We will find out how many Americans are actually opposed to health care reform when the Republicans campaign on the idea of repealing it. Just like SS, Medicare, etc. there is lots of complaining but just try to take any of those things away.

We will find out how many Americans are actually opposed to health care reform when the Republicans campaign on the idea of repealing it. Just like SS, Medicare, etc. there is lots of complaining but just try to take any of those things away.

The public loathes this bill.

They loathe it.

SS and Medicare not only had bi-partisan support but public support as well. The fact that both of these programs were blatantly uconstitutional is a seperate issue.

Immediate tax increases with no benefit for 3 years spells stink bomb for the dems if they try to pull off this sleazy move. I actually feel sorry for those who try to defend this one, they are very ill and must really need the free health care.

It has to pass before it can be repealed, doesn't it? Why hasn't it passed yet? They don't have the votes, no matter whay they say. And they won't get them, especially when some one finally has the balls to admit that they can't get the CBO numbers to meet their defecit reduction goals without substantially altering this shitpile of a bill or raising taxes significantly.

House Democrats ran into problems Tuesday locking down details of their health-care bill, prolonging the tense wait for a final plan partly because of a struggle over provisions that would overhaul the federal student-loan program.

With Congress just days away from an expected vote, Democrats still hadn't settled on final language of the bill, and until they do the Congressional Budget Office can't release an estimate for how much the complete package would cost.

Dennis Kucinich announced he will vote for the bill this morning. It's looking like it will pass.

"SS and Medicare not only had bi-partisan support but public support as well."

Huh???

"A July 1962 poll found 28% in favor of Medicare, 24% unfavorable and 33% with no opinion."

So........ the poles were close back in the 60s, just exactly what are they now? I guess you realize that you have to have secondary insurance if you are on medicare.

Telling me somone likes a program, does not automatically equate to the program being a good one.

If this isn't the definition of flawd logic, then there is none.

"I guess you realize that you have to have secondary insurance if you are on medicare."

That may be true but it would be impossible for most people on Medicare to buy regular health insurance. Most would just not be able to afford it.

It's too bad nobody listened to the critics of Medicare then. Now entitlements are bankrupting the country, and the libtards want another trillion per year more.

Lunacy. If we could go back with today's actual numbers, there's no way Medicare would have passed. It swamps the entire federal budget.

Ah well. America was a good idea, for awhile, until people figured out they could use politics to get stuff for free, and set up the world's largest Ponzi schemes.

What would be the financal shape of medicare and SS if it didn't pay for medicaid?

You are right 902. People like SS but is is a terrible program. It is a ponzi scheme the way its being run now and will be tits up in a few years. The government can't even doo a good job of hauling trash.

Oh yeah, Medicare worked out great, the cost projections came in under budget and the program generates surpluses as far as the eye can see.

You are right Mitch. Just like ALL government programs and projections. You can depend on them for the truth.

"It's too bad nobody listened to the critics of Medicare then."

The program operates fine, if Medicare had the ability to raise the taxes which pay for it in a similar fashion as insurance rates have gone up.....Medicare would be a cash cow for the government. It is ridiculous to pretend Medicare is such a bad program while we have runaway health insurance costs and at the same time increasing numbers of uninsured people.
In the long run insurance will become too expensive even with reform and Medicare will need to have younger healthier people in its risk pool. Eventually even the most stubborn righties will be forced to admit that Medicare Part E is the only way we are going to be able to provide health care for the majority of the population.

yeah this is correct if you read about it.
not sure there was a MULTIPLE TRILLION dollar deficit when it started though.....and since I HAVE NO DOG in this hunt, I can say whatever I want without some liberlfuck using the ole...get your hands off my SS routine.

but since dems believe a 460 billion deficit is liscence to shove it up over a trillion OR TWO..I am sure they will think its okay to add yet another entitlement now.

The program operates fine

what? your heros have legislation with language in it that includes "curbing billions of $$$ in waste and fraud in medicare".

I'm not anti-medicare...in fact I support it.

however, let's not elevate it to a level it doesn't deserve.

good grief, libs are pulling anything out of their ass to justify their support of this POS bill.

"however, let's not elevate it to a level it doesn't deserve."

No government program the size of Medicare can be perfect but it serves millions of people and they are relatively happy with the program which operates far cheaper than private insurance would or could.

Why do you think the repubs are have such a conniption fit trying to not get this passed? They spout lies, fear tactics, just about anything to not get it passed. Because once it gets passed the public will like it, and then the rich insurance monopoly (in effect) will be less rich.

If they really thought it was going to destroy America, they would offer to not run against Dems in their districts if they voted no on the bill. But they really aren't that serious so they won't.

but it serves millions of people and they are relatively happy with the program

agreed.

which operates far cheaper than private insurance would or could.

you wouldn't know.

apples and oranges.

"you wouldn't know.

apples and oranges."

Baloney.

with the program which operates far cheaper than private insurance would or could.

#17 | Posted by danni

And it is broke!!!! Damn good program dan.

apples
oranges
baloney

EWWWW!!!!!

which part danni?

the part where "you don't know". baloney....you don't.

compare an apple to an apple for me and I'll retract.

Medicare is going bankrupt because it is a bad system full of corruption. All they do in countries with socialized medicine is complain, and talk about the next patch, meanwhile stealing it blind. It is NOT the government's job, and it is not a right. There is a right to fail, however, that is being reduced by liberals every day. We the People reject this quaint notion.

If the bill passes and the GOP doesn't campaign to repeal the law, there is no reason for the existance of the GOP, they might as well join the Dems.

ditto

and as I have said repeatedly..IF THE gop doesnt come through after THIS liberal shit..then there will be a viable third party for the first time in HOW many years?

and anderson and perot were not what I consider to be viable....

I mean like the end of the gop viable...

ALSO...wasnt the votes on medicare and ss...at least PARIALLY bipartisan..UNLIKE any aspect of this disaster waiting to happen.

That may be true but it would be impossible for most people on Medicare to buy regular health insurance. Most would just not be able to afford it.

#9 | Posted by danni

It would be interesting to see the hypothetical cost of an individual policy for a Bluecross/Blueshield PPO for an 80 year old with numerous prescriptions and pre-existing conditions. If Medicare were dissolved tomorrow, I can't imagine any private insurer wanting to take the risk of covering someone who needs on going care and in all likelihood would need a major procedure in < 10 years.

Those Dems who pass this Trillion $$$ crap sandwich can "deem" themselves out of office in November.

Why do you think the repubs are have such a conniption fit trying to not get this passed?
* * * *

Because it sucks ass.

someone see if they can link to votes on medicare..
of course ss would be harder being older and also being a part of the fdr years

you remember those...when AMERICANS WERE locked up because they had funny eyes.

and its too expensive

too much govt

and WAY too much schumer, pelosi and reid..

"you wouldn't know.

apples and oranges."

Baloney.

That's right, she plugged the words private insurance into the Paul Krugman "it would have been worse" calculator...and it said "Outlook not so good".

Why do you think the repubs are have such a conniption fit trying to not get this passed?
* * * *

Because it sucks ass.

#30 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-03-17 01:10 PM

Like I said, if they really wanted to prevent this bill from going through they could. They could offer dems that are wishy washy on the bill that they would not oppose them in the coming elections, guaranteeing them they'll get re-elected. But they won't do that.

Or, if this bill is so bad, let it go through and then the public will see how bad it is, then they can get into power and change it. They don't need to lie about death panels and how it's going to kill your grandma.

They don't want it to get in because they fear the public will like it, and once it's in and they like it they won't win big seats next election.

"If Medicare were dissolved tomorrow, I can't imagine any private insurer wanting to take the risk of covering someone who needs on going care and in all likelihood would need a major procedure in < 10 years."

Of course not, the insurance industry only wants the young, the healthy, the one's who don't have many expensive claims. When we get older or become disabled they dump us onto Medicare and the taxpayers. It is a demonstration of American's collective stupidity that we continue such an unfair deal for taxpayers.

When we get older or become disabled they dump us onto Medicare and the taxpayers. It is a demonstration of American's collective stupidity that we continue such an unfair deal for taxpayers.

how is it "unfair" that we have medicare for seniors? under no set of circumstances could 90% of them afford any private insurance (if available) or afford the care itself.

who else should pay for it? you are bitching about the "unfairness" of it? I'll bet I pay more than 90% of everyone for those taxes and I'm not complaining.

"how is it "unfair" that we have medicare for seniors? under no set of circumstances could 90% of them afford any private insurance (if available) or afford the care itself."

I'm not saying it is unfair for the elderly to have Medicare and I don't mind paying either. That wasn't my point at all. I was saying that it is unfair to all of us taxpayers to pay for Medicare and also pay for health insurance with private insurers. It would be better for Medicare and better for us to all be included in Medicare with the appropriate buy in or taxes to pay for it. That would be cheaper than what we pay now, Medicare would be solvent and it would reduce the percentage of GDP spent on healthcare.

It would be better for Medicare and better for us to all be included in Medicare with the appropriate buy in or taxes to pay for it. That would be cheaper than what we pay now, Medicare would be solvent and it would reduce the percentage of GDP spent on healthcare.

really? right now we need 3.3 people paying "premiums" into medicare to provide care for only 1 person.

and somehow you conclude that we should all just enroll and it would be cheaper.

"right now we need 3.3 people paying "premiums" into medicare to provide care for only 1 person."

Because that person is over 65 years old.
If you brought all the young healthy people into the risk pool it would change your ratio of people paying in to insure one person quite a bit.
I don't know if you are just being obtuse or if you really don't get it, I think you do. It isn't exactly rocket science.

Vote "obtuse".

It isn't exactly rocket science.

it has to be dumbed down to a level so libs can understand.

but that comparison just isn't that simple despite the libs attempt to simplify it for themselves.

see? even this argument is a testament to how hard libs try to "simplify" this argument.

the conversation gets steered into a discussion of something that isn't, nor will be, on the table for a long long long time if ever.

But I guess it beats discussing what a POS the current legislation is isn't it???

"But I guess it beats discussing what a POS the current legislation is isn't it???"

Call it whatever you want but it's going to pass and it's going to help many people in spite of the people trying to tell us we don't want it.

Call it whatever you want but it's going to pass and it's going to help many people in spite of the people trying to tell us we don't want it.

it sure will.

like those of us who locked on Aetna when it was trading in the low to mid $20s.

and it's CEO.

the uninsured?????

I'll wait before I declare they are getting any help.

"which operates far cheaper than private insurance would or could."
#17 | Posted by danni

Check out the price of supplemental Medicare insurance. And that is just for what Medicare refuses to pay. No wonder you say it's cheaper. Don't forget people pay the premiums for Medicare for 40+ years before they can use it. It's not so cheap then.

Don't forget the new Health Care mandate will make cuts to Medicare in order to pay for the new program - so we'vw got that going for us! Remember, less is more, right?

KBM are you trying to claim that it costs more to insure people through Medicare than through private insurance???

"right now we need 3.3 people paying "premiums" into medicare to provide care for only 1 person."

#39 | Posted by danni

Do you know what a ponzi scheme is?

Medicate - another govt program which costs many times more than projected and is broke - nice comparison for things to come.

Incidentally, Medicare has a higher rate of claims denial than the private companies.

Medicare, another govt program which costs many times more than projected and is broke...AND, has a higher denial rate than the private insurance companies.

More of the same to come if obamacare goes through.

Good comparison to make one really think:

Medicare costs many times more than originally projected, has a higher denial of claims rate than the private insurance companies, and is broke.

Sorry, problems with the iMac. Was not showing that it posted - fixed now.

So, comparing this horrible bill to other gov failures is a rally message for the dems? The term Orwellian can't come close to covering this ...

#52 | Posted by FrankA

The big difference is that obamacare does not have the public support. Social suckurity has failed miserably, and so has medicare, we do not need another money eating leftwing marxist clusterfuck.

Put a fork in our country if this turd passes.....

The Marxist will have won....:(

Corporate HMOs spend a mil and a half daily to convince the right-wing lunatics posting here to oppose their own health care. I suspect that those demonizing their president and the notion that ALL Americans deserve medical help will go the comical route of birthers, the John Birch Society, anti-fluoridationists and anti-vivisectionists. herm

HERM - I have govt health care, no corporate HMO needs to influence me; the VA hospitals say it all.

you remember those...when AMERICANS WERE locked up because they had funny eyes.

#31 | Posted by afkabl2

and they were id'd by the census...that form coming to you soon that will ask you how many bathrooms in your house....or about that level of question

you remember those...when AMERICANS WERE locked up because they had funny eyes.

#31 | Posted by afkabl2

Wsn't that about the same time the Americans with German ancestors were locked up too? Who was president the?