personal reasons why? "Healthcare"

[Guest mikedwood]

Well, despite the loss of liberty, at least this will save us money!

I hate to admit it but I had a headache after number 55.

[G27]

Hey, at least this law will create new jobs!

(in India)

US healthcare reform is boon for India outsourcing companies / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

[oldogy]

first:

give me One or more personal reasons why this bill is eider Good or Bad for you.

Don't think about Country , State , County or City or anybody else, it is all about you ,only You, and nobody but you .

give me some hardcore numbers

thanks for reading

That, I have an extremely hard time doing so I apologize up front. Obamacare is about government takeover and that is more important to me than a few dollars I may owe or may save on health insurance. To think of my few dollars during a time of national crisis would be folly. Like it or not, our country is broke. We can not afford this plan.

Our founders fought and pledged their fortunes and lives for a government that worked for the people. Now we have the government taking over every aspect of our lives if we let it go.

Health insurance is not a right, but a product to be purchased with benefits in mind. We have a culture problem, not an insurance problem. Sure, there are changes that are needed. These changes should not be in the form of Hobama care.

My numbers. Retired, good health, no major health issues.

Cadillac insurance plan costs the wife and I about $7,000. / year total.

Do I know what Hobama care will bring? Does anyone really know at this point? Don't think so.

Respectfully,

oldogy

Edited March 26, 2010 by oldogy

[DavidM]

I hate to admit it but I had a headache after number 55.

Uh-oh, sorry, Mike. Headaches are not covered!

[threeshot]

Hey, at least this law will create new jobs!

(in India)

US healthcare reform is boon for India outsourcing companies / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

This is off topic. There are plenty of jobs in technical fields that are being outsourced to India, China and Brazil.

IBM laid off some of their IT people in the USA due to the recession and then quietly shift the jobs to India. Meanwhile, USA companies lobby congress to allow more H1B1 visas because they cannot find the engineers or technical talent in the USA.

Uh-huh.

Now back to our regularly scheduled topic.

[threeshot]

When people complain about our current healthcare system and then complain about the planned change to healthcare, ask yourself this question, was the current system going to lower costs of healthcare and provide healthcare to all citizens in the future?

Answer is no.

When I watched the healthcare roundtable debate Obama had with certain Democrats and Republicans, it was amazing the lack of common sense just because Republicans wanted to hold the party line. Mind you, I am not a Democrat nor a Republican supporter.

During the daylong debate that was televised live, Republicans wanted to “ease into change†by creating different pools of insured people. One Democrat compared the Republican approach of using different pools to segregation of races earlier in American history. However, instead of races, it was segregating people’s healthcare needs into pools that undermine the goal of spreading out the cost of the premiums by having one insurance pool of people paying into the premiums.

To me, having one pool makes perfect sense to avoid those people with healthcare needs from being where we are today by charging them the most. Like it or not, as you age, you are going to increase your healthcare needs. Therefore, for those who have no healthcare needs today, you will in the future and at the rate we are going, you will not be able to afford it when you need it.

One program I wish more Americans should have watched is an excellent PBS Frontline program called Sick Around The World.

FRONTLINE: sick around the world | PBS

FRONTLINE: sick around the world: watch the full program | PBS

[Guest strelcevina]

a lot of people confusing Freedom from Anarchy.

freedom is nice balance between Government and people .

if that balance is distorted u get snow ball effect.

anarchy, and anarchy brings riots , riots bring civil war, and later on the end it brings Change in Government

without government rules and Police enforcement and Military Protection USA would be nothing else than 3 world country.

i respect and follow lows, and show respect to LEO and military.

now back to my topic

it is all about Numbers. Cash.... no BS just hard core cash.

if you have country where 95% households make 40K or less.

health care is costing 1/4 or 1/3 of their net income. how much is left for other industries to survive.

everybody is taking their peace of pie, and i think health care is taking it to much. it is negatively effecting whole other industry

only way to pretend to be doing good it to have a Credit cards and debt.

like Dave Ramsey said. it is normal to be broke In USA.

anyway

thanks for response

edited to change order of text... way to misspelled ..sorry

Edited March 26, 2010 by strelcevina

[G27]

When people complain about our current healthcare system and then complain about the planned change to healthcare, ask yourself this question, was the current system going to lower costs of healthcare and provide healthcare to all citizens in the future?

Answer is no.

So what? An ideal solution on paper is communism, is that a great idea, too?

The reality is this law flies in the face of those of us who aren't willing to trade liberty for 'saving money' or 'what makes sense'.

[G27]

a lot of people confusing Freedom from Anarchy.

And it appears some folks are confusing constitutional rights with personal wants.

Were we anarchists last week? Under the old rules, where I choose to pay my own way?

The fact is, we lost a little more liberty when this was signed into law - my choice to not carry health insurance is now gone (as are other choices wrt saving money by opting for 'leaner' insurance plans).

What's sad is how so many folks are willing to accept this loss of liberty because they think it benefits them, or have a social outlook whereby they excuse it as it helps others.

Truly sad.

[G27]

There are plenty of jobs in technical fields that are being outsourced to India, China and Brazil.

OK, so laws that will increase jobs overseas rather than here at home are OK as it's already happening. Nice logic.

[threeshot]

So what? An ideal solution on paper is communism, is that a great idea, too?

The reality is this law flies in the face of those of us who aren't willing to trade liberty for 'saving money' or 'what makes sense'.

Based on your response, you did not even take the time to view the program I recommended unless you consider Great Britain, Japan, Germany and Switzerland to be communist countries.

[threeshot]

OK, so laws that will increase jobs overseas rather than here at home are OK as it's already happening. Nice logic.

Again you are making sensationalistic statements. It is not a law that companies have to outsource to India in order to comply with healthcare changes that are being proposed. Companies are choosing to outsource the jobs.

As I stated in my post, companies are looking for ways to outsource more expensive USA labor for cheaper labor. In the past, it was blue collar jobs. Now it is white collar engineering and technical jobs.

[G27]

Based on your response, you did not even take the time to view the program I recommended unless you consider Great Britain, Japan, Germany and Switzerland to be communist countries.

Straw man - I never claimed anyone was communist, rather simply stated that if you believe liberty is a chip to gamble with, you may as well concede that communism is the ideal solution to cure society's ills.

If you remove liberty from the equation, communism is a great idea.

Again you are making sensationalistic statements. It is not a law that companies have to outsource to India in order to comply with healthcare changes that are being proposed. Companies are choosing to outsource the jobs.

As I stated in my post, companies are looking for ways to outsource more expensive USA labor for cheaper labor. In the past, it was blue collar jobs. Now it is white collar engineering and technical jobs.

And you miss my point entirely - this law is supposed to be about our own economy and people. If the government is going to impinge upon the people's freedom, why not do the same for the corporations, forcing them to only hire US citizens to fill the necessary jobs?

Simple, because this whole thing isn't about health care or people's welfare, it's a power grab.

And no, that's not sensationalism, though you can keep trying to undermine the truth with name calling and accusations, I truly don't care.

[Warbird]

Based on your response, you did not even take the time to view the program I recommended unless you consider Great Britain, Japan, Germany and Switzerland to be communist countries.

Ohhh OK. Have you seen the tax bases in those countries? Do you know what the average unemployment stats are in those countries? For many of them it is higher than our current recessionary numbers. They have millions on a nearly permanent dole. Many of them are going broke and the people who do work pay exorbitant taxes for the privelege of working and making often little more than the ones on the dole. IS that what you consider fair? Is that where you think we should go? The fact is we CAN'T afford this. No if's ands or buts about it?

This doesn't even touch the tip of the ice berg when we look at Medicaid, medicare and SSI and the fact that already cannot afford those programs now due to our aging boomer population and their impending retirements.

I am appalled at the complete lack of economic understanding by some here. It truly is utterly astounding. What this bill will be is a tax raising, jobs killing handout which will mean more unemployed people paying less taxes and taking more from the gov tit. This admin has spent more in the last year than Bush did in 8, for all of his big gov crap. The debt load is projected to be in 2020 90% of what our GDP is estimated to be. The numbers just don't work period.

And don't even get me started on the loss of freedom and choice. However I am glad they included this in the law. If there is any hope of killing this it might be in the USSC, striking down as unconstitutional a forced purchase of product.

And to the gentleman who stated 95% of American families average less than $40k a yr, you are way, way wrong. The fact is however as we sit now over half of the American population pays nothing in income taxes at the end of the year. The top 10% of earners pay a huge bulk of the taxes, yet the libs answer is to tax these people more. You know the ones who actually employ people and the entrepreneurs who seek to produce.

In many ways the health care industry brought this on themselves not getting their own ships in order, but this is completely the wrong way to solve it. In fact it is just sure to cost us all more.

[Guest Republican]

I have private insurance. It will raise the cost of my insurance. Guess what else, my insurance will only get worse, even though I will be paying more. Also, it will cause the economy to suffer even more.

Taking money from working people and giving it to people who dont. That'll work.(sarcasm) Hey, I know. lets tax the rich so all us poor people can drive fancy cars and wear diamond rings and rolex's just like them.

Has no one ever read a history book here? This country was founded on not paying high taxes.

I say this following statement with all due respect and a love of all humans and knowing circumstances vary. As for people complaining about insurance for children, If you cant afford them, then dont have them.

I hear about plenty of people with like 8 kids and neither parent has a job or wants one. It i just plain wrong to leech off of the country and it sets a terrible example for the children who grow up this way.

If you cant see where Obama is trying to take this country, then God Bless you. God Bless those of you who do see it to.

YOU CAN NOT TAX PRODUCTION AND EXPECT GROWTH!

Edited March 26, 2010 by Republican

[-Bristol-]

If there were lots of good paying jobs and reasonable benefits, there would be no crisis. And with no crisis, they (DC politicians) could not pass this stuff. So, why would they want there to be good jobs unless it is for union or other special interest that is in their back pocket!

[LagerHead]

first:

please spear me with all those socialist, Obama sucks, and we going to hell comments. they are childish, and insane.

give me One or more personal reasons why this bill is eider Good or Bad for you.

Don't think about Country , State , County or City or anybody else, it is all about you ,only You, and nobody but you .

give me some hardcore numbers

i will start.

I'm full time single Dad of 2 , i pay 5000$ a year for family insurance.

and on top of that i have to pay 20% extra of all cost when I or my kids go to doctor.

so this bill should lower my Insurance, and i hope it should lower that 20% payment to.

thanks for reading

Aside from the fact that it is socialist, Obama sucks, and we're all going to hell:

The claim that something that costs $940 billion in extra spending is somehow going to lower the national deficit and my personal taxes at the same time is insane. And they have to do creative accounting, like keeping the "doctor fix" separate, just shows how deceitful they had to be to get the CBO to give this a low enough score for some to vote for it.

Not only that, when was the last time the government ever ran a project of anywhere near this size at anywhere near at or under budget? Or ran it more efficiently or at a lower cost than the private sector? Or when was the last time that creating huge bureaucracies made anything easier to get? The list of questions goes on, and the answer is always, "Never."

In addition, they gave employers the option of continuing to pay for your insurance, at an average cost of over $20,000/year or paying a $750/year fine for not providing it. So in a company of 1,000 employees, they can save around $19,250,000/year by not providing you insurance.

So what do you imagine will happen when companies start ditching their insurance plans left and right? The insurance companies will tank, and the "public option," which is not in this bill, will have to be added back in. And yet the government claims there is no plan to take over health care in this country.

Finally, if you're going to say "give me some hardcore numbers" you probably shouldn't follow that up with "so this bill should lower my Insurance, and i hope it should lower that 20% payment to." Should and hope aren't exactly hardcore numbers, are they?

And these points are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

[leroy]

And it appears some folks are confusing constitutional rights with personal wants. (....Its also about demanding to have what your brother has because you think he doesnt deserve it and you do. More than that; you want him to pay for it, because he somehow stole it; and that means he deserves to be punished.. You, of course, didnt steal anything, so you are the victim here. The truth is, it's class envy and distain for your brother run to its ultimate conclusion. The polititians and the demigogues are good at selling this stuff. The fact is, no one deserves to have someone he doesnt know pay for his stuff!!! As the famous cartoon character "Garfield" so famously said in the childrens poster depicts him looking to the mirror and pointing at himself: "...YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU!!...--Leroy's comment....)

Were we anarchists last week? Under the old rules, where I choose to pay my own way?

The fact is, we lost a little more liberty when this was signed into law - my choice to not carry health insurance is now gone (as are other choices wrt saving money by opting for 'leaner' insurance plans).

What's sad is how so many folks are willing to accept this loss of liberty because they think it benefits them, or have a social outlook whereby they excuse it as it helps others.

Truly sad.

What a truth brother!!! You hit the nail square on the head!!!

Keep up the good work!!

Kind regards,

Leroy

[Oh Shoot]

My mom, 84, has carry over insurance from my Dad's (deceased) retirement from BellTel. She pays about $350-400/ month, great insurance. Picks up essentially every other dime that Medicare doesn't. Medicare has to be hit first, though, but that's another issue.

Just heard the news that AT&T claims the new health care taxes/prescription drugs policy will likely cost them a billion bucks, which they have set aside just during first quarter of 2010, as I understand it.

"As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health care benefits offered by the company."

Any changes will only mean one thing, of course, so there's another "personal story" to add to this thread.

- OS

[threeshot]

Straw man - I never claimed anyone was communist, rather simply stated that if you believe liberty is a chip to gamble with, you may as well concede that communism is the ideal solution to cure society's ills.

If you remove liberty from the equation, communism is a great idea.

And you miss my point entirely - this law is supposed to be about our own economy and people. If the government is going to impinge upon the people's freedom, why not do the same for the corporations, forcing them to only hire US citizens to fill the necessary jobs?

Simple, because this whole thing isn't about health care or people's welfare, it's a power grab.

And no, that's not sensationalism, though you can keep trying to undermine the truth with name calling and accusations, I truly don't care.

How is market freedom (or free market) for healthcare working so well that you think everything is going just fine?

Is it the insurance companies being able to drop people because their healthcare needs are getting too expensive?

Is it insurance companies denying payment for pre-existing conditions?

Is it healthcare providers reducing staff to patient ratios to help the bottom line?

Is it the uninsured that uses ER services that are causing many hospitals and states to go into red? Some hospitals are closing their ERs. For profit hospital companies avoid certain markets and let the states suffer the losses. In essence, cherry picking their profit centers and leaves the rest to the taxpayer.

Is it a healthcare system that is more focused on reactive care than preventive care?

Do you think without the government stepping into healthcare that they can merely legislate insurance companies and healthcare providers to work towards giving everyone affordable healthcare and to focus more on preventive care rather than the bottom line profit?

For those of you against the change to the healthcare system, what are the solutions to these problems?

[molonlabetn]

I honestly don't see why placing a requirment on employers to provide insurance benefits makes sense... Why not buy it like car/home insurance? Find your age and health bracket (ie, smoke, drink, overweight, etc...), choose your deductibles and there you go. If you don't have health insurance, that's your choice, but if something happens and you don't/can't pay, your medical provider can place a lien against your life insurance/estate/social security so that it does get paid. Make individuals responsible for their own care.

[G27]

Do you think without the government stepping into healthcare that they can merely legislate insurance companies and healthcare providers to work towards giving everyone affordable healthcare and to focus more on preventive care rather than the bottom line profit?

Have you read anything in the bill which controls the premiums they can charge you? If so, please link them here. Everything I've seen just says they cannot deny coverage, but there are minimums of the coverage you have to buy.

You think the insurance companies are going to provide this extra coverage at no extra charge, out of the goodness of their hearts?

If this law makes it until 2014, get back to us and tell us how much your premiums have dropped.

*stifles laughter*

For those of you against the change to the healthcare system, what are the solutions to these problems?

I wish there was an easy answer, but my loss of liberty shouldn't be an option.

The reality is you liberals / progressives are willing to trade anything to achieve your idealistic utopia; 'freedom from worry or personal responsibility'. Please go do so elsewhere and leave my freedoms alone.

[G27]

I honestly don't see why placing a requirment on employers to provide insurance benefits makes sense...

The requirement for insurance is simple - as employers opt to pay the fine instead of the greatly increased premiums (based on the minimum coverages required by this law), more and more folks will be on the hook for their own insurance, but the premiums will be prohibitively high as the coverage required by law is expensive.

Once the outcry against the evil opportunistic health insurance providers gets loud enough, they'll roll out Government Insurance like they wanted to from the beginning.

Why not buy it like car/home insurance? Find your age and health bracket (ie, smoke, drink, overweight, etc...), choose your deductibles and there you go. If you don't have health insurance, that's your choice, but if something happens and you don't/can't pay, your medical provider can place a lien against your life insurance/estate/social security so that it does get paid. Make individuals responsible for their own care.

Yah, personal responsibility - that could never work!

We've finally reached the point where the entitlement mentatily has permeated enough of our culture that it's acceptable, even lauded, to take handouts.

[molonlabetn]

Exactly... it only makes sense to those who won't be paying for it.

Good post.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This health care nonsense will be the economic tsunami that will create another 'crisis'

called 'single payer'. Of course, we won't have jobs to pay for anything anymore and

will be enslaved in that utopia called 'marxism'.

They don't want to succeed, they want you to fail. Your only existence is for their pleasure. Abortion is about the unborn's right to life, which is paid for in this bill. so are 'death panels', which is your right to life. How is that good for freedom for anyone?

If I want to kill myself that is my choice, but it would still be 'my' choice. I choose to live on my terms, not the government's.

Like John Dingell, an old democrat, recently said, 'control people', is the issue and nothing else. If that isn't about power, I don't know what is. Al Sharpton said that the people voted for socialism this last election. I contend the people that voted for it

were duped or just plain stupid voters. How much more is it going to take to push these marxist hyenas off the continent?