Obamacare, Gov't Insurance Exchanges, & The Coming Price Explosion

[haldonrichardson1]

See "Panty Wad Proxitoligist George Will Fights Commerce"

[HealthReformStrategy]

Hi. I'm Glenn Morton...in the video ;o) I recently spoke at the "Enough is Enough" rally, sponsored by Coffee Party USA. In that speech, I gave President Obama 2 WEEKS to STOP defending Obamacare in the supreme court, or I would stop it for him. The video for the speech (the live feed was cut during the speech...was broadcast by freespeech.tv!) Search "President Obama Given 2 WEEKS NOTICE TO STOP OBAMACARE...AMAZING VIDEO" to watch it!

The time to stop Obamacare is NOW! Let's ROLL!!!

[pluto4847]

@HealthReformStrategy

Hello, I hear what you are saying. We should all be responsible for our own health. I take responsibility. I'm on a company group health plan. If I get sick, I should be ok right?

Wrong. I went to my doctor today, and oh yes my insurance will cover the operatiuon I need, but here's the catch.

I will need 4 months off. Sorry, can't do that. As soon as I stop earning, I won't be able to continue paying into my plan.

So no surgery this time. I can't call off work.

[pluto4847]

@HealthReformStrategy

I agree with a lot of what you say, but lets face facts. Health insurance can't save us. Whenever you have time off for an important procedure, you give up your abil.ity to earn a wage.

So yes its good to have coverage, but as soon as you are olut of work, and you no longer earn money--it just can't be achieved.

So my doctor wanted me to have a procedure that would make me into a vegetable for 4 months. So i decided, its not worth it. I will live with the pain.

[pluto4847]

@HealthReformStrategy

Continued...

Oh I won 't die if I opt out of surgery, it just means I will continue to limp and eventually I will be permanetely crippled.

So I had to weigh up which is better: a) Live with the pain I have now, continue to work, and keep paying into my group health plan; b) Have major reconstructive surgery on my leg which will keep be in bed for 4 months, no earnings; or c) Have a brace on my leg to hopefully correct it.

So option b is definastely out--no surgery.

[HealthReformStrategy]

@pluto4847 Well, do you have disability coverage? Health insurance does not cover wages, only medical costs, but disability does. Short-term disability can last up to a year, but is typically 3-6 months. Long-term disability can start after the third month, but normally starts after the 6th month. You should talk to your HR department to find out. Sometimes you can have it and not know it because the company pays it 100%. If not, ask about buying voluntary coverage like Aflac.

[cesar333]

We are all a medical emergency away from financial ruin. Health insurance is like crossing a busy 4 lane highway. If your lucky youll be fine, but one hit and your done.

[cesar333]

The fact is that for profit healthcare does not work anymore.

[shaithis80]

@cesar333 probably a good thing to do would be to get govt out of the market and let the system crash and rebuild itself. It might mean that Hopsitals/MDs/etc etc go broke and/or out of business without any state/federal support because they have chosen to continue to pay high salaries and charge outrageous fees. Then newcomes step in and offere superiour treatment for less. Either that or move towards universal which we should have since we pay into it in the form of Social Security&Medicare.

[cesar333]

@shaithis80 Theres big money in healthcare, You would think we have options but we dont. There is no such thing as free market when big money is involved.

[shaithis80]

@cesar333 agreed. It seems to me though like having a policy nowadays mean you are agreeing to a set of terms where if you are hospitalized, you are still going to be out money. Better to go without health insurance perhaps? Then again from a single standpoint, is paying a high cost worth extending your life. If the government and those in healthcare have looked beyond a persons skills and just seem them as individual ATMs then are we screwed as a nation.

[shaithis80]

@cesar333 all I can really say is that hopefully the next generation of doctors/nurses/healthcare professionals are just not greedy Wishful thinking.

[kbar8888]

@cesar333 Did you know that Øbamacare was fashioned after a plan to control the energy industry? One of the communists at the Midwest Academy, which Michelle and Barrack were members, came up with a similar scheme in the 80s. When energy prices were rising, they proposed to form a Gov't backed corporation that would compete with private companies by selling energy to poor families. They knew then what they know now, that with tax and regulatory authority the Gov't exchange would win control.

[weldean46]

this plan is BS, i all ready have been paying my own medical bills on my own with out the help of any one, and now my medical plan has gone up 35% since this has been put into law, i guess this is to pay for people or can not or will not pay.

[shaithis80]

@weldean46 speaking of people that will not pay, once argument to make is that due to the influx of poor illegals into this country which took advantage of services and could not pay, that might have been part of the issue as far as pushing healthcare rates up. I still think the other part of the problem is blatant overcharging and price gouging instead of repricing according to one's income. In other words the more you make the more you pay. Slidng scale based on income anyone?

[faceswithin]

the reason Obama way doesn't work is we don't have a food replicators. 

[hollisterpatricia]

DON'T call it Obamacare. I disagree with it also, but to name it after the President is not using the name "colloquially", but is to attach your disdain for the President. Let's not be so petty. If you disagree with the plan , don't use Mr. Obama's name derisively, just express your opinion without meanness.

[DarwinsFriend]

If you're forced to go to the emergency room with a medical issue and can't pay for it - who ultimately does?

In San Diego County - apparently the tax payers do. 17 emergency rooms have had to shut down in that country in the last 60 months. Why? Their hospitals couldn't writ-off any more bad debt.

So again, who pays for it? YOU DO, Chumley!

[notre2010]

Go to dberru.awiscard.com to learn how you can get covered with health ins regardless of your age and health issues. Your entire family can get covered for $99.95 a month. I can also get you Dental ins through Delta Dental for $79.90 month for family, $39.95 for a single. The health ins is through our ins division American Workers Insurance Services (AWIS). You can reach me directly through the "CONTACT" button on the dberru website

[stephaniemroin]

In fact, I've lived in 3 countries and I can fairly compare. There are many great thing in USA but the health care system (for a developed country) is inefficient.

It is mathematical: we are spending MORE in GDP than the average of OCDE countries for a LESS good result (life expectancy lower etc.)

Obama tried to fix that. It is far from being perfect but nothing compared to the lies of Repukes who are working ONLY for the ultra-rich, the real puppet's master.

[UTubekookdetector]

STEPH: Your point about lower life-expenctancy sounds like a WHO report from a few yrs ago, it fails for the following reasons: 1) You can have the best HC system in the world, if people don't listen to their doctors & they eat burgers & smoke cigs, it will do no good (diabetes & heart disease cases are rising markedly) 2) It fails to account for diff in how various countries catalog infant mortality 3) The US has a higher # of traffic fatalaties per capita than most countries, including Canada

[stephaniemroin]

@UTubekookdetector

Don't agree. Of course statistics are always limited but, like democracy, it's the "less worst" way to be objective. Curiously, if statistics don't suit some personal views, they are twisted.

Do you think that the obesity rate is not also increasing in other OECD countries? Regarding the infant mortality rate, it is in fact more a (negative) clue about HC system in USA. And South Korea has the same # of traffic fatalaties per capita than USA with higher expectancy...

[stephaniemroin]

@UTubekookdetector

And we can also cite examples that should decrease the life expectancy in some countries (where it is higher than in USA): the suicide rate is far higher in France and Japan than in USA. You see: with your one-sided examples, you are making typical and archetypical selection biases... Finally don't forget that this lower life expec. is reached with MORE % of GDP which is an additional (and huge) argument... I know the truth is hard to hear.

[stephaniemroin]

@UTubekookdetector

And this truth is that our HC system is NOT so good compared to other OECD countries with UNIVERSAL health care insurance. It is just facts and maths. Normally American people are pragmatic, why being so ideological on this question??!!

[UTubekookdetector]

STEPH: Now how does your "rebuttal" address the specific points I made above? You never addressed that, but instead opted for boilerplate talking points. You forget most US citizens have more disposable income to spend on health care, you also fail to factor in the fact that more drugs are usually available here than in Canada & Europe (generic drugs are typically much cheaper here). Now read my previous comment again & try to respond to it. You did mention the life expectancy argument.

[megarational]

@UTubekookdetector You still on that "generic drugs are cheaper in the US" thing?

The US special interests fought to prevent US citizens from buying cheaper drugs in Canada, not the other way around.

[UTubekookdetector]

MEGA: For those who are interested, I've been correcting numerous errors made by MEGA at watch?v=eX52UkQYJTA He's a hoot. I already corrected you once MEGA, generic drugs are typically cheaper in the USA, brand-name drugs are cheaper in Canada. If you'd like, (it seems this other character gave up) you can try to refute my response to this person's parroting of flawed WHO statistics. Good luck!

[megarational]

@UTubekookdetector Generic drugs are cheaper in the US. Brand name drugs are cheaper in Canada.

The health care system overall is cheaper in Canada by 7% of GDP, even though it covers everyone & with virtually no "caps", deductibles or co-payments.

[UTubekookdetector]

No reason to reinvent the wheel here, I'm refuting MEGA's cut-and-paste talking points over at watch?v=eX52UkQYJTA

[megarational]

@UTubekookdetector The only thing you "refuted" is any hope you can do anything other than parrot GOP/Fox sound bites.

[AntiMAGGOTS5]

@UTubekookdetector Well, KOOK, looks like you got OWNED here, courtesy of steph.

It's been six months. Are you still licking your wounds over this loss?

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin If govt created the problem, and repeatedly fails to fix it, Isn't that sort of a hint that maybe govt really sucks at this kind of thing? Dems tax my money and waste it on programs I don't need, and that don't work for anyone in the long run anyway. For petes' sake, give it up already. Let me keep my tax money, get out of my way - I'll pay less and get better care than any govt program. Only, then Dems and their corporate backers won't get their cut. Can't have that, can we?

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

What are you specifically talking about? Your are rambling w/o any details. It is only myths and myths. The last huge economic problem has been created by PRIVATE entities: deceitful, swindler, crooks bankers!!

Try to be a little more pragmatic and less ideological. Government is not always bad especially when they saved us from a huge depression.

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin How private are these "private" entities when they are regulated by government (if that was to protect us, it didn't work), protected by the federal reserve (didn't work), bailed out with taxpayer money (didn't work), and padding the politician's accounts? Try to be a little more pragmatic and less ideological. You're talking about industries that the government has had its claws into for over a hundred years. At what point are you going to question your ideals and face truth?

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

Are you kidding me??? There are nothing more PRIVATE than banks, they are the archetype of capitalism! Your argument are so weak that you are forced to twist one of the most basic facts and definitions!

Regarding, the regulation you once more display your ignorance, it is exactly the opposite: crooks bankers were not regulated enough!! Why? Because lobbyists buy some of our congressmen (as many Repukes than Dems).

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin *Ahem* forgot the Federal Reserve? Forgot fanne mae, freddie mac? Forgot social security, welfare, medicare? Forgot the Community Reinvestment Act and every other silly reg to push the economy out of balance, supposedly to help someone somewhere? "Private"?

"Because lobbyists buy some of our congressmen" is probably the first sensible thing you've said so far. Don't you understand that when there's no separation between economy and state, this kind of corruption is unavoidable?

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

No. Contrary to you, I'm not totally biased. I never wrote that government was always right, by far! I said that your rant against gvt was too one-sied + ideological and that its actions are far from being systematically wrong and that in numerous cases, government has a legitimate and stabilizing role (in so many developed countries btw). Regarding your examples, it is far from being so simple: Fanne Mae!? It exists since 1938 and was very useful many times. (...)

Regarding

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

(following)

So yes Fanne Mae screwed but: 1- during decades, it was very efficient, 2- it is a secondary and proximate culprit, not the ultimate one: the lying bankers.

Social security and medicare: one of the best way not to abandon our seniors or the poor!

It is a SOCIETY not only a greedy and egoistic bunch of people. And we are not talking of 100 % taxes! They are many pragmatic reasons to create these solutions (in fact is has been developed in all developed countries...)

[UTubekookdetector]

STEPH: You seem to be defending Social Security. 1) It's unconstitutional 2) From 1976-1983 OASDI ran a deficit, however, from 1950-75, the payroll tax applied to fund that increased by over 300%. This is long before the Baby Boomers got anywhere near retirement. SS was doomed by demographics. You need some specifics, scuttle the generalized emotional appeals.

[stephaniemroin]

@UTubekookdetector

That's a LIE: it is constitutional. It has been massively repeated by many justice courts and of course the Supreme on. Maybe you are not familiar with the 16th Amendment (among many others law texts)... or you are the kind of Americans who only defend the amendments which suits them? Biased...

In politics, some American people are becoming more&more crazy ideological guy, totally fundamentalists and forget that many things were and should be based on pragmatism.

[UTubekookdetector]

STEPH: Your rebuttal would require me to agree with the judge who says 2+2=4 & the judge who says 2+2=5. Would you agree with the Kelo decision that said the govt can take property for "public purpose" instead oif "public use" as the Const says? You're right though, the SCOTUS has ruled that you have "no intellectual property rights" under SS, so if the govt says the $ is gone & we can't pay for it, you'll be up a creek without a paddle. Where in the Const is SS sanctioned? Try again

[stephaniemroin]

@UTubekookdetector

NO, try again pitiful biased guy. You said it was unconstitutional: it is NOT. Period. Who are you to decide what's constitutional or not? Facts are facts you can't twist them even if you don't like them. You can't choose the decision of Supreme Court that arrange and suit you... funny as it's easy to rebut you, you do it yourself!!

[UTubekookdetector]

STEPH: OMB data backs up what I said about SS insolvencies in the 70s & 80s (as well as the cases Nestor v. Flemming (1960) & Helvering v Davis (1937). You have no intellectual property rights pertaining to SS. There's a benefit cut coming in 2036 (read the Trustees' Reports). The Const. decides what is Constitutional and what is not. Under the enumerated powers (Article I Section VIII), where do you find Social Security? Try to come up with something that's not generalized. You refuted nothing

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

To finish: ponder and think a little bit, it is not a mean plot to steal you! Except the ultra-rich, it's better for all of us to share some long-term issues (not all of course) and to mutualize them. And economy works better. What's the proper amount of taxes? It's changing of course, it is highly dependent on the good use of money (not always the case of course) and many factors but let's say btwn 25 % and 35 %. Higher it is stealth, lower we are not investing in the future.

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin You and I seem to be pushing different goals. You want an idealistic, monolithic country with perfect govt, willing to compromise freedom to force it even on those who don't want it, ignoring the inevitable failures. I want a freedom, first and foremost, compromising the rest, even if it means I have to be responsible for myself. There is only one America, yet plenty of countries that you can say we should copy. Why not leave America for the free, and you can move to China?

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

On this point, I fully agree: I would like the best of both worlds. As USA possesses more qualities, I think it's the most appropriate country to be... perfected. I really LOVE USA but some trends are frightening.

And no I will never live to China even better paid BUT it is not a reason to not benchmark SOME fields where this country is better. Idem for European democracies which can teach us some intelligent systems/decision even if the big picture is better in USA.

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin If you want both, listen to this: I favor the constitutional model - Federal govt defends the union and guarantees rights, while states do the actual governing. Social policy can be implemented by states, each in their own way, if at all, and the rest may choose to follow successful examples, if any. Diversity propagates success and mitigates failure. A monolithic government can't achieve better, and if it fails, it fails for everyone, as our current economy illustrates. (1/3)

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin No govt is perfect for everyone, because everyone has different expectations. Citizens who don't like the way their state is going and who can't vote for a majority, they can "vote with their feet" and gather in other states with like-minded individuals. They can live the way they want and yet remain U.S. citizens under the protection of the constition. This kind of freedom is only possible when the federal government is limited to its basic role. (2/3)

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

And history proves another thing: every great country has been strong thanks to its infrastructures, its long term R&D, its education paid by “taxes” + (of course) the private entrepreneurship and innovation (which are not exclusive). These are two legs we need to walk: the private companies for the short/mid term and the DEMOCRATIC representation for the long term investment (examples above) + yes, a bit of solidarity and humaneness.

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

Finally, regarding the healthcare you are still escaping the debate: we have a less effective system than many other developed countries (which are democracies by the way not dictatorships...). We pay a far more GDP percentage for less (especially life expectancy lower). How could it be more clear? I'm more American... I'm the pragmatist guy in the pool.

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin In my vision for America, there is a place for both of us, if you can only let go of the idea that I should have to live as you dictate. You can have your public health care, welfare, public schools, weed, and campfire kumbaya. I can keep the money that would have been taxed, and spend it at my own discretion, with the free market at my disposal. In your vision of America (35% tax? Really?), there is only a place for those who think like you, and to heck with everyone else. (3/3)

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

In fact, I’ve just given examples and the word “taxes” has a broader meaning (so it represents less than you think) since it is the statutory charges. And guess what, it’s yet 26 % in USA. Guess what again, during the great economic BOOM of the 90s, it was 28 %… so it proves my point.

In my vision of America, there is a great country which can always improve and except the freedoms (press, religion, respect of minorities etc.) there is nothing printed in the marble.

(2/2)

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

I've conceded a point for the sake of a fair debate. It'd be great that you stay honest and don't caricature my points. I'm dictating nothing. I'm the most pragmatic as possible and you haven't weakened any of my arguments. In fact, you only speak in broad and general terms i.e. ideologically. You are an extremist (in the first meaning). You are dreaming of an extreme which don’t exist and will be a nightmare. (1/2)

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin Re-read my previous three posts - sincerely this time. My position does not exclude yours. Rather, it adjusts the scale and locality of how policy should be implemented in order to cater more effectively to the affected constituents. Heard of "tyranny of the majority"? That's what you represent, and why your policies have never and will never work on a country as large and diverse as America, history be my witness. If I am an extremist, it is not moreso than the founding fathers.

[stephaniemroin]

@Shanockdotcom

Your tax money is used to: build roads, pay schools, research, infrastructure and so many things which are not profitable on short term and so don't interest private sector.

Regarding the long run, this is a stupid comment: why do you think China is working so well since 30 years?? This is one of the most GOVERNMENT-oriented country. Open your eyes and stop being stupid. A balanced amount of taxes (not too much of course) exist in each developed country with a high HDI!! 

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin China is also one of the most corrupt political-corporate environments, with bad working conditions, staggering environmental and social problems, and a pattern of government atrocities. You really want to cite them as an model to follow? Open your eyes and stop being stupid. Reasonable taxes on a local level, voted by, monitored by, and tailored to its constituents is fine. Forcing me to pay into national systems that benefit me in no way is *not* "balanced".

[Shanockdotcom]

@stephaniemroin Private roads are built and private schools are run, and are successful even in the presence of free public alternatives, are effective, beneficial to the community, and usually cost less than the amount of money that government puts into achieving the same goals less successfully. Private research is essential to nearly all industry, from lumber to vehicles to microchips. How do these things not interest the private sector? I'd love to hear your explanation on that one...

[stephaniemroin]

Health is NOT a product and should not be a business. It is no comparable to an i-Phone Why? Because public health is impacting on everybody. For example, if someone is not vaccinated, he is a danger for many other people. Idem for communicable disease.

Don't believe the lies of the big private HMO which are buying so many congress men (GOP or Dems btw) to falsely pretend health care is the same than a car or a phone.

[Gail6344]

How is he going to cap the cost to the secretary that has to fill out all that extra paper work? That is a 30 min job today for Medicare billing. Not to forget the CURRENT $60 BILLION in FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE. Medicaid isn’t much better with the fraud, waste and abuse. How is he going to get doctors to accept Medicare patients when all the doctor is getting is half pennies on the $1? Guess CONSCRIPTION would have to be considered.

[harrybean2006]

2014 "That's when our country changes substantially..." Well, better make sure the president and congress changes substantially in 2012 to head off that one.

[DragonFlySpell00]

That is my father!!!! And he knowwwwws what he is talking about!!!

[HealthReformStrategy]

@DragonFlySpell00 thanks babygirl :o) Love you.

[coltor9]

We need the PUBLIC OPTION and take all PROFIT out of ALL HEALTHCARE.

No one should PROFIT from peoples misery.

Private Insurance is a total RIP-OFF!

[juxvma542]

Who's the crack head asking the questions?

[Y2kplaya92]

Obamacare is terrible.

[HealthReformStrategy]

@Loathomar NFIB is the National Federation of Independent Businesses. The survey is called "Small BuSiness and Health insurance: One Year after

enactment of PPACA". I tried to post a link, but it didn't work. Google it :o)

[Loathomar]

@HealthReformStrategy Ah yes, I found the sight last time, but didn't download it. The question reads "If employees began to leave, how likely would they be to seriously explore dropping their firm’s coverage?" This is a horrible polling question for finding out any reasonable estimate of who will drop their insurance. It would be like asking, if Obama drops the unemployment rate significantly would you be like to vote for him, then report that number of people will vote for Obama.

[Loathomar]

Really, with that question, I am totally shocked that more small businesses would not say they would look in to it. I mean, when you employees are say, we like the government plan better and leave you plan, why in the world would you not look at it? If employers can save money by not insuring the employees while still keeping them happy and health, why would not at least not look in to it?

[HealthReformStrategy]

@Loathomar Then, I guess the question is will employees leave. I have a well thought answer to that question in an article called "When the Hunter is killed by the Hunted: The end of the health insurance broker in America". I don't know why I can't post links on here, but google is your friend :o)

If you get a chance, read it and see if you agree/follow my logic...

[Loathomar]

@HealthReformStrategy Before reading this, to post a hyperlink you need to replace the "." with (dot), so you get youtube(dot)com and so on.

[JTHELSTROM]

follow the money. All Democrat policies fail, but the billions of dollars it costs doesn't fail to find it's way to Democrat fatcats, leaving the poor people as poor as they ever were.

[urbanverificationist]

The U.S. health care system contributes $2.5 trillion, or nearly 18%, to GDP. That's the bill for all health care spending in the U.S. annually. Glen Morton's figures are nonsense. The problem with the Affordable Healthcare Act is that it still doesn't provide a way to control the prices charged by drug companies and hospital associations and it still allows health insurance companies to rip consumers off with a 20% administration fee.

[HealthReformStrategy]

@urbanverificationist The $2.5 trillion dollar number was provided by the CBO, not me (the author), and is a 10 year cost estimate, not an annual one. Whenever CBO assesses the cost of a law, they have to figure present and future costs.

To your other point, PPACA not only fails to control costs, it increases costs by supporting existing monopolized markets and adding additional coverage 2 existing policies. HHS is allowing 10% increases without pushback, or 100% over 10 years...

Glenn Morton

[urbanverificationist]

@HealthReformStrategy

I don't recall any mention of the %2.5 trillion being spread out over 10 years. I'm aware of the failures of HHS. We agree on that point. It may be that the individual mandate proves unconstitutional and RomneyCare (the mandate was originally a Republican idea) will fail. If it does, I suspect the U.S. will eventually adopt an All Payer system with some States moving to Single Payer. Could you please send me a link to the CBO estimates you've quoted. Thanx.

[Loathomar]

@urbanverificationist Yay for Math! Yes, 2.5 trillion is 17.7%, but over 10 years without any GDP growth that is 1.77%, which is about 10% of the current total spending on health care. And as there are 16% uninsured in the US, 10% to cover then seems very reasonable.

[HealthReformStrategy]

@Loathomar @urbanverificationist Why should making coverage more affordable, and decreasing the ranks of uninsured, cost anything at all? If we are only discussing how much more we are spending, we completely miss the goal of spending LESS. The middle word in PPACA is AFFORDABLE, and this law doesn't accomplish that.

If the assumption is premiums can't be reduced, then I respectfully disagree. It took me a few months, but i found a way to do just that and put it in my book...AT NO ADD'L COST.

[Loathomar]

@HealthReformStrategy It totally should can the fact that the reform did not try to reduce cost more by things like group bargaining for drugs, because why should Americans pay more then almost any other country for the drugs that are invented and produced here. I am totally in favor of all health care cost reduction that do not hurt quality of care. But the fact it the big pharma has both parties in the pocket, as wont do anything to them no matter what it costs Americans.

[pinegrove33]

sounds like a great book, thanks

[HealthReformStrategy]

@pinegrove33 you're welcome. The book does not just talk about why Obamacare is bad; I have developed a solution to the problem of high premiums and swelling ranks of uninsured that does not cost one dime, is easy to implement, and is much more effective. My aim is not to win an argument, but to win a better solution, and restore the individual purchasing rights the government has taken away with this law. I have 4 children, and i will not leave them more powerless, and more broke, than I.

[AtibbsSPARTAN]

What sucks about this is that once people get something from the government for "FREE"....they're not giving it up....it doesn't matter how much it costs or if threatens our fiscal health...at that point the democratic republic is dead

[OpenCarryNH]

It is no longer health insurance, it's a health subsidy. Imagine if the government mandated car insurance companies to cover flat tires, ceased engines [for any reason including lack of maintenance], oil changes, fuel [food stamps], etc.

[HealthReformStrategy]

@OpenCarryNH Hey!...be careful. Congress comes back soon, and they don't need any other ideas :o)

[jonathanaconway]

Ugh volume is too low. Amp it up, ReasonTV.

[angrywhenroused]

the whole problem comes down to this all the hospitals, doctors and support are working as private company's to its always going to be a cludge. The UK NHS eliminates the insurance entirely. The hospitals are public run and the GP's get a guaranteed payment per patent. Unfortunately its far too late for America to change to a proper public health service to what you get is a cluster fuck with lots of middle men with unnecessary fingers in the pie

[FuckObamasMama]

Obamacare!

What!

Forced?

How many dead political figures?

[MrGnode]

His math is wrong. 10 million people for $2.5 trillion comes to $250k per person per year. That is about 15-30x more than what insurance actually costs.

[AtibbsSPARTAN]

@MrGnode

I think those might be 10 year estimates

[HealthReformStrategy]

@MrGnode Hello Mr. Gnode. I want to address your comment because you bring up an important point. The CBO's estimate of 7% (or 9-10 million participants) is 2014 enrollment numbers. They expect the exchange participation to grow after that, and eventually triple, at a total costs of $2.5 trillion dollars.

My point is these estimates are clearly wrong, for the reasons stated.

-Glenn Morton

Their estimate of $2.5 trillion dollars is based on

[michtuofficial]

Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, called this type of scheme a confusopoly. Like cell phone plans the idea is that you cannot make side by side comparisons and so in the end you get screwed. Of course those in charge of confusopolies want it to stay that way.

[saper321]

Can somebody show this to Obama? I wonder at what point Obama will apologize for this disaster.

[RogueSwordThesco]

@saper321

Obama has never apologized for anything he has done

I don't expect him to start anytime soon

[Loathomar]

How do you watch this and not realize they are being dishonest. The McKinsey survey gave there selected information to those who where being informed, so 100% of those survived were informant, how do you get higher then 100% informed. McKinsey made informative statements to those they survived like the exchange will be “an easy, affordable way for individuals to obtain health insurance.”. Painting it like that and still only 30% say they may drop there health care? Wow!

[HealthReformStrategy]

@Loathomar You may have issue with survey, but the point is the same: what if more than 7% enroll in the exchange? Who pays? McKinsey isn't the only survey, btw...NFIB survey says 57% very or somewhat likely to explore dropping employees in the exchange...37% of small businesses not likely to offer coverage THIS YEAR, and, since PPACA, one in eight (12%) small employer respondents have had their health insurance plans terminated or been told that their plan would not be available in the future.

[Loathomar]

@HealthReformStrategy I am not sure where exactly Fox new got that data, as the question of Are you "very or somewhat likely to explore dropping employees in the exchange" was not listed in there poll. Of total people polled have a small business with 50 people or less, 57.7% are currently not offering insurance and 54.8% say they are not likely or not likely at all to offer it next year. And yes, some plans needed to change, it's not like they aren't change plans likely with the same company.

[JudgeNapolitanoFTW]

has Nick lost weight?

[MsWanderer1]

Everyone seems to be ignoring the REAL PROBLEM; the outrageous price tag of drugs and the outrageous markup on any instruments or supplies that are deemed medical. The medical professions pass that price gouging onto the people; now it will be doubled and passed onto ALL taxpayers.

[Sparkygravity]

@MsWanderer1 actually the real problem would be insurance companies. Insurance companies are built on the premise of limited claims, money marketing (which often is debt marketing), and externalizing costs. The reason Doctors charge $2000 bucks an hour is because he gest 5%, 15% of that goes to nurses and other specialists 10% to the hospital the other 70% goes to liability insurance.

The prohibitive cost of drugs is often linked to Congressional laws and drug subsidies.

[threepercenter03]

Obama doesn't want to build jobs; his job, as a Bilderberg shill, is to implode the economy and weaken our nation and our resolve, so we will accept anything that will "fix" us, even a New World Order global governance... he's punishing us evil white christians who enslaved his ancestors and created world poverty through a free market capitalist society. We used to hang traitors!

[audioblogs12]

Repeal the disaster! Ron Paul 2012!

[duanescot]

but, but, its for our own good right? I mean, heaven forbid I be responsible for my own healthcare decisions, that would be TRULY disasterous so says obutrod..

[megarational]

@duanescot "..be responsible for your own health care decisions..."

Nice little sound bite. In reality the only decision a person who becomes ill or injured wants to make is to go see a doctor and get the medical treatment the doctor prescribes, unfettered by the constraints of some insurance plan. Especially if the insurance plan was a shitty one but simply "the best you could afford".

[cesar333]

@duanescot your just another sheep in the healthcare system. You sound like a healthy young stud that probably hasnt seen a doctor in years, but there are people who are getting the news today that they have cancer which will financially ruin them. Healthcare isnt an option, its a necessity. Is it fare for someone to to make a profit off of my cancer treatment? Is that treatment work over 250K? You need to wake up my friend. The world is bigger then you know.

[shaithis80]

@cesar333 another reason to live broke if you know you will develop a seroius condition down the road. Look at Steve Jobs, he developed pancreatic cancer and seemed to be healthy right? The new normal would be don't have much in the way of assets that anyone can take. It's become a sick fucking game ever since government got involved in the system and the prices are now out of scope with the public market and insurance is soooo watered down. I'll let my body self correct and die accordingly.

[shaithis80]

@cesar333 it seems healthcare is now class warfare well the poor don't have access to the best medical care available. So we work for minimum wage or barely are able to meet our living expenses and die. Sounds like a greedy for profit system and eventually that catches up and people have nothing to lose but revolt or have the IQ to do some real research and vote in far left Green part candidates and evict Republicans and Democrats. I know I'm dreaming:)

[fkhan96]

why dont those damn beurocrats realize that their big spending is gonna come colapsing down and that at one point, china will want us to pay em back. they are screwing me when i go out from highschool and college. this rediculous amount of spending and all the problems this nation is in makes me really consider moving up to canada before everything comes crashing back down

[plalelal]

@yakyakyak69 Without some level of fractional reserve banking our economy would implode. The level it should be held to I have heard are from 5-10 times the amount on hand, and no more. Otherwise you get all this debt rolling that can't be -paid.

[yakyakyak69]

@plalelal It can't be paid now. This is why the debt is skyrocketing! America is defaulting by printing & debasing it's fiat currency just to pay the interest with devalued dollars. MORE printing & MORE fractional reserves just diggs the hole deeper.  This MUST and WILL come to an end. Fiat debt based currencies and fractional reserves ALWAYS collapse. The only questions are How deep the Debt hole and How much depression pain and How long will the recovery take.

You argue for MORE PAIN!

[plalelal]

@yakyakyak69 It can't be paid no that's why the debt is high? The debt is due to spending, the devaluation d/t printing.

[Sparkygravity]

@plalelal It's already going to implode, at some point, fractional reserve banking (FRB) is not sustainable, just like perpetual increasing profits are not sustainable, and those are both linked at some point when you look at capital investments... Or I should say debt investment, since those are all held in collateral as fractional reserve loans.

The FED was created to stop default chains caused by FRB, unfortunately it didn't solve the problem, it just secured deposits with the FDIC.

[plalelal]

@Sparkygravity No kidding! Had they kept it to the levels I suggested it would not have done what it it has done and is doing. Geesh!

[rescuemay]

What a disaster.



[1danyol1]

eleventy twelth

[classiclibertarian]

LAST! Oh, wait...