CBO: Obamacare Will Cost Over $2 Trillion by 2014

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ths-Too-babies-born-hospital-say-doctors.html

Who is the fool?

Open your eyes.

 

It's going to cost you.

WSJ Chief Economist: 75% of Obamacare Costs Will Fall on Backs of Those Making Less Than $120K a Year

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/...-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/

 

She was - like so many yanks - thieving. You don't pay, you see. If you are extremely rich it is doubtless 'efficient and nothing more'. If you belong to us 99% it is superb.

 

Leftys dont care about reality. They want freebees !!!

 

The Democratic Party has worked on through News Media, Public Education, and Bureaucracy creating a whole segment of people that believe it is alright to be a parasite on your fellow man.

 

So you force the 1% to use your system, and pay for it, yet when they complain about how it is mediocre then they don't deserve it anyway.

Geez.

This class warfare stuff is out of control.

If these liberal progressives could lock up the rich and loot all their belongings they would.

What a disgusting bunch.

 

The socialist cancer we got from Obama has spread though our entire national body. We probably can't get rid of it now unless we commit suicide. Maybe that is coming too. I can't stand Obama but I don't see Romney being much different in all honesty.

 

Can we buy medicine across international lines?

 

Yep, this is a poor solution so far. All we really need is for government to get out of healthcare, and really to stop wasting all our money on all sorts of stupid schemes, such as the endless wars they have had so many Americans supporting over the decades. They keep getting greedier and greedier for our money, and so we get poorer and poorer.

I would be happy to either buy health insurance or pay out of pocket for medical costs, and without income tax and other stupid taxes taking my income, and also without government helping drive health care costs up by stepping in and creating bureaucracy and paying people's bills for them, what I want would be far more feasible.

So... Since neither the MOD EDIT THAT IS NOT RESPECTFUL DEBATE Republicrats nor the Democans will ever do what needs doing here, we need to get beyond them. It shouldn't take a bloody revolution to elect better people to office. Better people run every single election cycle, but they are virtually ignored by all of you and by our media.

 

Just how few American voters look beyond the same two idiotic choices and investigate what's out there for candidates and platforms? We _should_ have choices, and theoretically we do, but we have this (*)(*)(*)(*)ed two-party mentality generating constant momentum that we must all band together to slow and hopefully stop completely, so that we can actually have choices on election day. Then we needn't have Tweedle Dumb & Dumber threatening us with bad and worse policies every election, forcing the voter to try and decide which is least worse.

It's up to all of us to stand up to this crap and to spread the word.

 

We've been herded into two camps that battle in one political arena that ONE group of masterminds controls! If you don't vote for one party's handpuppet, or the other party's handpuppet, you end up throwing your vote away, like I did twice for Ross Perot (because I couldn't STAND George Herbert Walker Bull(*)(*)(*)(*) Bush).

I'm so (*)(*)(*)(*)ing mad and disillusioned with the whole rotten, gutbucket full of this (*)(*)(*)(*) that I'm actually wishing that we could have Bill Clinton back for a 3rd Term. "Oh, it's not Constitutional!" Yeah, well, Roberts and the hyperlib members of the Court threw the Constitution in the garbage -- so why the hell couldn't we have Bill Clinton back? He's the only person who's occupied the Oval Office since Ronald Reagan who hasn't been an embarrassing, (*)(*)(*)(*)ed-up moron....

 

Lies, lies and more LIES!
Actually, in the next ten years, Obama health care will HELP reduce the deficit.

 

What compromise? The only thing compromised is the constitution. It effectively no longer exists. And Romney isn't even conservative. He's just slightly to the right of Obama, which means we have the choice between Obama and Obamalite who both believe that we should be a collectivist state. How is voting for Mr. Status Quo going to repeal the status quo? This country is no longer free -- the leader can do whatever he wants and the courts will approve it. They'll even redefine common English words for their statist masters. I don't see the point in voting -- heads they win, tails they win. I think the best we can hope for is a quick collapse so that we can rebuild.

 

You are indeed correct, septimine.

 

Waiting for the 'perfect' while voting for the fringe gives us folk like Obama and worse, the Marxist Congress that come in riding on his coat tails...Kill off as many RINO's as possible in primaries and vote for whoever wins in the general is a much wiser vote.

 

Bull, they do a fine job for routine care and are awful if your life is at risk...and the medicine is always at least a few years behind state of the art. My spouse was in a car crash in the early 90's in the UK and she ended up in a ward, the sort of thing we saw in a 1950's hospital movie in the USA, not what one sees half a century later.

 

Great response, JIMV.

Have you seen this recent report on the profits made by the U.S. health insurers?

Are insurance company profits excessive?
By Kevin Price

We are told, daily, about the "exploitative" profits being made by the large health insurance companies in the form of premiums. The "huge" amount of dollars collected should be grounds for the massive take over of health care by the government, we are often told by the media. Politicians discuss these companies like preachers from the pulpit, using terms such as "immoral" and "disgusting" as measures of the amounts they make. According to the Associated Press, the real numbers show a different story.

Health insurance profit margins run around 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That is very small compared to other forms of insurance and below the standard 7 percent most of us learned in economic classes as the corporate average for profits.

Here are some of the points from the AP article:

Health insurers posted a 2.2 percent profit margin last year, placing them 35th on the Fortune 500 list of top industries. It is not at all surprising that other health sectors did far better — drugs and medical products and services were both in the top 10.

Doing better still — at the top of the list — network and other communications equipment, at 20.4 percent; the railroads brought in a 12.6 percent profit margin.

HealthSpring, the best performer in the health insurance industry, posted 5.4 percent; that mark proved less than Tupperware, Clorox bleach and Molson and Coors beers.

UnitedHealth Group, reporting third quarter results last week, saw a better picture; it obtained a 5 percent profit margin on an 8 percent growth in revenue.

We have been told that the Bush Administration provided the "hot years" for health insurance companies. Reality, again, shows something else as industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.

So what companies were the real performers? Surprisingly the list includes Tupperware Brands, 7.5 percent; Yahoo, 5.9 percent; Hershey, 6.1 percent; Clorox, 8.7 percent; Molson Coors Brewing, 8.1 percent; construction and farm machinery, 5 percent; Yum Brands 8.5 percent.

I personally do not care how much a business makes as long as its profits are legal and they face competition. The Obama Administration likes to complain about the health insurance industry "monopoly" on health care, as if we were all dealing with a single company. In light of the fact health insurance companies are making considerably less than other industries, it is clear that these companies do not enjoy anything like a monopoly. We will not, however, be able to say the same about Obama's public option.

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/price/091029[/QUOTE]

 

This is true, Bluesguy.

 

What a bunch of BS. The cost for health care was $2.6 Trillion in 2010.

Health expenditures in the United States neared $2.6 trillion in 2010, over ten times the $256 billion spent in 1980. http://www.kaiseredu.org/Issue-Modules/US-Health-Care-Costs/Background-Brief.aspx

Therefore if it drops to $2 Trillon in 2014 it would be a reduction of $600 Billion. Doesn't that prove that the new plan is effective in reducing costs?

Yes, it does.

 

What socialism? Oh, you mean for bankers and CEO's? Yeah, that is a serious problem. Too bad we don't get to partake in any of it!

 

Ha-Ha!

You partake of socialism each time you pay taxes to support entitlement programs and welfare spending!