The President's Health Plan Won’t Cut the Budget Deficit

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
The Doc Fix and Cadillac Tax are explained along with other reasons why:

The President's Health Plan Won’t Cut the Budget Deficit

What the president’s plan would deliver, however, is dead-certain entitlement spending, financed with speculative revenue and spending cuts that almost certainly will not work as advertised. The president says Congress should pass his plan to improve the budget outlook. In fact, Congress should reject it to protect the budget from more unfunded entitlement obligations.

This short article explains why Obamascare is utter LUNACY!!
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Oh brother...

When this guy starts working for the CBO, let me know. Until then, I'll stick with the people who actually know what the hell they are talking about.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
It does when you review the fiscal record of the nation under this guy's watch. To have one's opinion respected, one must first display performance worthy of respect.


Hey, I have an idea! Let's listen to Jimmy Carter's advice on how to handle the Iranians! (get it?)
 
Last edited:

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
It does when you review the fiscal record of the nation under this guy's watch. To have one's opinion respected, one must first display performance worthy of respect.


Hey, I have an idea! Let's listen to Jimmy Carter's advice on how to handle the Iranians! (get it?)

Your reliance on "Bush" is ridiculous unless Obama was wrong to go with Gates and then KEEP Gates. :rolleyes: Get it?

You're relying on an OPINION piece from a HEALTH INSURANCE provider??? FUNNY!

The article is written by a well qualified expert who is relying on concrete information from Obamascare. If you can refute the article then give it your best shot.

Oh and you relying on Obama's mess of bills and proposals is even funnier!
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Your reliance on "Bush" is ridiculous unless Obama was wrong to go with Gates and then KEEP Gates. :rolleyes: Get it?
This explains part of your problem. You're unable or unwilling to discern between an employee with good performance, and one with bad performance. Gates has done an excellent job at the Pentagon. Especially in comparison to the disastrous tenure of the clown Rumsfeld before him. On the other hand, this guy helped craft an economic policy that we've all just personally witnessed crash and burn. Sorry, but you're not going to convince anyone that he is the voice of reason in the healthcare debate, no matter how much you wish we would.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
This explains part of your problem. You're unable or unwilling to discern between an employee with good performance, and one with bad performance. Gates has done an excellent job at the Pentagon. Especially in comparison to the disastrous tenure of the clown Rumsfeld before him. On the other hand, this guy helped craft an economic policy that we've all just personally witnessed crash and burn. Sorry, but you're not going to convince anyone that he is the voice of reason in the healthcare debate, no matter how much you wish we would.

Obama has no experience in running anything. Failure of economic policy? So far, Obama doesn't have a win. This article is written by someone who's been down the road and knows the perils that lay ahead with every decision. If you can't refute the article with anything Obama has...then saying "Bush" means nothing because according to Obama's low job approval, a majority of the American people will counter with "Obama" :mad: Stimulus Waste, Broken promises, Non Transparency, Unrealistic Economic Policy Agenda, Rejected Dem Healthcare Plan. :rolleyes:
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
^Seeing that you're changing the subject, I presume that you now are willing to stipulate that the guy you've propped up here isn't a compelling authority on healthcare. In fact, he's no authority at all.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,254
Media
213
Likes
32,173
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
This article is written by someone who's been down the road and knows the perils that lay ahead with every decision.
NO, your article was written by a HEALTH INSURANCE PROVIDER who has a financial, vested interest in making sure that health care Reform fails. I would take anything they say with a BIG grain of salt because their primary job is to keep their profits up by using my health as a commodity on which to make MONEY.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Obama has no experience in running anything. Failure of economic policy? So far, Obama doesn't have a win. This article is written by someone who's been down the road and knows the perils that lay ahead with every decision. If you can't refute the article with anything Obama has...then saying "Bush" means nothing because according to Obama's low job approval, a majority of the American people will counter with "Obama" :mad: Stimulus Waste, Broken promises, Non Transparency, Unrealistic Economic Policy Agenda, Rejected Dem Healthcare Plan. :rolleyes:

Wait... I could have swore I saw you sing this on stage before. But the words were much different... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
^Seeing that you're changing the subject, I presume that you now are willing to stipulate that the guy you've propped up here isn't a compelling authority on healthcare. In fact, he's no authority at all.

I didn't change the subject. I brought it back to the subject. The author of the article is both a compelling authority on healthcare and a qualified expert. If you can refute the article with anything from Obama and the Dems, give it your best shot.

NO, your article was written by a HEALTH INSURANCE PROVIDER who has a financial, vested interest in making sure that health care Reform fails. I would take anything they say with a BIG grain of salt because their primary job is to keep their profits up by using my health as a commodity on which to make MONEY.

No. It was not written by a Health Insurance Provider. It was written by a consultant who is an expert on domestic policy - in particular Healthcare.

If you can refute the article, give it your best shot.

oh, and regardless of the motives of Kaiser...it doesn't change the facts of Obamascare. The Doc Fix, the added taxes...the fact that it won't cut costs and costs too much.

If we want to reign in profits it won't be with the most rejected mess of bills and proposals that could collapse our economy and damage the quality of our healthcare worse than it all ready is. :rolleyes:
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I didn't change the subject. I brought it back to the subject. The author of the article is both a compelling authority on healthcare and a qualified expert. If you can refute the article with anything from Obama and the Dems, give it your best shot.
So, one of the architects of the budget time bomb crafted during the Bush years is the best you can come up with?
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,254
Media
213
Likes
32,173
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I didn't change the subject. I brought it back to the subject.
If we want to reign in profits it won't be with the most rejected mess of bills and proposals that could collapse our economy and damage the quality of our healthcare worse than it all ready is. :rolleyes:
I don't want to reign in Profits. I want to eliminate them ENTIRELY. My health is NOT a commodity.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
I don't want to reign in Profits. I want to eliminate them ENTIRELY. My health is NOT a commodity.

If only single payer worked *sigh* Don't you live in Mass Indy? Or you did...

You know hasn't worked. A 25 year old will take the $950 penalty (some pay it, some don't even bother) rather than pay $3500 for healthcare by mandate to keep more of his salary. But then if that 25 year old actually gets sick, because insurers can't deny coverage for preconditions, they have to cover all their bills.

The young who are supposed to be spreading out the costs of the ill and the elderly are adding to the costs through the regulation.

average Massachusetts insurance premiums are now the highest in the nation. Since 2006, they’ve climbed at an annual rate of 30% in the individual market. Small business costs have increased by 5.8%. Per capita health spending in Massachusetts is now 27% higher than the national average, and 15% higher even after adjusting for local wages and academic research grants. The growth rate is faster too.
… As in Washington, the political class and providers blame insurers, but a better culprit is the state’s insurance regulation. Incredibly, the average “medical loss ratio” in Massachusetts for individual policies is 112%—that is, insurers pay $1.12 in benefits for every $1 in premiums.
This is the direct result of forcing insurers to charge everyone more or less the same rate regardless of age or health status, which makes it rational for people to wait to enroll until they need expensive coverage.