Obamacare is working already!

[msm859]

Defense is a legitimate function of government since everyone benefits from being safer, whether you agree with the wars (I have my doubts) or not, that is one thing that you can't exclude someone from.

Its not like we can create a missle shield with a hole in it right above each person that doesn't want to pay, or let your house burn down because you don't want fire service, it presents too great a danger to your neighbors.

A public service is one in which everyone benefits. That was the original function of government, now we have too much private benefit (yes, both for corporations and individuals if you believe that)

Corporations are fictional entities and do not pay taxes, they simply pass on taxes. ........

Welfare is a problem, regardless of the amount because it deprives our society of the contributions the recipients would make if forced to work for a living. It also destroys initiative. The is the problem with social security, we take a whole class of people who could contribute and make them dependent on the largess of big government. Just because people are old does not mean they do not have contributions to make, but instead we put them out to pasture and have them sucking at the nipple of government, taking money out of the mouths of their children and grandchildren in some misguided attempt to promote retirement.

As said before I did/do not agree with the wars. And if they were necessary they should be paid for now. Not by my grandchildren. I wonder how many would support the wars if there was a surtax on wealth to pay for them. If the wars are going to cost 1 trillion dollars then lets figure the total wealth of all the people and corporations in the United States and tax them the appropriate percentage.

And corporations are not exactly fictional entities. The Supreme Court said they have free speech rights and can contribute whatever they want to political campaigns.

If you are against social security that will have to be an argument I will save for another day.

[nc73]

This could also be your company cutting back. They are paying less on your behalf and you are paying more of your share. I bet you that's it. I pay over 500 a month but we it covers 100 percent not 80/20 crap.

[chrisdfw]

And corporations are not exactly fictional entities. The Supreme Court said they have free speech rights and can contribute whatever they want to political campaigns.

True, I don't mean it in that they don't exist or have legal responsibilities. Just that they represent people. When we tax corporations a real person bears the cost. Either
an employee, shareholder, or (most likely) customer. The corporate income tax disguises who is paying the ultimate cost. Very low income people may well be bearing the
cost, and we can't see that because the corporation pays the tax, it disguises who bears the burden.

At least with the income tax (as unfair as it is in my opinion) we can see who bears the cost. That is an important feature in my mind since we can then have a reasonable
debate.

[PoorGrammyinBK7]

When I lost my job I lost my insurance as well. I have had to pay everything out-of-pocket and it is not cheap. A normal doctor's visit is about 300 dollars. I have just signed up for my own insurance and it is going to cost me 350 dollars per month. That is just for me. I wouldn't mind paying 310 for a family of 4 versus what I am paying to just insure myself. My employer does not offer insurance and I even looked into insurance offered by the state to help displaced employees. That insurance was riddled with flaws. The state plan only covered 400 dollars per year in medication and cost 125 a month.

I looked into other things that were supposed to be made available for people in need and it really is not made for people who have any sort of health issues. To give you an example I had to get my second MMR shot for the university I am attending and the health department referred me to my regular doctor because I have a chronic illness. I used to get upset at what I had to pay, it is pointless. I just finally accepted what insurance is going to cost every month now and have tried to say up to have spare cash on hand to cover the difference the deductible will not cover.

My med insurance (just for me) is $493 a month (probaby will go up to $550 in December) with a $1500 deductible. Our credit card debt is on the rise again because we can't afford all our expenses now with this insurance. I haven't been to the doctor in almost a year - taking risks with my health - cause I have to pay it all up to that $1500 and we just don't have the money - unless I put it on the card (thank God for one that survived BK).

If I were to give it up and stay uninsured for 6 months, then I can apply for the Obamacare (Florida) plan for those with preexisting conditions (my age and arthritis I guess), which is actually available now and I will get to jump into the government plan which they say will "save" me money, by paying almost $800 a month (its like $775 I think) and have a much larger deductible!

Sorry but that is change I cannot believe in. Downright depressing. Oops - that could become another preexisting condition...

[PoorGrammyinBK7]

That is not the only real solution. That would destroy health care as we know it in America.

There are several reasonable solutions to the problems that we're having. One is to emulate the Netherlands, which has private medicine just like we do, and a mixture of public and private insurance companies. Everyone is required to have insurance and the insurance companies are highly regulated. ObamaCare actually gets us a lot closer to the Dutch system, which the Dutch seem to really like. The question is whether that kind of system is only working because the Dutch are a smaller, more homogenous population, without a lot of the problems that populations have when they are larger and more diverse like ours.

One idea that seems reasonable to me is to eliminate all employer based health insurance and give everyone catastrophic-only insurance, along with HSAs to pay for non-life-threatening medical procedures. The HSAs could be filled with pre-tax savings, or with a health voucher from the government for lower-income Americans who can't afford to save anything in their HSAs. This would give people an incentive to spend wisely and would bring down health care costs. Under this system, folks would still get their emergency care covered via insurance but routine care would essentially be paid for out of pocket. The only problem I can see with this is that folks with chronic conditions would use up their HSA funds very quickly and would end up unable to get the care they need. Perhaps we could supplement this system by letting really sick folks buy into Medicare.

I like your idea in the last paragraph - makes sense and seems more fair than any I've seen.

[WhatMoney]

My med insurance (just for me) is $493 a month (probaby will go up to $550 in December) with a $1500 deductible. Our credit card debt is on the rise again because we can't afford all our expenses now with this insurance. I haven't been to the doctor in almost a year - taking risks with my health - cause I have to pay it all up to that $1500 and we just don't have the money - unless I put it on the card (thank God for one that survived BK).

If I were to give it up and stay uninsured for 6 months, then I can apply for the Obamacare (Florida) plan for those with preexisting conditions (my age and arthritis I guess), which is actually available now and I will get to jump into the government plan which they say will "save" me money, by paying almost $800 a month (its like $775 I think) and have a much larger deductible!

Sorry but that is change I cannot believe in. Downright depressing. Oops - that could become another preexisting condition...

These state-run Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plans (PCIP) would not apply to you since you are already able to get private insurance at a "reasonable" premium. To qualify for the PCIP plan you would need proof that you had been turned down for insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or the rates they quoted you were unreasonable. The PCIP rates are determined by prevailing private insurance rates in each state, and in fact vary widely from state to state. The only limitation is that the PCIP premium rate cannot be more than the highest premium rates for a healthy person in the same age bracket in your state. Florida has one of the highest PCIP premium rates in the country.

For persons with a serious pre-existing condition that may have medical expenses in the thousands of dollars every month, the PCIP insurance will save them money. Before PCIP these persons could not get insurance at any price.

Healthy people from 60-64 typically pay $600+/mo for private insurance, with the same high deductibles. So it's not unreasonable to expect someone with a pre-existing condition to pay a bit more. Both premiums are unaffordable for many people of course - which is why the Health Care reform bill was passed.

In 2014, your monthly premium can be no more than 9.6% of your monthly income, irregardless of any pre-existing condition. That should be a considerable reduction over the private insurance rates of today. And if you still can't afford 9.6% because of a poverty level income, your rates will be reduced until you can afford it, or you will be eligible for Medicaid.

Between now and 2014, you better get your BMI under 25, eat right, exercise, take your vitamins, stop smoking and binge drinking, and pray you don't get sick or have an accident.

The only solution for lower rates would have been the single payer system that Obama and the Senate Democrats wanted. But the Republicans and insurance companies made sure that didn't happen. Now you're stuck with a watered down bill that doesn't benefit most people until 2014. Vote more republicans and teabaggers into Congress this fall, and you'll be lucky to ever be able to afford health insurance.

The Republican health insurance plan for those that can't afford it is simple: Get Sick and Die Quickly.

[banca rotta]

Still haven't figured out Whatmoney what it is about Republicans you don't like?

They spend, spend, spend, like dems, they could care less about present and future generations of the middle class, like the dems, they bailout losers like the dems, they treat the constitution as if it was toilet paper just like the dems.

George Bush spent billions on "fighting AIDS" in Africa when Clinton never spent a dime and Clinton was the first black president at least that's what he said.

Obama is spending billions today in Iraq and Afghanistan killing the "enemy".

I for one can't tell the dems apart from the republicans. Maybe you can but I can't.

[chrisdfw]

The democrat alternative is to bleed the economy dry by forcing those with incomes to pay taxes and support those that don't.

That may seem like a utopian ideal of charity, but it adversely effects the economy, capital is mobile and it is easy
to set up a factory somewhere else if you try and force the"rich" to pay for everything. We need to be more reasonable
about our healthcare expectations and expect if we want a MRI for every sprain its going to cripple our economy.

The fact is in many cases all the extra healthcare does not improve outcomes. More surgery for older people often does
not improve either quality or life or length. We run to the doctor too much because it is subsidized. Also by having low
deductibles we just use the doctor if we need it or not. The fact is the free market can't work if people have no incentive
to reduce costs. We will then either suffer quality declines or rationing by government panels.

Our health system works pretty well right now, with some minor changes needed. One of those (at least in Texas) is that
we need to start deporting illegal immigrants instead of treating them in our hospitals. A lot of money is spent on care that
we never get paid for. Guess who then bears the costs? Us citizens and taxpayers.

There are fixes, but I have to believe that the government running my health care isn't the answer. I also can't believe the
the healthcare costs of the lower income workers have to be borne by the upper income workers. Where does it end, government
thugs on the street robbing you at gunpoint to pay for someone elses healthcare. (thats pretty much what is happening using
the tax code instead of thugs, I ask you morally what is the difference?)

[WhatMoney]

The democrat alternative is to bleed the economy dry by forcing those with incomes to pay taxes and support those that don't.

I also can't believe the the healthcare costs of the lower income workers have to be borne by the upper income workers. Where does it end, government thugs on the street robbing you at gunpoint to pay for someone elses healthcare. (thats pretty much what is happening using
the tax code instead of thugs, I ask you morally what is the difference?)

You're post contains so many exaggerations and distortions of the truth that I am not going to bother to debate you. You are on the side of personal greed over compassion for the sick, the poor and the elderly. You want to end Social Security for Seniors, even for those that paid into the system their entire working life, and think deporting illegals will solve the health care problems. I'm sure you think the US citizen children of these illegals should also never be treated when they get sick in this country. After all, it was the child's fault he was born into a family of immigrants and the child should just suffer and die so you can keep more of your personal income from taxes. Charity and compassion are really foreign words to you.

And your post just verifies what I said before: The Republican health insurance plan for those that can't afford it is simple: Get Sick and Die Quickly.

[WhatMoney]

Still haven't figured out Whatmoney what it is about Republicans you don't like?

They spend, spend, spend, like dems, they could care less about present and future generations of the middle class, like the dems, they bailout losers like the dems, they treat the constitution as if it was toilet paper just like the dems.

George Bush spent billions on "fighting AIDS" in Africa when Clinton never spent a dime and Clinton was the first black president at least that's what he said.

Obama is spending billions today in Iraq and Afghanistan killing the "enemy".

I for one can't tell the dems apart from the republicans. Maybe you can but I can't.

You are correct - I can tell the difference. Why you cannot is the real mystery. Perhaps it is because I pay attention to the congressional bills and votes of the Repugs and Dems. I listen to their rhetoric. Why you think liberal Democrat Barney Frank, and SC Republican Strom Thurman, the old conservative segregationist and racist, were indistinguishable, is truly amazing.

But to answer your question of why I hate the Republican Party OF TODAY, this article expresses my thoughts exactly. I could write the same thing, but this is a good shortcut article on what is wrong with the Republicans and their future directions.

The Republican Purge

In every ideological revolution within a party, a peculiar event occurs. Instead of becoming bigger, the party actually moves to become smaller. It identifies and isolates or eliminates ideological impurity within its ranks so that it may march lockstep in carrying out its agenda. It happened in Russia after the communist revolution. The communists seized power, overthrowing the Czars. But the party was too big, unwieldy. Too many people had their own opinions and party dissent was evident.

Under Lenin, the first purges were expulsions, not arrests and executions. Those expelled were intellectuals in various disciplines, people who were intelligent, could persuade others, and were not content to be told what to think or how to act. They were not unsympathetic to the Revolution, though. In fact, they agreed with it for the most part. They may have favored other methodologies or different directions going forward.

But in any case, their voices were not welcome by Lenin and other party leaders. They would not participate in the hysteria needed to support the party through hard times. Stalin, Lenin's successor, continued to carry out party purges under various guises, usually having those purged executed along with their families.

Hitler similarly purged the Nazi party of dissent and challengers, executing those who disagreed with him or sought to challenge his power. The Nazi party was built along rigid lines of control, so that dissent from within would be squashed immediately.

A modern-day analog of the same thing can be seen in Afghanistan. The Taliban, a small group in numbers but fiercely devoted to their ideology, kills villagers who cooperate with the US, attacks schools for girls, and generally controls the population with a reign of terror.

Granted, the purge happening in the Republican Party is not as dramatic, not as bloody, but it is just as decisive in its ideological isolation. The party began emphasizing lack of cooperation with Obama and the Democrats right after Obama's election in 2008. Since Obama took office, the constant mantra of the Republicans has been "obstruction." The rhetoric against the administration, against the Democratic members of Congress, and against Obama personally was marked by hate, vitriol, and outright lies -- often colored with racism. The point has always been to de-legitimize the President and his administration.

And threats have been made against Republicans who would dare to cooperate. Several Republicans , characterized as RINOs - Republicans in Name Only -- have lost their primaries, having incurred the wrath of Tea Party purists who believe in no cooperation with a black president and a democratic congress.

The Republican Purge, begun when Obama became President, has intensified. It will continue. The party is moving toward an ideologically "pure" position -- no taxes, no government, no regulation of business, no health care, no protection of the poor and the destitute, no Social Security or Medicare, survival of the richest, no rights of birth control or abortion, an enhanced police state, allowing racism and discrimination, intolerance of Islam and homosexuality, and a perpetual state of war. All of this in the name of Christianity, mind you. Many of the positions taken are ostensibly "Christian" positions -- the fundamentalist variety. More moderate or liberal Christians would see concern for the poor and social justice as Christian virtues.

Now not all Tea Party Republicans hold to all these radical positions. But you can bet that unless a wave of sanity comes over the party, there will be more purges. We have already seen accusations of "tea party in name only" as candidates try to out-conservative the other.
Remember, the purge began when Obama got elected. One by one even mainstream Republicans have adopted more radical language and attitudes in an attempt to survive politically.

Although the Democrats technically have had control of the Congress and the White House, control does not mean the ability to get things done. Senate rules require a super-majority of 60 votes to move a bill to a voting position, and the Democrats do not have that. Nor do Democrats act in lockstep. The Democratic values of diversity and differences of opinion mean that they are less united against a lockstep minority -- and the Republicans in adopting that kind of attitude have won the day time and again. They scream for the Administration to treat them fairly, to include their ideas, to compromise -- and then vote against whole measures. Health care was significantly weakened because the Administration wanted to treat them as reasonable and rational when they were determined to be unreasonable, irrational, and obstructionist.

The public values getting things done. A diverse majority will wind up at the mercy of a united minority moving with a single purpose. It happened in Russia. It happened in Germany. It may well happen here, if we don't learn the lessons of history. George W. Bush presided over the greatest deconstruction of government that has ever occurred, while increasing its police powers and warmongering. The Tea Party Republicans will make Bush look like a big government regulator.

Rand Paul wants to deregulate the coal industry after the terrible Massey coal mine accident. Who needs safety regulations? He also wants the ability for individuals and businesses to discriminate against blacks. Sharron Angle has called for the elimination of Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance.

Think they can't do it? Look what chaos crazy minorities produced in Russia and Germany. But this is America! Yes, but the Tea Party folk do not like a tolerant America where people do what they please and government is there to help people in trouble. They object to things like the 14th Amendment which outlawed slavery and gives citizenship to people born in the US. Some object to the people being allowed to vote for their Senators! Some have even objected to the amendment giving women the vote.

A reasonable majority is usually helpless at the onslaught of a determined, single-minded minority. And if the Republican Tea Party seizes control of Congress, the dismantling of America will begin.
September 15, 2010

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymon..._b_718217.html

[goodyphilips]

Obamacare though started with all the good intentions and with the heart in the right place does not seem to be practically working. Private insurance companies do not like it and insurance agents are not too enthused. existing policy holders are also not very happy.

[chrisdfw]

You're post contains so many exaggerations and distortions of the truth that I am not going to bother to debate you. You are on the side of personal greed over compassion for the sick, the poor and the elderly. You want to end Social Security for Seniors, even for those that paid into the system their entire working life, and think deporting illegals will solve the health care problems. I'm sure you think the US citizen children of these illegals should also never be treated when they get sick in this country. After all, it was the child's fault he was born into a family of immigrants and the child should just suffer and die so you can keep more of your personal income from taxes. Charity and compassion are really foreign words to you.

And your post just verifies what I said before: The Republican health insurance plan for those that can't afford it is simple: Get Sick and Die Quickly.

Until we change the constituition the children of illegals born in this country are illegal, but why should I pay one dime to treat any child other than my own by force?
Second, charity is not charity when the money is taken from you by force. Don't pay taxes and they arrest you and put you in jail. There is nothing charitable about supporting others at the barrel of a gun. I give to charity, and give 10% of my income to my church, but there is nothing charitable about handing over money under the threat of force.
Third, it isn't about greed, it is about the right to private property. I should get the opportunity to own the results of my efforts. There was a time in this country where we forced an entire race of people to serve the needs of others. We called it slavery. I guess now when they only take 50% of income that only makes one a half slave? There are legitimate functions of government, but stealing from one citizen to support another is not legitimate.

Finally, I am no Republican, as far as I am concerned they have wrecked this country right along side the democrats. It was George Bush that created the largest new entitlement program in 40+ years with medicare prescription drugs.

I believe in limited government, Jeffersonian government over Hamiltonian government. Personal responsiblity over collectivism. Minding our own business and protecting our own borders over meddling foreign affairs. If attacked I believe in a full response, crushing any that oppose us, but not getting into protracted battels in wards we refuse to win. The last time we knew how to win a war was WW2 where we nuked the Japanese twice and fire bombed German cities to the ground. That is how you protect your interest. Other than that we need to bring our troops home and protect our own borders and shores.

You don't have to debate, but I am not exagerating, I am making a fair moral equivalent between two acts. Use whichever analogy you like, but there is nothing about having the government enslave or steal from people that makes it morally superior to the theft and slavery imposed by individuals. Just because the majority votes to steal does not make it right.

Democracy is just two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner. That is what the country is doing. More and more people are voting to consume the earnings of fewer and fewer people. In addition to being immoral, its economically unsustainable. Eventually the goose dies. It may be a long slow process, but the welfare state is not sustainable. Look to the soviet union, cuba, etc. Even Europe has been in decline.

Its really a question of what you value. I value freedom. Others value having a master that doesn't beat them.

[banca rotta]

And your post just verifies what I said before: The Republican health insurance plan for those that can't afford it is simple: Get Sick and Die Quickly.

Are you sure about this Whatmoney??? George Bush and the republican controlled congress created the very expensive senior citizen prescription drug plan back in 03 to appease people like yourself.

He even got the blessing of the more fiscally conservative senator Edward Kennedy.

If you look closely on the link you will see the 19 plus trillion (with a "T") gift that the republicans gave you. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

I would relax if I were you. There's a very good chance that the republicans will take back congress and support more spending just as they have before.

The only change with either party will be all the numbers on the debt side of the above link will be much larger.

[WhatMoney]

Are you sure about this Whatmoney??? George Bush and the republican controlled congress created the very expensive senior citizen prescription drug plan back in 03 to appease people like yourself.

I would relax if I were you. There's a very good chance that the republicans will take back congress and support more spending just as they have before.

The only change with either party will be all the numbers on the debt side of the above link will be much larger.

I am talking about Republicans TODAY and in the future, eg. the TeaBaggers described in the article. It's more than spending - I don't want to live in an ultra-conservative intolerant and hateful Theocracy. I agree the Bushes outdid the Democrats in overspending. The Repugs just prefer to spend it on wars and military contracters, while the Democrats think the citizens of the country have more priority that the Iraqis and the Afghans, and the MIC.

But you are right, the Part d drug plan did save me vast fortunes, about $20 last year over buying my Rx's at Walmart for $4/month without Medicare.

[tobee43]

what is this country doing wrong????

my brother gave me a quick call yesterday as he returned from russia on a business trip. he had explained that he had gotten extremely ill and had to be rushed to the hospital....not only in a different faraway country...but oh my....what type of health care could he possibly get.

well....he's taken in immediately in the er...a doctor promptly enters the room...does the examine..speaks kindly and with respect...hands him a scrip....and on the way out a bill in the amount of $35....WHATTTT???

now a few days passes and actually he gets worse...so the hotel calls the auto traveling unit who rushes to the hotel....runs up to his room...2 doctors and 1 nurse are prodding and poking about...3 shots of this...drink that....he falls asleep and awakes feeling great...goes downstairs and found they left the bill the front desk....this time it was for $60 US dollars???

What is going on here.............
a personal note with great love and respect for this country...i have always thought that a country's true test of one's strength of character and dignity is the way that that country takes care of it's elderly and young.... need i say how disappointed i am.