.

The cost of Health care is killing families and companys all over this country,If you do not see this as a serious problem .You are either blind or a idiot.

Here are what some CEOs of health care corporations earned last year:

.

By the way I dont care to much for Obama,didnt vote for him and I dont like much anything that he has done,But something needs to be done about the cost of  health care.

Sunburn, stop lying to people. A lot of the profit made by private companies in the health care industry are plowed back into research and technology development; espeically at drug companies. That is why we lead the world in new drug and medical technlology development which is a large part of the successful aspect of our economy.

Socialists don't care about private industry. They care about government. They don't care about individual freedom. They care about paying off their corrupt pals with pork and they care about the collective where everyone can suffer shortages and poverty in equality. They call that oppression "social justice."

So let me see if I can sum this up

 

1.         There are no uninsured in this country, they just dont want to buy insurance (54,000,000).

 

2.         Any attempt at Universal Healthcare for all citizens is going to be labeled as Marxism or socialism.

 

3.         If you cant afford it then you do deserve it (Healthcare).

 

4.            Swine flu is a scam to install socialist government.

5.            If you have health insurance your good to go.

6.            Any attempt to Make Healthcare Universal for all of its citizens will be considered destroying the American Dream.

7.            The Canadians are socialist and thus treated that way

8.            The financial expense of 3,000 to 6,000 per employee does not hurt American businesses in competing with countries where this expense is dealt with through its government.

9.            60 + % of all American bankruptcies are not caused by Healthcare expenses out of control they are just lazy, and need to find a better job.

10.          Every Industrialized country who has a Universal Healthcare Systems are lying, their not really happy with the system  their just afraid to speak out against the newly discovered Socialist Government.

11.          Disrespecting and Calling our President Nasty Names will change everyones mind.

12.          Anything .gov does should be seen as BAD REALLY BAD!!!!!  They cant run anything including the most successful government the planet has ever seen. Don’t trust any of them their all Marxits or a slightly milder Socialist.

13.          You are a sheep (Derogatory Political Name) if you believe Universal Healthcare is a better answer than Insurance Corporation Healthcare.

14.          Universal Healthcare for all citizens will mean no preventative care like Pap smears and other screenings.

15.          Any reference to Jesus helping the poor will be seen as socialism and thus be defrauded.

 

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Who did you say was braainwashed???????????????????????????????????????

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/06/16/report-kennedy-bill-would-actu

Report: Kennedy Bill Would Actually Cost $4 Trillion
By Philip Klein on 6.16.09 @ 3:40PM

Yesterday, the CBO estimated that the current Democratic Senate health care bill would increase the defict by $1 trillion over 10 years while leaving 30 million uninsured, forcing the White House to distance itself from the legislation. While liberals have tried to emphasize that the CBO provided only a partial analysis of the draft legislation from Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, a more comprehensive analysis of the legislation will only serve to drive the bill's ultimate cost higher. For instance, because it was only working with a draft of the bill that had holes in it, the CBO did not estimate the costs associated with increasing Medicaid elgibility to 150 percent of the poverty level, or the full cost of providing subsidies to individuals with incomes at up to 500 percent of the poverty level to purchase insurance through state-run exchanges. Once this is taken into account, liberals are right that the final CBO estimate will reflect more people being insured, but the cost of the legislation will go up as well.

Health Systems Innovations Network, a consulting group, went ahead and estimated the full cost of a bill that included the subsidies and Medicaid expansion, and reduced the number of uninsured by 99 percent. With these assumptions, they estimated (pdf) the cost at a staggering $4 trillion over 10 years, resulting in the shift of 79 million Americans to government-run health care. The report does not include possible tax increases or spending offsets, but notes that, "this would be a challenging proposal to finance with budget neutrality."

President Obama, in a speech to the American Medical Association on Monday, declared of the price tag of health care legislation: "it is a cost that will not – I repeat, not – add to our deficits."

UPDATE: I just spoke with Steve Parente, principal at HSI, who explained that the main reason why the group's estimate is so much higher than the CBO is that it assumes more people will buy coverage with government help. "We see a lot of people taking advantage of that subsidy, because it goes so far up the income threshold," Parente said. To be clear, 500 percent of the poverty level translates into income of $110,000 for a family of four. He also said HSI would revise the estimate if a new version of the legislation proposed new cost savings. However, he said it's difficult to estimate savings from the adoption of information technology and increased prevention. IT, for instance, could turn into an "unfunded mandate" on doctors and hospitals, while not all forms of prevention are created equal. Flu shots, for instance, are relatively cheap, but providing mammograms to some age groups can be quite costly.

.

Do you think you could continue without the inflamitory (Fear Labeling) Sara.

Lets see if I have this straight:

Just cause you advocate for dear leader to take over the health care industry and enslave us all to government control of our bodies and health care jobs does not mean you are a socialist.

Obama knows more than all the doctors in the US.

According to socialist health care advocates (aka Universial health care) there are 54 million people in the US who don't purchase health care. We know that 20 million are illegal aliens - citizens of foreign nations - and we also know millions do not choose to purchase health care because they are young and healthy and don't think they need it. Some make a priority to purchase health care along with food and housing; others choose to buy cars and McMansions. Since they make bad choices all of us must be punished by losing our health care system.

We know the poor, eldery, the handicapped and all children are already covered by government provided health care. But this is not enough for socialists - they need to control it all.

We know that social security and medicare are promised retirement benefits the American people paid for but that is no longer available because the government spent the money elsewhere. Yet we are supposed to now trust the government to take over the whole health care system and take care of us all.

We know that socialists often use the name of Jesus to justify their abuse and oppression of people - especially Christians and Jews. It is called "liberation theology" and it was created by socialists to herd Christians into oppression. They use the name of Jesus to justify abortion and euthanisa. We recently saw a full term abortionist murdered in a "Christian" church. They use the name of Jesus to force medical professionals to perform these immoral acts. Diversity means nothing to socialists when they get centralized power. Everyone must submit in word and deed.

We know that once the socialists take over and kill our health care system, we can never get it back and we will never have power over our own bodies and the bodies of our loved ones again. It will all be decided by the nut cases in Washington - like Bawey Fwank and that gem of ethical government, Chris Dodd. These are the same idiots who crashed our economy and then to fix the economy, doubled our National debt in just three months! In the meantime, the brilliant central ones are watching unemployment rise by about a half a million people per year and this is before they extract the money from the people and the economy to pay for their splurge.

We know the socilaists say 60% of bankruptsies involve unpaid medical care but in most cases we know it was irresponsible overspending and the sudden loss of one's job that really leads to bankruptsy. That unpaid medical expenses are present has no automatic relationshipo to the cause of bankruptsy. Often the choice to spend one's money on material things rather than health insurance leads to health care debt.

We know that most of what the government does is REALLY REALLY BAD. It costs too much and oppresses too much. We know we have a constitutional which defines the powers of the government and the government taking over private industry and private property and treating Americans like children is not power given to the government by the constitution.

We know that we are a wealthy and peaceful nation because of freedom. We know that 70% of the people in this country do not want socialized medicine here. We know that only 17% even identify themselves as "liberal." We know that over 40% name themselves conservatives. We know that socialists are a minority of elitists who lied to the American people about the aims of their agenda in order to get elected and impose their will on the people.

Finally, we know that socialists don't like being outted as such and would rather we call a socialized health care system "universial care" cause it sounds less destructive and oppressive than it really is. A prefered word for socialism is "progress." You see, they are making progress...like in China, Cuba and the Soviet Union.

You know.... the bottom line is the democrats whole heartedly support the man/boy love association. That is the face of your party! You support and champion a group of gay men who openly and proudly proclaim to rape and mollest young boys! You will not talk your way out of it. You stand for and support only decadance!! You f-ing murdered more American babies and bloodlines than there are people alive today. All in the name of you just wanna smoke your stupid dope and deepthroat and choke on what obama is pitching. I'll say it ... H1N1 will meet up with H5N1, it wll recombine and come out highly leathal and highly contagious and it will discriminate, it will go after a certain kind of people because nature has a way of wiping it's own ass, it will go after you...

Anyone ever look into how the government provides health care for veterns? It is expensive and disgracefully cruel and incompetent. My aunt was a nurse for the VA for a while but could not stand the pitiful mess she saw there and left for work in a private hospital.

http://www.publiusforum.com/2009/06/16/healthcare-reform-flim-flam/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Healthcare Reform Flim-Flam
June 16, 2009 | Filed Under Anti-Americanism, Barack Obama, Budget, Business, Communism, Congress, Dan Scott, Democrats/Leftists, Economy/Finances, Free Trade, Government, Corruption, Health, Journalism, Liberals, Media Bias, President, Society/Culture, Taxes, Unions |

-By Dan Scott

President Barack Obama is seeking to help pay for his healthcare plan by sharply reducing the government’s medical spending, mainly by trimming payments to prescription drug makers, hospitals and other care providers and then hiking taxes.

…In his weekly Internet and radio address Saturday, Obama proposed cutting $313 billion from the programs over 10 years. That’s in addition to the $635 billion “down payment” in tax increases and spending cuts in the health care system that he announced earlier…

…He would cut $106 billion from payments that help hospitals treat uninsured people because his plan would cover nearly every American.

Source

Of course we could suspend our disbelief of Obama’s claim that he can insure 47 million people by cutting Medicare and raising taxes. Now I want someone to explain to me how you can cut Medicare reimbursements to doctors and hospitals and keep the same level of service when in fact the reimbursements are at or below cost to the medical providers? This is outright flim-flam to make such claims.

Now if Barack Obama were interested in saving Medicare, which is in dire need in eight years, then he should focus on some basic reforms there instead of taking over the entire healthcare industry. The reason why a majority of medical expenses occur in the last years of life is due to nursing home costs. Medicare foots the bill in a nursing home when a person exhausts their financial resources and essentially become indigent. It’s not surprising that a senior goes bankrupt in a nursing home paying in excess of $6000 a month, plus meds and special procedures. That’s where the bulk of costs are located. The only way to cut costs in Medicare is to change the nursing home and ALF (Assisted Living Facility) admissions policy. It is far less expensive to care for a person with end of life or long-term care issues via home healthcare in an ALF than in a nursing home.

The idea that senior citizens will overcome the effects of a lifetime of habits via prevention in their late stages of life is nonsensical. In terms of longevity, prevention in senior citizens essentially consists of keeping active through walking and not smoking. The hard truth of becoming a senior is things take much longer to heal due to age and the difficult heart wrenching realization that any disease condition is merely a hastening of the inevitable end. No matter how long you live, eventually you must die and therefore in the meantime any medical condition if untreated will likely hasten that end. Unless there is a technological breakthrough on causing the body to accelerate healing in older people, significant cost savings through prevention are a farce.

…The problem for liberal Democrats is ideology. The Medicare Part D program is based on competition among private insurance plans, whereas they are determined to model health reform on government-run, price-controlled Medicare Parts A and B or on Massachusetts’ individual-mandate plan.

But, as the latest Medicare trustees report warned, Medicare’s hospital insurance plan (Part A) is scheduled to go bankrupt in 2017. And Part B, which pays doctor bills, is experiencing “steep cost increases” for taxpayers and will demand “unusually large premium increases” for seniors who can afford to pay.

Meanwhile, Massachusetts’ heavily regulated plan, while covering 355,000 previously uninsured residents, is costing much more than expected - 32 percent more in its first year and an anticipated 20 percent more this year…

…Obama wrote Congress that “health reform must not add to our deficits over the next 10 years,” though most estimates for covering the nation’s 47 million uninsured come in at $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion.

Eventually, making the health system more efficient - with digital medical records and chronic disease management - may cut the costs. But in the meantime, Democrats are looking to Medicare provider cuts and taxing employer-provided benefits as answers…

Source

Notice also the proposed cut in Medicare prescription drugs are completely paid for under Part D by premiums paid by seniors themselves!


House Health-Care Proposal Adds $600 Billion in Taxes (Update2)

Health-care overhaul legislation being drafted by House Democrats will include $600 billion in tax increases and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid,…

…Obama has pledged that health-care changes won’t add to the deficit. To accomplish that, he’s proposed getting about $600 billion by reducing tax deductions available to the wealthy, and by trimming Medicare payments to insurance companies…

Setting aside the propriety of the figure 47 million uninsured, let’s look at the numbers tossed around:

$2,400,000,000,000 National spending on Healthcare (2007)
303,000,000 Population of US (2007)
$7,921 per year per person
Source

$1,000,000,000,000 raising taxes and cutting Medicare
47,000,000 Number of so called uninsured
$21,277 over 10 years
$2,128 per year per person

A typical modest insurance coverage costs per person around $450 a month or $5,400 a year not including co-pays and the deductible. So are we to believe that the so-called uninsured can receive quality medical coverage at a 1/3rd the current average? Clearly not going to happen. Furthermore, taking Obama at his liberal demagogue word we are lead to believe it is the fault of the rich that healthcare isn’t available for everyone and therefore 5% of country, namely 15 million Americans aren’t paying enough taxes (an extra $600,000,000,000 over ten years) to provide that healthcare. His claim still is the tax cuts only helped the wealthy, which also wasn’t true. Remember, Barack Obama’s gave his word that 95% of Americans were not to see a tax increase but also get tax relief of $500 per person. Based on the numbers, President Obama expects the rich to come up with an extra $4,000 per person per year. That’s $60 billion a year diverted from highly efficacious charitable giving to a dubious social program.

But let us now come back to the 47 million uninsured figure I so skeptically mentioned. Others have done an excellent job of dissecting the propaganda of President Obama and the Democrats, so I will leave you to read up on this for yourself. Now if one were to exaggerate the figures no one would take too much notice of a 10%, 20% or 30% padding. However, as we do some digging, the real number of uninsured is around 10 to 15 million people or a 1/3rd of the problem proclaimed. Isn’t that interesting, if the problem were actually 1/3rd, that would mean the money collected on behalf of the uninsured in extra taxes would come out to be $6,000 per person per year which is coincidentally more in line with current costs. Increasing the figure by 3 fold is not exaggerating, that’s just plain lying. We should not be surprised that President Obama and the Democrats have lied yet again to the American people, they have a track record of doing so. The real question is why did they lie?

There are estimated to be 13 million illegal aliens not covered by health insurance and not paying their medical bills. Guess whom they want to be paying those bills? You and me or rather the rich people. The real issue here is not the uninsured, but a dubious social program for illegal aliens. The entire healthcare debate is simply a ruse to help the Democrat Party’s new favorite constituency. A constituency that supposedly doesn’t have voting rights. Why the ruse? Because the vast majority of Americans would never agree to subsidizing illegal aliens when given a choice. The will of the people has been very clear for years, they don’t have our permission to be here, they are displacing our poor from jobs, they are committing multiple felonies by being here and we clearly told Congress we aren’t agreeing to amnesty with an emphatic NO! Apparently the idea of self-governance and majority rule is inconvenient to the Democrats agenda and thus they dispense with such inconveniencies by misleading the public with ruses.

Either we believe President Obama and the Democrats are delusionally naïve in thinking $2,128 will cover the annual health care costs of 47 million supposedly uninsured people or they are lying to cover up their advocacy of illegal aliens. Which is it? Neither alternative is a material qualification for running the country, both are disqualifiers. Come the 2010 elections, you have a choice to make on election day. Reward the incompetent or liar or clean house installing a firm conservative GOP majority to reign in on this foolishness. Divided government has always been the last line of defense in the checks and balances of our form of governance, someone has to quell the madness of the Democrat Party and the GOP is the only one that can do this.

Sara123 wrote: Sunburn, stop lying to people. A lot of the profit made by private companies in the health care industry are plowed back into research and technology development; espeically at drug companies. That is why we lead the world in new drug and medical technlology development which is a large part of the successful aspect of our economy. Socialists don't care about private industry. They care about government. They don't care about individual freedom. They care about paying off their corrupt pals with pork and they care about the collective where everyone can suffer shortages and poverty in equality. They call that oppression "social justice."

Uhhh... what are you talking about Sara? I clearly said that profits by drug companies are put directly towards research and development; in effect I said exactly what you did. I was arguing your point against the other poster.
Perhaps you should try to read these posts a little more carefully - your opinions seem to be based on mistakes and conjecture.

To clarify this for you, here is exactly what I said:
"But those profits are used towards research. The high price of drugs and treatments in our country represent the enormous expenditures involved in researching and developing new treatments."

I really don't know how to make it any clearer than that. Sara123. It seems that you just like to argue without really listening to others or addressing the facts.

So here is a challenge: Address my earlier post with a fact based response.
Why does the US have a lesser system of health care than so many other countries?
Why does the US have a higher rate of infant mortality than so many other countries?
Why does the US have a lower life expectancy than so many other countries?

I bet that you cannot manage to address these points in a nonabrasive, intellectual manner. I believe that your viewpoints are based on things that you have heard from other people of low intelligence and have no grounding in fact.

Sara123 wrote: Anyone ever look into how the government provides health care for veterns? It is expensive and disgracefully cruel and incompetent. My aunt was a nurse for the VA for a while but could not stand the pitiful mess she saw there and left for work in a private hospital.

My dad is a veteran. He suffered from cancer that he received due to his exposure to agent orange in Vietnam. He received wonderful treatment at the VA hospital. They actually saved his life.

Before my experience there I had heard the same things. But after having actually been there and had an experience with the place, I found it to be a very well run hospital. Of course, I can only speak for the one hospital I've had an experience with. Just like your aunt can only speak for that one singular institution and not for the entire system.

OMG

Sara We here a lot of fear labelingfrom you, fuzzy math and deceptive right wing talking points so lets put you idiology to the test

Yes I didnt think you would answer the questions, that would expose the deception and the untruthful characterization you have used throughout this thread.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm


ABC REFUSES PAID ADS OFFERING ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT FOR WHITE HOUSE HEALTH CARE PROGRAM
Wed Jun 17 2009 15:15:00 ET

ABC is refusing paid ads for its health care program at the White House. Thus they're refusing even a paid-for alternative viewpoint.

Conservatives for Patients Rights requested the rates to buy a 60 second network spot immediately preceding the broadcast of the Town Hall meeting.

Here is statement from Rick Scott, chairman of Conservatives for Patients Rights.

"It is unfortunate - and unusual - that ABC is refusing to accept paid advertising that would present an alternative viewpoint for the White House health care event. Health care is an issue that touches every American and all potential pieces of legislation have carried a pricetag in excess of $1 trillion of taxpayers' money. The American people deserve a healthy, robust debate on this issue and ABC's decision - as of now - to exclude even paid advertisements that present an alternative view does a disservice to the public. Our organization is more than willing to purchase ad time on ABC to present an alternative viewpoint and our hope is that ABC will reconsider having such viewpoints be part of this crucial debate for the American people. We were surprised to hear that paid advertisements would not be accepted when we inquired and we would certainly be open to purchasing time if ABC would reconsider."

Developing...

-------------------------------------

Wonder why the socilaists can not permit opposition voice and debate about their health care boondoggle?

Socialists have to ban free speech to impose their agenda because their proposals are too oppressive, stupid and incompetent to stand up to the light of day.

I saw Dodd with a twenty inch stack of papers which constitute the socialists legally binding "reforms" to our health care system. No new red tape there!

To 'do no harm,' dump Obamacare


The dictum isn't actually in the Hippocratic Oath, but "first, do no harm" ought to be the guiding principle for the Obama White House and congressional Democrats as they plot health-care overhaul. Alas, that doesn't seem to be their strategy when it comes to Obamacare.

The nation is running a $1.75 trillion deficit and has unfunded debts exceeding $100 trillion, but the Democrats want to appropriate — borrow — $634 billion over the next decade as a downpayment on the nationalization of the health-care industry. The final cost is estimated at $1.2 trillion, but as with any government undertaking, especially one this massive, taxpayers should expect the real cost of socialized medicine to exceed $2 trillion.

But just getting to $1.2 trillion will be a challenge for the Demo- crats. Over the weekend, the president outlined $313 billion in "common-sense changes" in Medicare and Medicaid funding formulas to help pay for Obamacare. He would reduce payments to doctors and hospitals by more than $200 billion, but physicians already turn away patients because reimbursements are so inadequate and hospitals lose 30 cents on every dollar they spend treating uninsured patients. Meanwhile, he would cheat pharmaceutical companies that provide prescription drugs to seniors and others out of $75 billion.

What President Obama really is proposing is to force the industry to eat $313 billion in expenses to make Obamacare seem affordable.

The Congressional Budget Office now estimates the first phase of Obamacare would cost $1 trillion and only increase the number of insured by 16 million. The CBO thinks Medicare cuts might encourage efficiencies, but with the health-care system already overused and underfunded, the opposite is more likely, leading to reduced quality of care even as the industry braces for a record influx of patients with their newly minted government health-insurance cards.

"I know some question whether we can afford to act this year," President Obama said. "But the unmistakable truth is that it would be irresponsible to not act." The unmistakable truth is if universal health care was the answer, it would have worked somewhere in the world where it's been tried and America would have adopted it long ago. The unmistakable truth is with so many vested interests — doctors, hospitals, nursing homes and assisted-living communities, the insurance and drug companies, the trial lawyers, politicians, et al. — reform may be impossible.

The unmistakable truth is no one is being honest: There is no silver bullet; the number of uninsured Americans who can't get or afford public or private health coverage is only a small fraction of the 46 million so-called uninsured; health care is not a right, and "free health care" is an oxymoron. But politicians don't get elected by telling the truth, which may explain why Ted Kennedy entrusted the Obamacare project to Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.

Sara 123..........I love your posts