20 responses to “Obamacare costs summarized (updated)”

1. 

   Mikey McD

   19 March 2010

   from “your” link: “The legislation includes ten years of tax increases and ten years of Medicare cuts to pay for six years of spending. The true ten-year cost when subsidies kick in? $2.4 trillion.”
   AND
   “According to the Administration’s CMS actuary, the legislation increases national health expenditures by $222 billion.”
   And Americans DON’T WANT IT… http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
   Stinks to high heaven.

   LikeLike

2. 

   Dave C

   19 March 2010

   Right now, I am concerned about the ammendments to the healthcare proposal that are being written as a separate bill to be sent to the senate, while the healthcare bill passed by the senate will be “deemed” to pass. Tricky, but legal.

   LikeLike

3. 

   Steve Enos

   20 March 2010

   Elections have consequences.

   LikeLike

4. 

   Steve Enos

   20 March 2010

   Coverage just out from the kill at health bill Tea Party clan rally in DC:
   By Paul Kane
   Saturday, March 20, 2010; 6:12 PM
   Black lawmakers said Saturday that “tea party” protesters outside the Capitol hurled racial epithets at Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a former civil rights leader who was nearly beaten to death during a 1965 march, as he headed out of the building on his way to President Obama’s final health-care rally.
   Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.), walking next to Lewis after the Obama speech, told reporters that protesters yelled “kill the bill,” then used a racial epithet to describe Carson and Lewis, who is a revered figure on both sides of the aisle. By the time the president spoke, thousands of protesters had gathered south of the Capitol.
   Carson told reporters from Roll Call and other media outlets that the protesters were shouting racial slurs. “It was like a page out of a time machine,” he said.
   Lewis’s office has not yet commented on the matter.
   The episode happened as the House concluded a set of votes mid-afternoon before heading to the Obama speech, and it came after an earlier tea party protest had ended on the west side of the Capitol. After that more than 100 protesters moved to the south entrance of the House, whose members held a series of votes throughout the day as a prelude to Sunday’s showdown.
   On the first day of spring, most lawmakers walked across the street — rather than using the underground tunnels connecting their office buildings to the Capitol — exposing themselves to hundreds of protesters who lined each side of the walkway leading into the House.
   Some protesters cursed at lawmakers and at one point — when Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) wanted to walk across the street to an office building — he was ushered into a car by his security detail and driven a couple hundred feet through the screaming crowd.

   LikeLike

5. 

   Mikey McD

   20 March 2010

   I think you mean “Demon pass”

   LikeLike

6. 

   Nuff said

   21 March 2010

   If other alternatives exist (from the other side of the aisle), why didn’t the Republicans even take up healthcare reform — with said alternatives — in the years they held complete control of Washington?

   LikeLike

7. 

   George Rebane

   21 March 2010

   Excellent question Nuff, and no easy answer. The Republicans (and we all) knew that this bomb was there and ticking. The socialists, when they achieved total dominance, would make this leap to nationalization that would take the country (in my opinion) past the point of no return. The conservative solution has always been to remove regulation, increase personal choice, and free up the medical markets. The main components were 1)remove the state insurance oligopolies and 2) tort reform. That legislation cannot be passed without a filibuster proof Senate, which the Republicans never had. It was for that same reason the Democrats passed Obamacare on Christmas Eve, knowing that they may lose their filibuster proof majority after the holiday recess (which they did).
   Don’t think that I’m a fan of the recent Republican Congress, I am not. Republicans are not free of progressives who also believe that more state is better than less. I hope that this sheds some light on your question.
   But all that was then, this is now.
   These tea cup debates don’t usually go far, because your social utility function may be totally opposite from mine. If so, then all the words we say to each other offer little clarity. Principled debate/negotiation requires that parties of good faith first expose their utilities. Without that, there is very little chance of finding common ground and working outward from there.

   LikeLike

8. 

   RL Crabb

   21 March 2010

   George, I still don’t see how the Republican plan will cover everyone without some sort of a mandate requiring universal participation. You’re still going to have a lot of people at the low end who are going to need a subsidy. Where is that money going to come from?

   LikeLike

9. 

   George Rebane

   21 March 2010

   Bob – the 32 million ‘without healthcare’ works down to only 9 million of those who want it and can’t afford it. I don’t claim to have the best way to deliver it to them in my back pocket, although a new program of direct transfers to those folks would cost an infinistesmal amount of Obamacare. Those transfers would be provided as part of an alternative solution that also contains tort reform and ending insurance oligopolies.
   The biggest objective of all though is to reduce the costs of medical care delivery that is now hamstrung with regulations and a parasitic legal system. Insurance coverage always follows the cost of what is covered. Team Obama is betting that we’re too dumb to realize that, and so far there the odds are overwhelmingly with them. Focusing on ‘insurance reform’ is a red herring at best.
   And lest we forget, this all presupposes that universal healthcare is now accepted as a new ‘right’ – a debate that somehow we skipped over.

   LikeLike

10. 

    Mikey McD

    21 March 2010

    RL Crabb- those on the low end already have free healthcare. We are shackling the entire country to provide a “right” to approx 9 million asterisks. I am not naive enough to believe that this legislation has anything to do about health care. The question now becomes: is this legislation irreversible?

    LikeLike

11. 

    RL Crabb

    21 March 2010

    The notion that healthcare is free to those with pre-existing conditions and low incomes is simply not true, except to those who have never had to deal with it. If you are REALLY poor, yes, the state picks up the tab, but there are millions of people who don’t qualify because the make too much money, yet can’t afford insurance, if they can even get it.
    As I suspected, the Republican answer to those people is “tough luck, losers.”

    LikeLike

12. 

    Mikey McD

    21 March 2010

    Crabb- I strongly- and factually-disagree. Healthcare is free to those with pre-existing conditions and/or low incomes (under $60k in CA- Healthy Families/Medicaid/charities).
    What is ironic is that other people’s healthcare is important enough for me to pay for it (‘a right’), but, not important enough for them to pay for it themselves. I had a friend complain of $15k for a heart surgery bill… I told him,”It was worth every penny.”
    But again, this legislation had little to do with healthcare.
    p.s. I am not a republican.

    LikeLike

13. 

    RL Crabb

    22 March 2010

    To Mikey McD –
    Okay, I really didn’t want to get into my personal experience, but I guess it’s the only way to convince you.
    I have a rare form of arthrits that limits my mobility and ability to work for more than a few hours aday. My wife is a diabetic.
    Last summer, I began experiencing extreme pain in my abdomen and was unable to sit. Having no insurance I went to Yuba Docs, who will see people with emergencies for a reasonable fee. They couldn’t detect the problem and referred me to the hospital for ultra-sound tests. While there I applied for County Medical (MediCal). The requiements stated I couldn’t have more than $2000 in assets (cash, bank accounts, jewelry, stocks, etc.) Business accounts and owning a home were not counted.
    The ultra sound didn’t show anything, so I was scheduled for a CT. The CT revealed three hernias, and Yuba Docs referred me to a surgeon. The surgeon doesn’t take MediCal and demanded cash, so I emptied my business account to pay for the surgery.
    (Also, there were co-pays for any hospital services, including the operating room.)
    After months of trying to work to pay the bills while standing upright, I was scheduled for the surgery, but first the surgeon demanded that I get a colonostomy, but I couldn’t because of the crimp in my intestine. I had to settle for a barium enema.
    Months after the surgery, I received a letter from the State saying that they would be coming after my estate to recoup any monies used for my illness.
    So tell me, what did I get “for free?”

    LikeLike

14. 

    RL Crabb

    22 March 2010

    I would also like to add that we are honest people who are not asking for a hand out, just a fair shake. For the past twenty years, friends and even doctors have asked why we don’t just apply for disability. I know a lot of people who are receiving it who are much less disabled then we are.
    Believe it or not, I hate the idea of being a ward of the state as much as you do. I like being a productive member of the community. I’m proud to be a homeowner and proud that I managed to do it without getting suckered into a sub-prime loan. (I looked into it and realized if it looked to good to be true, it was too good to be true.)
    There are many good ideas in the reforms you propose, but there will always be the problem of people who use the emergency room as a doctor’s office. Some are doing it to game the system, but many others just don’t have any other recourse. That’s why I believe a purely free market solution will still leave hospitals holding the bag, and charging the insured to make up for it.
    Even if the insurance companies are required to insure those of us with pre-existing conditions, it ain’t gonna be cheap, probably too expensive for us.
    Incidently, both of us are caregivers ourselves. My wife works professionally and I spent the last eight years caring for my parents. My 96 year old mother-in-law lives with us now. If I sound a little cranky at times, it comes from being house-bound with Granny twenty-four hours a day. She has mild dementia, but every once in awhile she’ll recall some event that happened during World War I.

    LikeLike

15. 

    Gil Gray

    22 March 2010

    George, et al: last night at 3 AM in my “self talk regime” which starts right after I get back into bed after I finish my nightly pee my mind kept reviewing the insanity of the Health Care bill passing. My mind drifted toward the CBO calculation that many in Congress rely on to tell them how much money will be saved over the next 200 years or whatever. And the following thought popped up
    Congress sends a bill to CBO to answer the question of how much is 2 plus 2. The bill contains in very clear and indisputable language that the number “4” no longer exists for the purpose of this bill. The CBO comes back with the answer “5” and cheers are heard throughout the halls of Congress. Which once again proves the old adage “Figures don’t lie but liars figure”.
    This may help drive home the real story of the phony CBO numbers to those who lack the numerological ability to understand and use numbers intelligently.

    LikeLike

16. 

    Mikey McD

    22 March 2010

    The smartass in my would answer the following:
    “So tell me, what did I get “for free?””
    1-Ultra Sound
    2-CT Scan
    3-barium enema
    I can only look at the equation from my vantage point. I would ask what did I pay for? Answer: See list above
    Is my neighbors health my responsibility?

    LikeLike

17. 

    RL Crabb

    22 March 2010

    Well, as George’s tag line states…”the last great century of man.” Apparently, that includes humanity. I got mine. Screw the rest of you. This is why I reject the conservative philosophy as well as the liberal. One feels too much, and the other feels nothing at all.
    I’m done arguing with you fellas. It’s one thing to debate and look for solutions. It’s quite another to talk to a brick wall. Have a good life.

    LikeLike

18. 

    Gil Gray

    22 March 2010

    The Democrats are cheering themselves on as the “winners” in the legislation process. Let’s take a closer look.
    Assume two professional football teams. One team has 11 players, the other team only 9. They are playing in the Superbowl and the first team that crosses the goal line wins. There are no rules except for those the larger team puts into place as necessary. The 11 man team has had the ball since the beginning of the game. Every attempt at moving the ball ten yards is met with a failure due to the clumsiness and fumbling on every clear path toward the goal. And, with each successive failure, they set up a new rule that extends the number of downs allowed to move the ball toward the goal line. The 9 man team left the field after the first rule change as there were no referees to call foul. After 10 hours of play and still not able to move the ball over the goal line, the Chief Umpire, who was actually the coach of the 11 man team, stepped in and created an “Executive Order” to add a new rule to move the goal line to one yard in back of the ball and then claim a victory. Hooray for the “winners”.
    The next game is on Tuesday Noivember 2nd, 2010. Lets’s see who wins that game when millions, not nine, converge onto the field.

    LikeLike

19. 

    George Rebane

    23 March 2010

    Bob, you judge us harshly. We of the conservative/libertarian bent are not the cold brick walls that the left likes to make us out. Locally, nationally, and globally we give more of our time, treasure, and talent than folks of any other belief system studied. To go into detail on that here would be unseemly, but I will gladly do so privately.
    One of the common tenets that bind us is that we know of no sustainable social system based on collectivism that maintains the quality and spirit of life that most folks around the world seem to want and are willing to risk their all for. Yes, I do believe humanity as we know it is most likely in its last throes – you will notice that ‘Man’ in the tag line is capitalized. How we deport ourselves in the next decade or two will determine whether homo sapien enters into an epochal new phase, or becomes mired (forever?) in a very stable and robust technology supported tyranny. This is worth discussing, and I will post and expansion on it soon.
    In any event Bob, please feel welcome to return at any time and again give us your best thoughts.

    LikeLike

20. 

    Mikey McD

    23 March 2010

    I wholeheartedly agree- “We of the conservative/libertarian bent are not the cold brick walls that the left likes to make us out. Locally, nationally, and globally we give more of our time, treasure, and talent than folks of any other belief system studied.” I would highlight, the products produced by our talents are those demanded by our fellow man (not ordered by a elite Czar).
    I apologize if my earlier answer seemed heartless- which could not be further from the truth.
    My question remains, at what point does my neighbor’s health become my responsibility? If our health is collective property then we should each get to dictate the diets/exercise/activities of our neighbors. This is a right I am not willing to give up. The equality promised by socialists is paid for with our liberty.

    LikeLike