Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
All Da King's Men -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

ObamaCare Victory !

by Da King on March 22, 2010

in Democrats,health care,Uncategorized,White House administration

Congratulations to President Obama and the Democrats for pushing health care reform through the House Of Representatives. Now they will use reconciliation to push The House "fixes" to the bill through the Senate, and then the President can sign it into law. What a "victory for the American people," as the Prez said yesterday.

The "victory" came about when our President realized that by forcing all Americans to buy health insurance, he could solve the problem of some Americans not having health insurance. The man is a genius, I tell you ! His Harvard education certainly didn't go to waste. Who knew the government could make people do things by forcing them to do things ? Next, perhaps our President can solve the poverty problem by forcing all poor people to make more money ! In fact, if the government just forces people do to anything and everything the government wants them to do, we could solve EVERY problem. The possibilities are endless. Maybe we could even form a perfect utopian society where the means of production and private property are all controlled by the government, and could be equally distributed by the state, in order that everyone would get an equal share. That would be fan-freaking-tastic ! No more of those filthy rich people making more than the rest of us workers. No more inequality. We'd all big one big communi…ty. It takes a village, you know.

But I don't want to get ahead of myself, so I'll return to the incremental step known as ObamaCare. The President got the pro-life group of Democ-rats led by Bart Stupak to agree to ObamaCare by promising to issue an executive order that would ban federal funding of abortions. That put ObamaCare over the top. It passed the House by a 219-212 vote. Stupak said Obama's promise was all he needed to vote for ObamaCare, somehow, even though an executive order doesn't override Congressional legislation, and therefore carries no meaning. If it did, Obama could have passed the entire health care reform bill by executive order, not that I want to give him any ideas. He couldn't do that, of course. Democrats are on record as being against the notion of a unitary executive (or at least they were during the Bush years), and I'm pretty sure the U.S. Constitution has something in it about a separation of powers, not that we use the Constitution much these days. It certainly wasn't consulted to pass ObamaCare, except for the occasional mention of some Constitutional "blind spot" by our President, who took an oath to uphold the Constitution when he was sworn into office. Our Prez, what a jokester.

The first "victory" the American people will see with ObamCare is….their taxes will go up. Then, a few years down the road, the benefits kick in to address the health insurance crisis that Democrats claim is killing 40,000 Americans every year (by their own estimate, the Dems will let 160,000 more people die before the benefits kick in in 2014. Go figure).

If you listen to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), though I have no idea why anyone would, ObamaCare is going to create 700 bazillion jobs, or something (maybe it was only 4 million). Yesterday, I heard officials from the Caterpillar company say that ObamaCare would cost them $100 million in the first year alone, which seemed to fly directly in the face of Pelosi's dream-state job claims, but it's not like the American people have been buying the blue-sky fantasies of the Democrats regarding ObamaCare in the first place. We all know the cost estimates are smoke and mirrors (10 years of taxes to pay for 6 years of benefits in order to not increase the deficit). We all know ObamaCare adds 14-16 milllion to Medicaid and passes those costs along to the states, when the states already can't figure out how to pay for their existing Medicaid recipients. We all know doctors don't even want to take existing Medicaid patients, because the reimbursement rates are even lower than with Medicare. Many doctors don't even want to take more Medicare patients. We all know the government will create a Medicare rationing board that will restrict care to the elderly who need it the most. We all know ObamaCare is a redistribution of wealth to the working poor and the young at the expense of the middle class and upward. We all know the middle class and upward will pay higher insurance premiums. We all know ObamaCare will cost FAR more than the estimates. We all know you can't insure 32 million more people and have it cost only $950 billion. That comes out to about $3,000 annually to insure each one of those 32 million. We all know you can't give comprehensive insurance to people at that rate, especially when you remove pre-existing conditions and recessions. The cost estimates of ObamaCare are a pipe dream, a joke. We also know there's no such thing as a "right" to health insurance, any more than there's a right to own a Mercedes Benz or a right to own a 4-bedroom house in the suburbs. There is no right which forces another person to provide it for you at their expense. Such a thing is not a right, it's welfare (for the perpetually confused, you don't have a "right" to welfare either).

On a personal note, I'm almost certain I will not be able to keep my current health insurance, in spite of our President's many statements to the contrary, because my insurance does not cover all the things ObamaCare says it should cover. Even if I can keep it, it will not be the same insurance, and it will no doubt cost much more than I pay now. My insurance rate already went up 12% last week, due to the fact that it now covers pre-existing conditions, which I did not ask for or want. I only say I'm "almost certain" I will not be able to keep it because, let's face it, the actual details of the costs and coverages of ObamaCare are not really known by any of us, in spite of the President's constant claims of transparency. The ObamaCare bill has recently grown to nearly 3,000 pages. We don't know all of what's in it. I can think of no other major piece of legislation passed in this country that was demagogued with the same blizzard of bs as this one.

But we're very close to finding out what ObamaCare will mean if it isn't reversed. If it stays in effect, here's my prediction – 10 years from now the health insurance companies will implode under the weight of government regulation and bureaucracy, health care costs will continue to go through the roof, we'll have trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, a shortage of medical services, the dollar will be extremely devalued….and the Democrats will cite it all as proof that the free market doesn't work. The government NEVER blames the government for anything. Then the Dems will call for the government-run universal single-payer health care system they've always wanted, with Americans paying 50-60% of their incomes in taxes. The Dems will repeat the exercise with housing, food, banking, energy, and anything else they can dream up.

In the end, utopia is achieved….and with the little money we have left in our pockets, we'll buy what we can on the black market.

Or, we can vote these idiots out of office and make sensible changes to the health care system. The choice is yours, America.

  • roysoldboy

    ***Then the Dems will call for the government-run universal single-payer health care system they've always wanted, with Americans paying 50-60% of their incomes in taxes. The Dems will repeat the exercise with housing, food, banking, energy, and anything else they can dream up.***

    You have hit the nail on the head with those statements. Of course, there is one more that they have already thought of, and that would be amnesty for illegal aliens. Just think how many people that will add to the 30 million they just threw into the health insurance policy.

    Oh yeah, they will go hog wild just as soon as they stop celebrating and I bet they go to amnesty before they do anything about the number one problem, jobs.

  • g-mann17

    Ugh, conservatives truly are dummies.

    First what country pays 50-60% in taxes. Second, add up all the taxes, fees, licenses, that you pay now, and it's roughly 40% of your income.

    The difference between liberal and conservative is that a liberal wants to tax you and give you something for it, a conservative wants to tax you and give it to his buddies.

  • walter

    hey roybot….how's that government-run universal single-payer health care system (Medicare) working out for you?

    our buddy Jeff (via John Stossel at Fox News ) brought us the story of a single payer government run health care system that not only worked quite well but the people covered by it lived much longer than the people covered by France's system. It was the government run Singapore health system.

    government run systems can work….it's just that republicans in government want to ensure that they fail

  • roysoldboy

    Come on Walt. Is the population of Singapore anywhere near 300 million? How about the territory of Singapore compared to the US? Do they have a democratic form of government or just a bit less free?

    Why do you people always forget the population of nations when comparing them? Do the people of Singapore live as high on the hog as most Americans? How much do they spend on defense every year? I guess I might as well shut down since you know all about that government run system crap without telling some of the other things that are needed to see the truth. To compare nations there is more to be done than health care.

    Speaking of all those things, how many doctors would it take to take care just of the new 30 million we are putting on the public dole? Come to think of it I don't think they have 30 million people, do they? What will become of all those new ones unless our government cuts we of the Medicare group out of the medical system. That would help take care of the 30 million new ones.

  • Andrea

    An article for you – history hypocrisy scare tactics all over again ..by the right
    http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/29/medicare-44/
    I think when the Americans who earn less than 88k for a family realise they are going to get a subsidy to help them buy health insurance – this is one thing they won't mind being forced to do. Your logic is that people for some reason hate to have health care insurance – Hello? they don't have it because they couldn't afford it and they gamble with their lives.
    If the insurance industry thought they implode why did their stocks rise today ? Actually this bill is their gift horse.

  • JRid

    Not having health insurance is not "gambling with our lives" by any means; it's gambling more with our finances. You talk about scare tactics from the right, well try scare tactics from the left saying that 40,000 people will die because they lack health insurance. Sorry, you may go bankrupt without health insurance and you are unfortunate enough to suffer a major medical problem, but your cause of death won't be "lack of health insurance" since no hospital can refuse treatment and no study has been made linking certain deaths to lack of coverage. Both sides are horribly guilty of "scare tactics" and twisting the truth. Not having insurance myself and having had to make a visit to the ER recently, I can attest to the fact that bureaucracy–basically all the layers between you and your doctor– is the biggest problem in healthcare costs. The solution we just passed? A new, extra layer of bureaucracy. So even if you pay the same or less out of pocket to a hospital or doctor, you'll still pay to staff and operate that new layer of bureaucracy via taxes. A lot of people keep saying they're happy to pay more taxes to help more people get coverage; well, how very kind of you but a lot of what you'll be paying for are salaries of bureaucrats–not much different than paying the salaries of insurance company bureaucrats–not just supporting subsidies for poorer people. And you'll still be paying those insurance company bureaucrats too. Also, if an individual starts having financial problems and can't afford to pay his/her insurance, instead of just dealing with your insurer, you will also have to prove to a government agency that you are suffering hardship and hope they agree with your assessment to avoid the fine. That was one of the "treasures" I found as I read what has been posted of the bill on the Congressional website. But Government workers are far smarter and nicer than those mean insurance company bureaucrats, right? Just like the friendly staff at the Post Office and the IRS. Will people get help from this? Sure. Are reforms needed? Absolutely and many in this bill are necessary, but why should we have to also accept the parts that many of its supporters have even referred to as "seriously flawed"? Will everyone benefit from this bill? Not even close, in particular those like me who work but don't make enough to afford insurance but make too much to qualify for much of any help in the form of subsidies or assistance and probably still "qualify" to pay the fine.

  • http://www.redstate.com/flagstaff/ Flagstaff

    Scare tactics? What does that mean? When the theater is on fire and someone yells, "Fire!" is that a scare tactic? Yes, in a way it is. The idea is to wake up the folks who are dozing through the movie and make sure they get out before they're killed. Nothing wrong with it. All the facts are straight.

    Now, when somebody yells, "We gotta abrogate the human rights of everybody else because if we don't, millions of people will die!" that is a scare tactic, too. And if it's true, perhaps it can be justified. But when it's NOT true (and it's not), then it's a misleading scare tactic, and it isn't justifiable.

    Hi, Andrea.

  • http://www.redstate.com/flagstaff/ Flagstaff

    And Andrea, this bill is a great gift to the insurance industry in some ways. "30 million" new customers (it really won't be that many) are welcomed by any business if they are allowed to serve those customers at a profit. The only way that can happen is if insurance premiums match reality. Given that the current profit margin of the health insurance business is about 2.5%, that means premiums will NOT go down. Obama claims forced coverage is necessary in order for "pre-existing conditions" to be covered. New coverage of more people who are already seriously ill will require higher premiums. Did you realize there is nothing in this bill that restricts insurance premiums? Whose premiums are going up?

    Consider that about half of the newly insured can't pay their own premiums, that means YOUR premiums (if you pay any) will have to go up to pay for THEIR coverage. That's not the change I hoped for. Oh, and your taxes will go up, too, to pay for the increased bureaucracy, among other things. They already have plans to hire 17,000 new IRS agents to enforce the "everybody has to buy insurance" requirement. Just for that one requirement. Do you really want the IRS to be reviewing your medical records?

    ps. For those of you who are not yet on Medicare, some facts: I pay about $225 per month for my Medicare and supplemental coverage–just for me. Last year, I had a Medicare Advantage plan–you know, the ones protected by the Gatorade Giveaway in Florida but not in other states. My total then for slightly less coverage (but all I wanted, including drug coverage) was $120 per month. Not available this year, thanks to The Won. Californians were upset by a 40% rate increase by a Blue Cross company. They should try an 88% increase.

    Basic Medicare costs $95, as it did last year, and my prescription coverage, which I would rather not have but I'm penalized if I don't, costs $35. I added a Medicare Supplement Plan, which has the catastrophic coverage I want and more that I don't want. It accounts for $95, the rest of the $225. Because the federal government sets what can and cannot be included in that supplement plan in my county, I effectively have no choice if I want the catastrophic coverage. That is a government program, and the only reason it is that LOW* is because the medical care providers accept about 40 cents on the dollar, according to the Statement of Benefits in my hand. (Half of that comes from the Supplement plan that I pay extra for, but one I'm not forced to purchase. Without it, I'd have split that 40 cent cost with Medicare.) And they say they're going to save more money by cutting doctors' payments back even more. How long 'til my cardiologist decides to retire? Maybe I should petition the President to force all doctors to work until they're 70.

    *Low= less expensive than it might be. Not that it will do me any good when it goes bankrupt.

  • http://www.redstate.com/flagstaff/ Flagstaff

    G-mann, In the western hemisphere, that country is called "California." For top bracket earners in CA, their taxes (including sales and property) can be very close to 60%. It's on the agenda for NY. Many European countries have taxes in that range, with VAT taxes around 20%, and several dollars per gallon gasoline taxes.

    Before Reagan, the top income tax rate was over 80%. When that rate was dropped to 28%, it only took about a year for the economy to take off, and it only slowed down in 2008 because of over-extension of mortgages (a government-forced program) to people who couldn't repay. The Obama advisors seem to think a return to 80% would be a good idea.

  • Andrea

    Flagstaff insurance premiums will be going up with or without the bill. Flagstaff I live in NY I already pay high taxes and I am willing to pay more if it means an assurance of health care.
    JRID – for many it is gambling with their lives. Because they don't see a doctor for preventative care. I remember a short order cook telling me he can't afford to buy insurance – his health care is he either gets better or he doesn't .

    Sure the insurance industry will be getting more customers while most of us save or at least the people who can't afford to pay. I think you guys cant see the Forrest through the trees. You see all the negatives but can't see the good and how YOU might end up saving.
    And even if you are not in the income bracket to save you will have the reassurance that you will no longer have a cap on what you are allowed to spend in health care in case of a big disaster.
    Families earning less than 88k get to be on a sliding scale instead of paying the same rate as a person who earns a million a year. Seniors get $250 towards donut hole gap , no longer are pre existing conditions something to fear and worry that you will not get coverage. Small businesses get a tax credit .

    I love Bill Kristol last nite on FOX noise, saying how republicans were for all the good parts of the bill (like coverage for pre existing conditions ) – but just not the bad – Well how then are you going to make a deal and pay for it ? You cant just have your cake and eat it too. Republicans think they can get things for nothing. You dont get nothing for nothing like a Uncle of mine used to say.. But isn't it good that now the richest country in the world is finally thinking about their poor when comes to health? Well some of us think so

  • Bubba

    Andrea, since you are so knowledgable about the bill, unlike the Democrats who voted for it, please explain how this will reduce costs. Also what good is having insurance if physicians won't accept it? Many won't take Medicaid now and it will only get worse. And why does coverage only start in 2014? Surely the govenrment can't be that incompetent that it will take 3.5 years to put the program in place.

  • angry conserv

    WHY I DETEST THE WASHINGTON ELITE
    Iam about to leave home and pay my respect to a young man that gave his life
    for his country. God ,I feel for his father . I cant imagine the pain. I think of my good friends father that went ashore on D-Day survived and fought his way through France and when seriously wounded refused to be sent home and fought on. Or my father voluntarily being on a a carrier 300 miles from Tokyo knowing that once the invasion of Japan was underway his life would likely end over the skies of Japan.
    Nancy Pelosi declares the vote "a great act of patriotism".

  • http://www.redstate.com/flagstaff/ Flagstaff

    Andrea, the point is not that ObamaCare will raise prices but no change would not raise them. It is that OC will raise them more, and your taxes will go up too, and so will inflation. Do you remember the inflation of the Carter Administration?

    As a preface to another take on the cost of the new plan, I shuld explain something that most people are unaware of–CBO numbers are a static projection, useful ONLY to compare competing plans for the future. They DO NOT CLAIM to predict ACTUAL future costs of any particular plan of action. Remember that. Comparative costs, not actual costs.

    Now read this.

    http://www.redstate.com/repair_man_jack/2010/03/22/welcome-to-the-desert-of-the-real/

    Get it? The CBO always underestimates costs because of the rationale behind their estimates.

  • roysoldboy

    Did anyone see the signing ceremony on TV this morning? I watched some of the speechifying and was amazed at some of the things our Glorious Leader said. For one, he said that this bill will save about $1 trillion in 2 decades. Mercy me, he can save $50 billion each year for 20 years. Somehow, it seems to me that that is about the amount they say they will take from Medicare. Surely they don't spend enough on Medicare to save that much in 20 years. The math of the White House and the Dem party really amaze me.

    The worst statement he made was that "the votes have been made and counted and we had a majority". To tell the truth he should have mentioned that the votes have all been bought and paid for with promises, which surely would be the truth. You know those in the Senate that were bought with special deals for certain states and haven't been removed from that one and those that Pelosi "bought" with her bribes, and there were a number of them. The thing was defeated easily if Bart "Stupid" Stupak hadn't got some special dispensation for some small airports in Michigan. How many of his group went with him when he switched over after that promise of an Executive Order which just can't constitutionally change Congressional law? That was one of the most junior minded changing of the mind I have ever seen and sure enough Bart Stupid said that the promise of an Executive Order was the reason he finally changed his mind.

    Bought and paid for with tax money and not a penny of any of it coming from the pockets of the leaders of the Dem party or the Glorious One.

  • roysoldboy

    Ohmigod, Andrea, a link to the wonkroom at ThinkProgress. Please excuse me for not punching on that one since your references to fear tactics are such a big deal on that site.

  • Da King

    Glad to see you back here, Flagstaff. Your comments were very informative.

    The cost estimates for ObamaCare are a joke. We all know it (except for certain acolytes blinded by partisanship). Looking at the big picture, what we have accomplished with ObamaCare is to make our unsustainable entitlement problem even more unsustainable. Now, we have to raise trillions more in taxes just to stay even with where we were prior to ObamaCare, and we were already on the path to countrywide bankruptcy before. The unsustainability remains, and we missed the opportunity to truly address health care costs and the entitlement problem. Insurance premiums will go up instead of down, and the size of the welfare state will now increase dramatically. Obama is further eroding the ability of our businesses to remain competitive, thus further eroding the private sector (the source of our wealth). Our annual deficit problem is unchanged and most likely worse. Massive tax increases are on the horizon, and we'll probably end up with a National Sales Tax soon to pay for all the government promises. That tax will hamper the economy even more. We are well on our way to becoming a European style quasi-socialist country, with it's accompanying decreased GDP, increasing joblessness, and increasing government dependency. What a shame. This seems like exactly what our Founders warned against.

  • Da King

    Roy,
    You know, even if ObamaCare did save $50 billion every year for 20 years (and it won't), it still wouldn't come close to paying for the annual federal spending increases Obama has already put in place, which come to about $500 billion every year. By my math, that leaves Obama about $450 billion short each year. I can't believe that all Americans can't see through this fiscal charade, but judging by a few of the comments (such as Andrea's), they can't.

    If the math don't fit, we must stop it.

  • Da King

    G-mann says, "Ugh, conservatives truly are dummies. First what country pays 50-60% in taxes. Second, add up all the taxes, fees, licenses, that you pay now, and it's roughly 40% of your income."

    It's not often that I'm called a dummy in one sentence, and then data backing up my claim is offered in a following sentence. Add the cost of ObamaCare to that 40% we already pay in taxes, then add in the increasing entitlement costs of the retiring boomers, and voila, we go into the 50-60% tax range. Great argument, G.

  • wvason

    Those who have come to expect to be taken care of do love this administration and its socialist ways. They also love these dem leaders in congress who want to be remembered for their support of the first minority potus regardless of his incompetance and harm he is doing to this country.

  • Da King

    Why worry about bankrupting the country when you can feel good by giving people "free" stuff ? Like many before him (but none nearly as bad), Obama will just leave the mess for someone else to clean up later.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).