about the plans, and whether it's going to pass, and what is going to be in it, and what is going to happen, and no one has taken me up on any of them. That, to me, says the opposition has less confidence in their prediction than I do in mine.

[DC Tom]

The White House is arguing, and the CBO agrees with them, that there is no way to measure a lot of savings that will take place in the mid term and long term based on various provisions in the bills. Since they can't put a figure on it, because there isn't any model for it, they just ignore it.

 

As well they should.

 

The bigger question is: IF THEY CAN'T PUT A FIGURE ON IT, HOW THE !@#$ DOES THE WHITE HOUSE KNOW IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY SAVINGS??????

[Kelly the Dog]

Well, you and the Dems pretty much are betting that the public will like it better by the time it gets passed. Because if they don't, '10 definitely becomes a single issue race, and '12 could very well be dominated by it as well. Aren't a lot of the provisions of "the plan" (no, what plan's on second, who's plan's on 1st, I don't know, 3rd base) supposed to kick in in '13. If they are, that could backfire on Obama if he's spending '11 & '12 trying to keep the Repubs from overturning his healthcare triumph of '09.

 

The interesting question to me in the scenario where the public believes the healthcare reform got railroaded through becomes is the public frustrated enough w/ both parties that a 3rd (or even a 4th) party actually becomes viable. My gut feel is no, but I hope I'm wrong there.

To me, very little of this matters. There will be a bill passed and it will have a public plan or a co-op in it, and there will be all kinds of protests about ramming it down our throats and the liberals will dance in the streets and yada yada yada, and this will go on for about six months. By spring of next year and into the summer if the economy has started to come around Obama will be a hero and the Democrats won't have to worry much about losing too many seats (they should lose some). And if the economy is worse or too sluggish for the public's expectations, the Democrats will be in trouble, and people will talk about the stimulus and health care, etc, but that won't really be the issue.

[Kelly the Dog]

As well they should.

 

The bigger question is: IF THEY CAN'T PUT A FIGURE ON IT, HOW THE !@#$ DOES THE WHITE HOUSE KNOW IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY SAVINGS??????

 

BECAUSE MOST EVERYONE IN THESE FIELDS AGREES IF YOU DO CERTAIN THINGS IN WELLNESS AND PREVENTION AND FIGHTING OBESITY AND END OF LIFE ISSUES THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS TO BE SAVED, THEY JUST CAN'T PUT A DOLLAR FIGURE ON IT.

[IDBillzFan]

As well they should.

 

The bigger question is: IF THEY CAN'T PUT A FIGURE ON IT, HOW THE !@#$ DOES THE WHITE HOUSE KNOW IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY SAVINGS??????

It's actually based on a very concise formula that just isn't being properly explained so the average American can understand it. Let me try to break it down in layman's terms for you based on what I've been hearing from Obama in his town hall meetings. Follow closely, okay?

 

First, we take shooby-dooby from here. That represents a net savings of oogey-boogey which goes directly to the initial costs of the health care reform package. Then the balance comes from abra-cadabra, which is picked up by taxing (fill in the blank with greedy capitalist here), and then you take the abra-cadabra and add it to the shooby-dooby, and that will cover the costs for the first year. After that, you need to start factoring in an incremental hokey-pokey which will come from cutting the costs currently being spent on hocus pocus. Divide that amount by the number of blowjobs Pelosi must give to get this passed, and pretty much from that point it all becomes profit, which is then given to the people who pay no federal income tax each year.

 

It's CBO-approved, Obama-approved, farting unicorn approved, and when it's all done, more than 65% of America will rely on the government to inefficiently do things that no person can obviously do on their own...or what the liberals like to call "Owning America, Securing Power."

[Chef Jim]

BECAUSE MOST EVERYONE IN THESE FIELDS AGREES IF YOU DO CERTAIN THINGS IN WELLNESS AND PREVENTION AND FIGHTING OBESITY AND END OF LIFE ISSUES THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS TO BE SAVED, THEY JUST CAN'T PUT A DOLLAR FIGURE ON IT.

 

BUT IT THEY COULD PUT AN EXACT DOLLAR AMOUNT ON WHAT COULD BE SAVED THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE COST IS SO WE'RE STILL AT AN UNKNOWN BOTTOM LINE. QUESTION? WHY ARE WE YELLING?

[Kelly the Dog]

BUT IT THEY COULD PUT AN EXACT DOLLAR AMOUNT ON WHAT COULD BE SAVED THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE COST IS SO WE'RE STILL AT AN UNKNOWN BOTTOM LINE. QUESTION? WHY ARE WE YELLING?

NOT SURE!!!!!!!!!!! ASK DC!!!!!!!!

[Chef Jim]

NOT SURE!!!!!!!!!!! ASK DC!!!!!!!!

 

Oh good, I thought we were at a town hall meeting.

[Magox]

The polls are way, way off on these issues. Right now, the public and the independents are against it strongly. But that is because people don't understand it. When pollsters start adding stuff in the questions, would you like to see this or that, would you be in favor of this or that, the popularity goes way up.

 

The White House does need to do a much better job of explaining itself, and what the plan will actually look like. They need to have a plan first though and that must be done by Congress. The opposition has done a much better job of demonizing the plan than the supporters have done explaining what it will be like. I will also bet that the public will be a lot more in favor of it than they are now by the time it gets passed and they understand better what is there and what isn't there.

That's because we don't understand it? ok

 

I believe what is closer to the truth Dog is that the general public senses a plan that has way too many uncertainties, and that they don't feel comfortable enough with what has been presented as a solution that will do more good than harm.

 

1) We don't believe the government when they tell us that it won't add to the deficit.

 

2) We don't believe the government when they say that the quality of care would be unaffected.

 

3) We don't believe the government when they say that it won't crowd out the private insurers.

 

4) We don't believe the government when they say they won't have to tax the general public to pay for this bill.

 

5) We don't believe the government when they say they will be able to lower insurance costs.

 

The only thing that I feel that is certain that they can achieve is insuring more people across the board.

 

Now you may disagree with the 5 points I brought up, but you can not be sure that these things won't happen. What is for sure, is that the outcome of these arguments are uncertain.

[Kelly the Dog]

That's because we don't understand it? ok

 

I believe what is closer to the truth Dog is that the general public senses a plan that has way too many uncertainties, and that they don't feel comfortable enough with what has been presented as a solution that will do more good than harm.

 

1) We don't believe the government when they tell us that it won't add to the deficit.

 

2) We don't believe the government when they say that the quality of care would be unaffected.

 

3) We don't believe the government when they say that it won't crowd out the private insurers.

 

4) We don't believe the government when they say they won't have to tax the general public to pay for this bill.

 

5) We don't believe the government when they say they will be able to lower insurance costs.

 

The only thing that I feel that is certain that they can achieve is insuring more people across the board.

 

Now you may disagree with the 5 points I brought up, but you can not be sure that these things won't happen. What is for sure, is that the outcome of these arguments are uncertain.

 

I believe there are a significant number of people that believe those things you just mentioned, and they are legitimate concerns, and there are no verifiable answers to the questions. But it's still only a quarter of the public at best, IMO, even if you divide the country into two halves of red and blue.

 

The vast majority against it, IMO, fall under a lot of categories, don't realize how bad off we are if we don't reform the system, just scared of the unknown and big change, don't know what is actually in the basic plan but heard nasty rumors, don't understand the "public option", think gramma's plug may be pulled and there are death panels, fear their insurance they like is going to be taken from them, fear socialism even though they don't understand we already have it in health insurance, worried that the economy is not doing well right now and this is just too much, etc.

[Adam]

Because he's waiting to laugh at the hypocrisy of people who don't want the government to reduce health care costs, but want health care costs reduced anyway. Because only the government can reduce health care costs.

Just remember- to the conservatives, the government is evil and the private sector is consumate good. You can reverse the two for liberals......this is a country full of simpletons

[Magox]

I believe there are a significant number of people that believe those things you just mentioned, and they are legitimate concerns, and there are no verifiable answers to the questions. But it's still only a quarter of the public at best, IMO, even if you divide the country into two halves of red and blue.

 

The vast majority against it, IMO, fall under a lot of categories, don't realize how bad off we are if we don't reform the system, just scared of the unknown and big change, don't know what is actually in the basic plan but heard nasty rumors, don't understand the "public option", think gramma's plug may be pulled and there are death panels, fear their insurance they like is going to be taken from them, fear socialism even though they don't understand we already have it in health insurance, worried that the economy is not doing well right now and this is just too much, etc.

I didn't mention those things because they're idiotic. However the idea of more government control is a justifiable concern and there is a legitimate question out there, where do you draw the line? And that is another point that I'm very concerned with.

 

Now you can chalk this up to the Talking Republican lines, but this has got to be the largest government power grab that we have ever seen in our life time. When is enough enough? Dog, if there happened to be another power grab in another industry, you know as well as I do, that they would have a logical reason in why it needs to be done, and you know damn well that you would be right there justifying why they are doing it, with a logical coherent argument.

[Chef Jim]

I believe there are a significant number of people that believe those things you just mentioned, and they are legitimate concerns, and there are no verifiable answers to the questions. But it's still only a quarter of the public at best, IMO, even if you divide the country into two halves of red and blue.

 

The vast majority against it, IMO, fall under a lot of categories, don't realize how bad off we are if we don't reform the system, just scared of the unknown and big change, don't know what is actually in the basic plan but heard nasty rumors, don't understand the "public option", think gramma's plug may be pulled and there are death panels, fear their insurance they like is going to be taken from them, fear socialism even though they don't understand we already have it in health insurance, worried that the economy is not doing well right now and this is just too much, etc.

 

I think many of us are against it because there has not been anything comprehesive, understandable and difinative put before us. It's not so much that we're against it, we're reserving judgement. How can we be for something that has not even been properly presented yet?

[Kelly the Dog]

I think many of us are against it because there has not been anything comprehesive, understandable and difinative put before us. It's not so much that we're against it, we're reserving judgement. How can we be for something that has not even been properly presented yet?

 

You can't be, you're right. But then you really shouldn't be against it either. It's pretty easy, IMO, to know about what is going to be in the bill. You can be in favor of it or not in favor of it based on the general parameters... but you're not being asked to vote on it, just whether or not you agree with the basic construct.

 

It's also very legitimate to say, well, if if doesn't have a public plan I think I would be in favor of it. I don't like the public plan idea.

 

I think if people knew what was in the public plan, many more would be in favor of it. If they knew how bad a situation we are in, they would know something needs to be done. If they knew there isn't going to be any person who works for government telling you what procedures you can or can't get any more than a private insurer accountant telling you, a lot more people would be in favor of it. If people knew no one was pulling the plug on gramma, a lot more would be in favor of it.

 

It's never going to have 80% approval, but it probably will be over 50% when all is said and done and explained.

[IDBillzFan]

Just remember- to the conservatives, the government is evil and the private sector is consumate good. You can reverse the two for liberals......this is a country full of simpletons

It's easy to stand back and point at both fringes and suggest that if only everyone were as wise as you, all in the world would be swell. So while you're standing on that perch, take time to remember that to a true conservative, government only comes across as evil when is strays from its original purpose, and increasingly creates a greater individual dependence on the government. A true conservative understands that a government naturally has its role for the sake of things like interstate commerce, national security, etc. But when a government extends its reach to states and individuals in such a manner as to increase the amount of dependence the states and individuals have on the government, apathy rules and freedom deteriorates.

 

I noted a great quote recently from H.L. Mencken: "The fact is that liberty, in any true sense, is a concept that lies quite beyond the reach of the inferior man's mind. Liberty means self-reliance, it means resolution, it means the capacity for doing without. The average man doesn't want to be free. They want to be safe."

 

Making people think they're safe keeps liberals in office and, like I said, deteriorates freedom. Being a true conservative is simply not as ridiculously easy as "government evil, private sector great." It's about embracing your individual freedoms and, as Mencken basically said, having the "capacity to do without." It's about personal accountability, and the desire to win and lose on one's own, with no need for handouts from the federal government. That's something that gets lost in the all the holier-than-thou TV Guide version of what a conservative really is.

 

But thanks. Cuz America does love its TV Guide.

[Chef Jim]

You can't be, you're right. But then you really shouldn't be against it either. It's pretty easy, IMO, to know about what is going to be in the bill. You can be in favor of it or not in favor of it based on the general parameters... but you're not being asked to vote on it, just whether or not you agree with the basic construct.

 

It's also very legitimate to say, well, if if doesn't have a public plan I think I would be in favor of it. I don't like the public plan idea.

 

I think if people knew what was in the public plan, many more would be in favor of it. If they knew how bad a situation we are in, they would know something needs to be done. If they knew there isn't going to be any person who works for government telling you what procedures you can or can't get any more than a private insurer accountant telling you, a lot more people would be in favor of it. If people knew no one was pulling the plug on gramma, a lot more would be in favor of it.

 

It's never going to have 80% approval, but it probably will be over 50% when all is said and done and explained.

 

Oh if it can't be properly and simply explained to me I sure can be against it and you're right I'm not voting on it and that's what sucks. I've got to rely on members of congress who won't even be a part of the plan to vote on it for me. If I present an investment to someone in a manner that does not make sense to them I've failed them and they typically won't move forward....because they're against it. They don't know why, but they don't understand it enough to move forward even though doing nothing is the worst option. I don't have enough faith in the people running our government, most of whom have never run any business or been responsible to a bottom line, to create something that will work for the long run. This plan is going to be for the long run, this plan or plans will be what I will be using for the rest of my life and I want them to take their time and come up with plan and publish reports in laymen's terms for all of us so we know what we're. Kind of like Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Hay did with the Federalist Papers in regard to the constitution. They ran it by the people not rammed it down their throats. The fact the Obama wanted to rush this through is what really (in my mind anyway) !@#$ed it up.

[Alaska Darin]

Actually "the public plan" would have private insurers cutting the costs, after the government sets the guidelines.

Yeah, we all know how effective government regulation is at reducing cost.

[manateefan]

I don't give a sh-- what the White House wants. It's what Congress can pass that's important.

 

And the Congress has a Democratic Majority not a GOP. So of course they'll do what Obama wants.

[ThereIsNoDog]

And the Congress has a Democratic Majority not a GOP. So of course they'll do what Obama wants.

They will? Then what's been the problem?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

They will? Then what's been the problem?

 

 

That IS the problem.