Healthcare: Democratic no's now maybe

THOSE PESKY OL' FACTS KEEP GETTING IN THE WAY OF THE DEMS SOLUTION LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM.
Graph of the Day for March 2, 2010
"For four years, they haven't tried. They stood by while insurance companies have taken in record profits. They don't consider the high cost of health care a serious problem. But I do." John Kerry, 2004.
US Health care costs rise 5.9%/year, the lower middle and below the 6.6% average.
Also this, gee why are the physicians running away from gov't controlled care?
-
Expatriation rate of physicians in Canada: 13.0%
Expatriation rate of physicians in the UK: 11.3%
Expatriation rate of physicians in the US: 0.6%
Source: Joint Economic Committee, Republicans.

And this, those evil, greedy, insurance companies make loads of profits, right? Guess again, loony libs!
2008 profits as percentage of revenues, and rank among 52 industries:
Life and health insurance (stock): 4.6%, 22 of 52
Health care, insurance and managed care: 2.2%, 35 of 52
Life and health insurance (mutual): -3.0%, 47 of 52
Source: CNN Money.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/graph_of_the_day_for_march_2_2.html

The machinations of the vote counting is fascinating in view of the fact that every day in this country, our health care mess gets worse. It stopped being about republicans or democrats or silly rules in the Senate. Every day more of our fellow citizens die, declare bankruptcy because they had no health care insurance. I'm ready to talk about it. Please send me an email at flmaphurs@gmail and we can do a radio show about it. Thanks.

Alice in Health Care
Almost everything they claim will lower costs would, in fact, raise them.
*
Most discussions of health care are like something out of Alice in Wonderland.

What is the biggest complaint about the current medical-care situation? “It costs too much.” Yet one looks in vain for anything in the pending legislation that will lower those costs.

One of the biggest reasons for higher medical costs is that somebody else is paying those costs, whether an insurance company or the government. What is the politicians’ answer? To have more costs paid by insurance companies and the government.
*
http://article.nationalreview.com/426584/alice-in-health-care/thomas-sowell

Americans want jobs and the spending to stop, but president panty waist isn't listening...all he wants is his socialist, far left wing Utopian agenda to succeed.
Any dem that votes for this is on a Kamikaze mission to the unemployment lines.

Paulo

American Collectivism: A Record of Failure
.
The hype is always better than the real thing.
Boston's Big Dig sounded like a half-decent project in the beginning. Approved in 1982 with a price tag $2.6 billion, it was completed, however, more or less, in 2005 at a price of $22 billion.
-
Medicare, similarly, was optimistically projected in 1967 to have an annual price tag of $12 billion by 1990. The actual 1990 cost? $98 billion.
-
These estimates and actual costs aren't even close, with final prices running eight and ten times off.
-
Now we're getting the biggest hype yet, the idea that Obama and his various czarinas and central planners have the expertise to re-work a sixth of the U.S. economy so that we'll somehow end up with universal health coverage, 30 million more people insured, and all done in a way that produces lower costs and higher quality while not adding a dime to the federal deficit.
-
It's like everyone gets a shiny new Mercedes and somehow, simultaneously, the sticker price goes down, the quality goes up, and there's no red ink.
-
Plus they're saying that billions can be cut from Medicare without cutting anything that seniors are getting from Medicare.
-
I get the feeling that we haven't learned much from our previous grand experiments. The list of failures in long.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/02/american-collectivism-a-record

I keep saying it if the loony liberals in the Congress choose to ignore the majority of the voters and pass this bill they will pay dearly for their arrogance during the next two election cycles. We all know we need to reform healthcare that is a no-brainer. The problem is one massive bill riddled with pork and payoffs does not cut it. What I find repulsive about the Democrats and their lunatic fringe is that they will not even seriously discuss tort reform as part of healthcare reform. Because of the trial attorneys buying the Democratic Party we cannot get a handle on defensive medicine which is estimated to cost (and this is lowballing) $200 billion a year.

Jim Flannigan:

You're not smart to identify contradictions in your own idiotic rant.

On the one hand, you talk about how Medicare is a failure. Then you complain that Obama wants to cut Medicare services (a brazen lie, but zombies like you never let the facts get in the way).

Pick a side. You either want Medicare eliminated or you want it improved. Not even a simp like you can have it both ways.

Maybe you should have the courage to say what you mean: you want to eliminate the government altogether and go back to that libertarian Utopia, the State of Nature. Let's abolish the Constitution, disband the government and start all over. You can farm your plot of land, have the youngins stand guard, and then barter sprigs of parsley in exchange for clothing. Nasty government will never again encroach on your precious bowl of rice. Deal?

Easy there blinkin, sounds like you need to do some thinkin. Abolish the Constitution? Where'd that come from? The point is . . . now listen closesly . . . big gov't programs ALWAYS have big overruns and unforeseen negative consequences. NobamaCare will be no different. Someone has to pay for it; nothing is free. Is that simple enough for the liberal brain of yours?
-
Let's abolish the Constitution, disband the government and start all over.
Posted by: a blinkin | March 2, 2010 12:23 PM

Mobster:

I don't want to abolish the Constitution, but it's quite clear you zombies do. The Constitution created the government that creates these evil programs that you fear. If you don't like the programs created through democratic processes, then you need to change the processes. I realize that's not simple enough for you. Nothing is simple enough for you. Too bad.

"Nothing is free"? That's for sure. That includes hundreds of billions for wars of choice. Did anyone plan to pay for your beloved wars? Did anyone even ask what they might cost? Did anyone dare suggest that revenue might need to be enhanced in order to pay for the blank checks drawn on the Bank of China? Of course not. And traitorous Republicans (pardon the redundancy) "ran" the Government and started these wars despite these obvious deficiencies in planning. Those are facts; that is a track record. It is a record of complete failure. No one has less credibility on "fiscal responsibility" than right wing America. Spout all your simpleton platitudes you want. No one with a brain cares.

YEAH ABE LINCOLN, TURNS OUT THERE WAS TRUE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THE "WARS OF CHOICE", NOT THE RAHM IT THROUGH HEALTH CARE "REFORM DEBACLE THAT WILL SOON USHER CONSERVATIVES BACK IN POWER..

PLEASE READ UP ON HISTORY:
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

YOU AND YOUR LEFTIE DEM ILK MIGHT WANT TO TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR D'S "CONSTITUTIONAL" ACTIONS IN AGREEING TO THE "WARS OF CHOICE" AND THE SPENDING REQUIRED. THOUGHT THE MESSIAH WAS BRINGING ALL THE TROOPS HOME. OH WAIT, HE OK'D THE SURGE IN AFGHANISTAN.. SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU?

That includes hundreds of billions for wars of choice. Did anyone plan to pay for your beloved wars?
Posted by: a blinkin | March 2, 2010 3:03 PM

Jim Flannigan,

Don't forget to add Social Security to that list of fiscal failures. When Social Security started in 1936, the tax rate was 1% for teh employee and 1% for the employer with a salary cap of $3,000. That's a total of $60 per year.

Now that rate is 6.2% for the employee and another 6.2% from the employer on a salary cap of $106,800. That's a total of $13,240 per year.

If over the next 76 years, Social Security grows at this rate, then the amount of tax collected from one individual could be $2.9 million.

Do you think the gov't can do things well?

Fine Terry. Let's abolish Social Security too.
Sounds like a winning Republican platform plank for sure.

Next on the chopping block: warm puppies.

BTW: The Government did a decide enough job creating the whole "internet" thing, doncha think? How 'bout nuclear fission -- another government failure? And that whole landing on Mars bit could never been done by the Government, could it?

-----

Mobster: For all their shameful bellicose bluster, the Dems quoted did not -- did not -- did not -- start the War. George Bush did, with the full backing of a Congress controlled by chickenhawk Republicans (fiscal idiots to boot). There would have been no war in Iraq if Republicans, "led" by a drunken murderer, had not started it. That's the "history" you're not honest enough to acknowledge.

Ex-Felon’s Blueprint Obama Is Using To Ram Socialized Health Care Down Our Throats! A political strategy that has been put into place over the past year by the Obama Administration to force the radical overhaul of the American health care system all under the guise of “Health Care Reform”. If anyone doubts that the strategy blue print written by convicted felon Robert Creamer (while he was serving his time in Federal Prison) was really put into action by the administration, one only needs to look at the endorsements page and notice a rave from none other than David Axelrod:

Blinky,

Abolishing the generational Ponzi scheme called Social Security sadly is not a winning platform. However, it is a way to get this country out of long-term financial crisis.

As for the internet - the gov't creates for use in case of nuclear war. That's all fine and dandy - have a need, throw a bunch of time and money at the problem, create a solution. It was private eneterprise - capitalism if you will, that has turned the internet into what it is today. It was capitalism that used the inetrnet and the personal computer that generated the economic growth of the 90's. Would you want the gov't running the internet today? If so, try China.