President Obama Pushes for Health Care Reform, Pushes Back Against Opponents

“You’ll hear during this debate over the next several weeks is people will also say ‘The deficit and the debt are skyrocketing, and that’s the reason why we can’t afford to do health reform.” So I just want to repeat the single biggest problem we have in terms of the debt and the deficit is health care, it’s Medicare and Medicaid.”
============
If the biggest problem with the debt and deficit is Medicare and Medicaid, how does expanding a public option do anything to control the costs?
Especially if it is going to be expanded to people who currently can’t (or don’t think they can) afford to pay premiums?
What are they going to do to address the fact that under reimbursement from Medicare and Medicaid is a big problem for doctors, patients, and hospitals?

if you want health care, you should pay for it. paygo if you will. there ain’t no free lunch barry.

“If you research any other country that offers socialized medical care it is a DISASTER”
Hardly.
We are the last of the so called “first world” nations to not have a nationalized healthcare system in place.
We currently rank as 37th in the WHO measurement of overall health care systems.

“We spend almost 50 percent more per person on health care than the next most costly nation. But here’s the thing, Green Bay: we’re not any healthier for it.”
That’s the crux of it – we pay 50% more than the next most expensive nation per capita, and over double the median of first world nations. Documented fact. So we are spending more (we being total payments including insurance, co-pays, cash, etc) and getting about the same care (actually far worse on average if you’re out of work and/or out of insurance).
Health care reform isn’t about creating an entitlement program, it is about eliminating massive waste. My Dr shouldn’t be wasting his two decades of experience arguing with a paper pusher in my insurance company about why I need a specific medicine, or ordering up an xray for a sprained ankle out of fear of being sued. And if the Republicans were interested in actually serving their nation, they’d be working to get appropriate lawsuit control in this bill rather than throwing out stupid soundbites about rationing. (Newsflash guys: if you weren’t a Congressman, your healthcare would already be rationed by HMO or private insurance bean counters, and lets talk about waits after you live on ibuprofen while having a surgery request slow walked through their pre-approval process.).

A government run health care system would put the government in charge of who gets what health care if any. It will raise the deficit and raise taxes in economic hard times which will further hurt the economy.
The proposals now on the table for a so called “public insurance option” call for keeping costs down by denying care based on one’s “worth” to society. That translates into denying care to the elderly and making decisions on who gets what health care on political grounds, ie. aids treatment may be on a higher politically correct scale than lymphoma.
With the government in charge of our health care, the government will have the power to decide if you get that operation you need or not and even if they ok it, you may have to wait months to get it. Assuming there are any doctors left to provide the care. After all with no “skin in the game” aka “profit” for taking care of you a lot of physicians may well just quit instead of working for peanuts. Just remember, you get what you pay for. Think about it.
Reality Check:UNDER A GOVERNMENT RUN PROGRAM EVERYONE WILL HAVE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE BUT ONLY THOSE WHO ARE DEEMED BY THE GOVERNMENT AS OF “WORTH TO SOCIETY” OR HAS A POLITICALLY CORRECT AILMENT WILL GET THE CARE!!!
So who are the “heartless and greedy ones”? I say the ones who would deny care to the elderly and are for taking food out of the mouths other peoples children in order to pay for their health care.

My Dr shouldn’t be wasting his two decades of experience arguing with a paper pusher in my insurance company about why I need a specific medicine, or ordering up an xray for a sprained ankle out of fear of being sued.
=========
There is nothing being proposed that would indicate your doctor won’t have to fight with someone about why you need a specific medicine. The players will just change.
And you know what, sometimes the doctor *should* have to argue about why insurance should pay for a specific medicine or treatment.

“Who is ranking and how? Statistics are a funny thing, they can be used to say anything.”
The 37th place is by the World Health Organization.
Right wingers object to that because it includes access.
When removing access, the US still does not crack the top 15.
“We all just lost 1.3 trillion in personal wealth (thanks)”
Yes thanks Bush and right wingers who decried any and all regulation as the work of Big Brother.
“and the health care in this country is best bar NONE.”
Unfortunately its not. And no amount of We’re #1 chanting by right wingers will change that.

Re: The Headline
“SMUGRG: I Want A Million Dollars in My Bank Account By October”

Get out- how does Korea keep medical costs low?

I like how some hateful nuts are framing this argument. I thought we were all for capitalism. What are we afraid of competing against? If the current system is fine, don’t you think people will willingly stay with their respectives insurers? I guess choice is only good when extremists can freely buy their guns and go on a rampage (not that I’m against owning guns).

millions of Americans travel to foreign countries to get good health care,and at a fair price.Our health insurance companies dont care about our health, they want to make money.But government health care will be also abused by many people.

I cannot support a system that kicks seniors and the military to the side. I am a vietnam combat veteran. I can’t get insurance because I am diabetic. As soon as the insurance company found that out they cancelled my policy out of the blue and instead offered me one for $2,400.00 a month. The VA won’t cover us either. You get a form letter telling you that you don’t qualify and that it could take up to six months to appeal. I fail to understand how our own country, who we fought and died for can be thrown out with the trash. Obama’s idea, get use to being older. After all, you are no longer a productive citizen. I have zero respect for this country anymore. Good luck with socialism. I may not live to see it, but you are seeing the beginnings of a police state to take down those that believe in the old America. You are being sold a bill of goods and you don’t even know it.

citing the WHO…what a joke. the WHO is trying to crate panic over the swine flu. more people died on air france then from the swine flu. the arrogance of elites is mind boggling. thats wahy common sense trumps a 4.0 from the best school every time.

“citing the WHO…what a joke. the WHO is trying to crate panic over the swine flu. more people died on air france then from the swine flu.”
I guess when swine flu can’t be used as a weapon to rile hatred against immigrants, it loses its luster to the right wing.
They just declared swine flu a pandemic which means its spread cannot be stopped. That pretty much comports with what many countries health organizations have been saying.

“ryanc…so what are you saying besides the same old bush did everthing bad mantra”
I never mentioned Bush in this discussion but I guess you are tired of getting humiliated by facts.

if you want health care then you should get a job that offers it or buy your own. too many lazy people who want something for nothing, they don’t deserve other peoples money. there ain’t no free lunch Barry.

all these health tips from a guy that smokes a couple packs of Newport lights a day. LOL

Let’s give GOP all the private pay and private insurance increases, and the rest of us have the teaching schools, health science centers, and medical centers take care of the rest of us. That way we have a 2 way tax system: one for GOP to pay high priced health care, and one for the rest of America to receive health care through reform.

“The right wing cares deeply about each and every child till the moment they are born.
Then they could care less.”
Funny! We have a waiting list of over six months for people wating to adopt!

ryanc…lets see if you can focus on the the issues…i as a business owner will be forced to pay 3600 more each year for each employee because of the taxability of health care under the prezs proposal.if we are mired in recession how many employers are not going to cut salaries or jobs to equalize the new tax burden? perhaps i am ignorant but only a government owned company could afford to do this.

jhw 539…old people have to spend down their assets before they get help via the government. whats good for them should be good for the rest of those who dont pay for health care.

The Republicans are alienating more of their base by defending the corrupt insurance companies and hospitals. The lie about people losing their insurance is a total manipulation of the truth. People would leave their insurance for a better option, unless insurance companies gave a better option. I know I would. Remember dear Republican Congressmen, both conservatives and liberals (and us in the center) get sick, and we know how much the health care system sucks.

seems like no one knows how this will be paid for?

colincarz…no argument but how will it be paid for? simple question that no one has an answer for? so far it looks to me that busineeses will be taxed in a recession to pay for this thing. when there is not enough money how will this be paid for.

Medicare already pays below the cost of the private market. If private companies are footing the bill, they will have difficulty turning a profit where 100% of people are receiving government care at a price below the cost set by the market.
I think the problem is that using market in the context of health care does not indicate a private, competitive market, it means a market riddled by government (federal and state) control.
Econ 101: In a competitive industry firms are profit-maximizing, meaning they are cost-minimizing. If cost-cutting truly is the panacea that the OMB and Obama believe it to be, then why don’t our legislators strive to make a transparent and open market.
We don’t live in a world where the only choices are unregulated markets and command and control. The government can create institutions (like insurance exchanges, grouping uninsured individuals) to facilitate the exchange of information. This will allow individuals to account for all costs and benefits to make the correct decision for themselves.
I think Friedrich A. Hayek said it best: “It is rather a problem of how to secure the best use of resources known to any of the members of society, for ends whose relative importance only those individuals know.”
If the problem is that individuals do not internalize the full full value of health care, benefits can be withheld or penalties mandated to make people fully realize the costs to society of not insuring. Of the tens of millions of uninsured in America, there are many that are well above the poverty line that choose not to be insured, those people fit in this category.
For the group of people that cannot afford insurance, Medicaid is available for the severely poor. Government can facilitate the purchasing of private insurance for people not covered by medicate. Putting purchasing power back into the hands of consumers and allowing states to group the uninsured for more favorable rates are two possible solutions.
The point is that we have not exhausted or options for getting every American insured in a market-oriented system. Surely a well-running market (note: as stated above a well-running market includes government support sometimes through institutions that facilitate information exchange, etc.) will increase coverage and cut costs.
If we think that a central-decision maker(s) can do a better job of deciding what services we need, how much insurance we need, and when we should be able to go to the doctor, then the government is the right entity to insure our nation. I suspect this is not the case, particularly in times of recession where governments (see California) are forced to cut back on services. Do we want this to be our health care? Do we want a government health care entitlement to force other things out of the budget?

Error: *Medicaid

catman:”so far it looks to me that busineeses will be taxed in a recession to pay for this thing.”
Depends on how it is done. If the businesses see their cost of providing healthcare to employees drop from $12k a head to $4k a head, and get taxed $5k extra per person they end up saving money.
The median per capita price of healthcare for first world nations with national systems is less than half pwhat Americans – primarily American businesses – spend on health care. Business stands to save a bundle and catch up competitively if we get even a mediocre model in place to control costs.

Enough of all the Republicans are evil capitalists and Democrats are evil socialists. I have never seen such division and social wars since Vietnam!
Has this country become nothing more than groups of people hating each other and the businesses that are employing everyone?
There is no conspiracy to take you to the cleaners. Stop watching too much TV. Life is not that way.
This is about reforming our health care system. I’m not a big Obama fan – but one thing he does say over and over again makes a lot of sense to me. Too many people in this country are excluded because of prior conditions, or age, or all of the above. We need to stop that. We need to find an equitable way to make it available to everyone. We can’t give free everything to everyone – no more than we can tax everyone until the sun stops shining.
So lets stop calling each other names and come up with a solution. This applies to the President and Congress also – they are fueling the fire with all of their party lines and divisiveness.

catman:”old people have to spend down their assets before they get help via the government. ”
This is NOT TRUE. Medicare does not have a means test. Come on, this is basic knowledge stuff.
catman:”i as a business owner will be forced to pay 3600 more each year for each employee because of the taxability of health care under the prezs proposal.i”
This is NOT TRUE. What you are describing is actually SENATOR MCCAIN’S proposal. Obama has recently taken flak for not taking any solid position yet, preferring to let Congress and industry hash it out.
catman:”seems like no one knows how this will be paid for?”
This is true – so you appear to actually realize that you were just making stuff up with that absurd $3.6k per employee comment.

Has anyone bothered to study Australia’s healthcare??? Australians I have met love it! Medicare for EVERYONE! It works there! I have spent 32 yrs. in nursing & I have observed a lot in our healthcare system as it is currently (not) working for everyone!!! Without good healthcare, why bother about anything else in our country!

President Obama promised people they would be able to keep their doctor. He can’t keep that promise.
Doctors choose to participate or not participate in insurance plans. Doctors even can choose not to participate in Medicare and Medicaid.
Currently, if a doctor does not accept Medicare, they are not to accept medicare patients for direct payment.
Unless Obama is planning to force doctors to accept all private insurance plans and the new public plan, this is a promise Obama can’t keep.

If you like the economy now you’re going to love Obamacare.

My daughter-in-law is from Canada. When she got here, she had to go to doctors to help her with her health issues, she wasn’t getting the right help for, over there! In fact, she didn’t even know what was wrong with her until diagosed here! That’s scary.

spencerb-
“If the problem is that individuals do not internalize the full full value of health care, benefits can be withheld or penalties mandated to make people fully realize the costs to society of not insuring. Of the tens of millions of uninsured in America, there are many that are well above the poverty line that choose not to be insured, those people fit in this category.”
You compare “internalize the full value of healthcare” to “costs to society of not insuring”.
An insurance is a product that covers the cost of an improbable outcome. But it is also lately called ‘insurance’ to make regular payments for a future service ahead-of-time (like a 401k). I take ‘full value’ of an insurance to be the price exchanged for the service, either well before or long after. That’s the way an insurance should work, and that’s way it does work. That is the limit of the services that can be provided long-term. A person’s cash-flow can go to an early payment, or it can go into their estate and be re-invested and then be payed out later, when they need to liquidate the value for the needed service. In that view, a mandated health-care payment is very much like a 401k plan, which didn’t work out well for many people.
On the ‘social cost’ concept, I have trouble understanding what you are calling the ‘social cost’ of not paying for healthcare services earlier through a mandate, rather than later through their estate. It isn’t like the car insurance mandate, where a person could do serious injury and inflict financial damage on another vehicle. You seem to have for your only argument that people who pay for healthcare regularly will come out ahead compared to the individual who never goes to the doctor until a crisis comes along. That is not a ‘social cost’, but only becomes a ‘social cost’ to the extent that the government decides to underwrite their expenses. We can’t have a government that goes around deciding that whatever it chooses to pay for is a ‘social cost’ and a ‘burden that must be shared’.

Anna – When looking at the quality of health systems it is a mistake to go by the experiences of individuals. Your daughter had a bad experience in Canada, mine had a very good one with France’s system. Neither really tells us much. The best way to compare them is through national statistics. The infant mortality rates are lower and life expectancies are higher in Canada and France than here in the U.S. Our medical delivery system is bloated and dysfunctional and needs fixing now.

If it’s merely reform, then wouldn’t legislation alone be enough?
With more than half a trillion set aside, how could that be for anything other than socialized medicine?

The system needs to be reformed now…not perpetually put on the back burner…and as mentioned of those 46 million insured, how many are underinsured? 15% uninsured and 25% underinsured…the republicans have belittled the plan the president has set forth but they have not provided a reform on their behalf…apparently they believe status quo is fine…this is one reason why they are being defined the party of the stone age…very little recruitment of youth…especially today, everything is at the speed of light-technology and the republicans aren’t keeping up-this president is tech savvy and thereby gets his info fast…one learns to read fast and comprehend fast…the republicans are as slow as molasses and are living in the past.

This is a great picture of Obama. Under the picture the caption should read: “So far, I’ve lied to the American people this much”.

Please, if Someone willing to tell this id..t that election is over, and he is already the president?
I ask seriously, whether it’s time to add on to the shaky economy?

Now that’s worth repeating…
If you like the economy now, you are going to LOVE Obamacare.

Give up your beer and cheese curds.. and jump on the health care bandwagon..

“Change Congress mounted a campaign involving internet ads and direct mail informing Nelson’s constituents of significant political donations he’s received from health and insurance interests. “After an intense 11-day battle with Nelson, he’s now publicly ‘open’ to the public option — and this week, he made more news by saying he won’t join a filibuster of Obama’s plan,””
Vote for our healthcare plan or we mount a public campaign to your voters and demonize you. Thats change you can believe in. Are Americans going to tolerate this kind of political thuggery? This is exactly what Hugo Chavez does in Venezuela. What is happening to our country?

“If you have a government competitor, virtually every study I’m aware of says that half of the people that get their coverage through their employer now would opt for the cheaper government competitor,” said Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., today, “and, of course, that destroys the system and then you don’t have any competitors.”
================================
These “competitors” were not even in the game a little over a generation ago! Where was Blunt when the for-profits used their monetary leverage from life, property, etc. insurance to drive the non-profits that ensured almost all of America out of business, or else into mergers or for-profit status?
And it’s wrong for anyone to prefer the “cheaper, government competitor”?
I’m concerned what will happen to my pension’s health coverage – which is available to us ONLY as a reward from retired from our employer and not switching to another employer and driving salaries up, yet there’s no guarantee of its future form.
But, without a major reform, I wonder how my employer can possibly bear the costs in the long run for our current, antiquated, inefficient system?

Of the supposed 50 million give or take who lack coverage more than half lack coverage for reasons other than affordability.
The largest group simply chooses not to pay for insurance
Another portion of the group is already eligible for insurance paid for by the government, but have not bothered to sign up.
When those are removed we are left with 15-20 million uninsured based on affordability.
It is less expensive and less risky to plug that hole than to destroy the best health care system in the world.
It has failed in Europe, and in the elections last Sunday, across the range of euro countries, France, Germany, Spain, Great Britain, the tax and social spend group were universally thrown out of office with great gains made by those who do not approve.
The citizens of those countries are tired of the very high taxes the very rationed care, the government deciding if you live or die, the high cancer, heart disease death rates compared to ours, the wait to see a doctor, the second wait for diagnostic tests, the third wait to see the specialist and further years of waits for surgery if required. The stories are not few and not rare.
If you thought is was a problem when insurance companies balked over over “experimental” bone marrow transplants, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
The government will by necessity have to raise taxes ON EVERYONE, there will be a health insurance premium paid to the government, it is not free, but no one is telling us what that is.
Obama has consistently underestimated costs and given us rosy economic projections that have proven false over and over again. We need the numbers and they must be subject to independent analysis. Obama numbers have not once been reliable or honest.
There is no majority of the public who want a government controlled health care system. The public is evenly divided.
The claim that this is a government option and Obama does not want the government to run health care is as true as it was for the auto industry, which the government now runs.
Dem. Congressman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was caught on tape telling a special interest group that of course a government option will kill private insurance and we will end up with a single payor.
She laughed on this tape like it was a fabulous inside joke on the rest of us.
Google it, look up the Wasserman-Shultz tape.
Google the statistics of who are the uninsured and so on.
The government has never run anything efficiently. The government has bankrupted social security and medicare.
There is no successful model for national health insurance.
The ones that do the best are in the countries that severely restrict immigration. WE are not one of those.
Taxes in Europe are up to 70% with “regular folks” paying up to 60%, not including their health care premium and other contributions that we would still have to make such as social security and medicare.
After all of that wouldn’t it be safer and cheaper to simply plug the 20 million uninsured hole??
We cannot afford more reckless spending.

I ponder why the liberals would like to persue a national health care really. They should know well the failing outcome elsewhere this had been tried. In their sane mind, they would not be willing to stand in line or wait weeks/months for treatment..and other string of inconveniences. It doesn’t make sense, so What is it?
Another thing is, just like in California, you can fit so many in a life boat; save the 20 that fit, why drowning everyone?. Doesn’t Arnold know this? How much more is he is going to borrow? to keep up, to include the Tsunami of illegals that require health care. Just do a drastic move to straighten the state up, and be strong to manage it economically before you go back and save or improve the lives of illegal immigrants. And why does this need to involve the Federal Gov?
So, what is it, I ponder some more; the mases of population the majority poor and middle class, ( the ill informed and/or careless for the america we know ) would welcome this move, suerly constituents; whom would be happy to keep them in power for entitilments and hand out. ( which are short term ans misserable vs the long term limitless creative private enterprises jobs and opportunities )
Liberals elite – the rulers – would not see a line or waiting of any sort. I don’t believe they care about the future, or helping anybdy, see if they did, they would work truly with the rest of senators and reps to keep the legacy of America being free and unique. It is seems to me they are selfish and just want power today and as long as they live.

Piggy15, you’re almost there! The Liberals DON’T care about healthcare for the poor or the middle class. The Liberals really want to control every aspect of ALL of our lives. And the means to that end is to advance class warfare and use the poor and middle class–a very large voting bloc–as pawns in implementing their agenda. The Liberals want to destroy capitalism, the free market and suppress the American Dream as they pose the greatest threat to their socialist ideals.

“Vote for our healthcare plan or we mount a public campaign to your voters and demonize you. Thats change you can believe in.”
That’s exactly how the Republicans passed the IWR you are so proud of.

There is no successful model for national health insurance.”
Except for every 1st world nation except the US.
Other than that its a failure.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 12, 2009 12:42:15 PM
——–
If you consider high cancer death rates, high heart disease death rates (compared to ours)
If you call waiting months for a dr. appt. waiting more months for diagnostic tests, and yet another wait to see a specialist, followed by another wait, often in years for surgical correction, if you were approved and deemed worthy at all and not written off.
Chronic unemployment averaging 10% with a high of 18% in Spain.
If you consider the average person will pay at least 60% in taxes, plus the usual social security and medicare deductions, as do all these “first world countries:
If you consider the proponents of the program in those countries just got the boot in last sundays elections because as polling showed the people were sick and tired of the chronic downturn fueled by the high taxes to support social programs that discourage productivity.
so if you call all of that successful we will have to disagree

There are more than a dozen countries with national healthcare whose unemployment rates are below our own.
———-
Of course you are referring o the current 9.4% and rising unemployment rate caused by Obama’s massive spending.
Remember when this liar Obama told us to hurry, hurry, hurry and pass his stimulus so that we could keep unemployment below 8%
9.4% and rising unemployment in the US will not be temporary if the health care, rationed care Obama wants is passed. We too will suffer chronic double digit unemployment, meaning fewer people paying taxes meaning those that actually work will pay more, just as they do in europe and canada where the bums who had this idea are getting thrown out of office as these countries move to the right.
Again we are told hurry, hurry hurry. Short on details we will figure out later, numbers not subject to independent analysis to sort through his always inaccurate projections of costs and savings.
So if you claim that some countries are less than our 9.4% and climbing that ain’t saying much!

“Of course you are referring o the current 9.4% and rising unemployment rate caused by Obama’s massive spending.”
Actually I could be referring to two months ago when you first started posting this right wing lie and I refuted it but today works as just as well.

“If you consider high cancer death rates, high heart disease death rates (compared to ours)”
2008 – “Where you live plays a role in cancer survival, according to a new study that shows the U.S., Japan, and France recorded the highest survival rates among 31 nations for four types of cancer. Algeria had the lowest survival rates for all four cancers.
The highest survival rates were found in the U.S. for breast and prostate cancer, in Japan for colon and rectal cancers in men, and in France for colon and rectal cancers in women
In Canada and Australia, survival was also high for most cancers.”
Looking at stats from 2005, US ranked 13th in death rate from heart disease with quite a few countries with nationalized healthcare ahead of them including France, Spain & Japan.

“So if you claim that some countries are less than our 9.4% and climbing that ain’t saying much!”
So even though they have better health care and less unemployment, we’re still #1 right?

“So if you claim that some countries are less than our 9.4% and climbing that ain’t saying much!”
So even though they have better health care and less unemployment, we’re still #1 right?
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 12, 2009 2:02:40 PM
———–
I do believe they still average more than 10%. Any of the unemployment rates you quote are very high. During the Bush years libs complained when unemployment ranged from 4.5-5.5%. And yes I know it climbed a bit higher at the very end.
So now, because we have under the Obama spending and massive debt plan, excluding health care and the bankrupt social security and medicaid, we have a huge 9.4% unemployment rate you suddenly think rates with a low of 7.1 percent are good???
You must be kidding.
7.1% the lowest listed, most are higher, is still an extremely high unemployment rate, and theirs is chronic, not a recent occurence, all due to the massive social spending that discourages work and output with the massive 60-70% plus tax structure.
Which is of course why last sunday, across the board in the euro elections they threw out the tax and spenders and moved right. They know their social experiment has failed, but Obama is too stupid to change course. He is a looney megalomaniac.
Massive social spending for rationed health care, that is wholly unnecessary as opposed to plugging the holes will be just another massive spending disaster of the Obama administration.
There is no plurality of the public that wants this. The public is evenly split on this topic.
They are evenly divided because the details of the horrific survival rates and long waits for treatment, if approved at all, have trickled down the general public.
And while Obama’s personal approval remains high, the approval of his actions and spending are not.
The public is on to this moron’s inexperience and socialist agenda and the spending is frightening the public.
Every step of the way Obama has lied, I mean miscalculated the cost and results of his massive, quadruple the deficit spending. While he boasts that he will cut the deficit in half he neglects to tell us it will still be double what he inherited.
NONE of which includes a fix for social security and medicaid, which means there is still tax and spending to come.
None of what he tells the public about savings with a government run health care plan is true. He is lying like he did with the auto disaster.
Time to see the details and assumptions for this rationed health care plan, have an independent analysis and not rush headlong into this disaster because Obama is afraid if the details leak no one will want this.
In fact a plurality of the public would like to rescind the rest of the stimulus spending too, because it did not save or create jobs and keep unemployment at or below 8% as Obama claimed.
Teddy Kennedy would not have received any treatment for his cancer had it occured in any of the national health care countries you mention.
We won’t get a say in our own health care, the government will decide for us. Anyone who wants a hint of what is to come should read dem. Tom Daschles book. He is the tax cheat that Obama had wanted to run Nat’l health care.
READ Daschle’s book. It will scare the daylights out of you when he tells us it is patriotic to die for your country and he doesn’t mean fighting in the military.

“I do believe they still average more than 10%.”
Nope, the OECD countries in Europe have an avg unemployment of 9.2%.
“During the Bush years libs complained when unemployment ranged from 4.5-5.5%. And yes I know it climbed a bit higher at the very end.”
That was because the U6 figure for that time was still quite high.
“all due to the massive social spending that discourages work and output with the massive 60-70% plus tax structure.”
This lie again?
Even with VAT, taxation tops out at 50% for most countries…much like our country.
“Which is of course why last sunday, across the board in the euro elections they threw out the tax and spenders and moved right.”
Record low turnout and outwardly racist right wing parties gaining seats.
Woo-hooo.

Yes, the average European country maxes out at about 50%. However, their VAT rates average about 22% – that’s a healthy chunk of change.
The post-Obama rates for 2010 will be 39.5% plus about 10% state tax – or about 50%. If more tax brackets are added on – as he seems to be itching to do, we will go much higher than the 50%. We also have FICA or self-employment tax, and the runaway Alternative Minimum tax which hits 20 million middle class Americans.
Lets just say, that even without heath care – we are paying quite a bit. Our current rate of indebtedness is not sustainable, and will call for higher taxes beyond what I’ve just described at some point.

Why would the US want to invite bankruptcy and corruption with the “free healthcare” that works so poorly in Russia and is a waiting-line DMV system in much of the rest of the world? Bribes help the wealthy push to the front of the line in government care where free healthcare is worth even less than free advice. Remember when the borders open the lines will get longer and rationing tighter.

Many an administration has fallen into the deep abyss of health care reform, but none have had the political capital and forces that support the Obama administration. The recent 2009 proposal has probably the best chance to get approved that any in the recent past. The question is will health care reform in America work?

When are you SHEEPLE going to understand the provisions of the health care bill have not yet been written nor voted upon?
The cost to do the bill is what is creating the stir, and no one knows how to get the uninsured insured.
So to those of you talking about the good and the bad provisions of a new health care policy, forget it. As of now there are NO provisions. Just a bunch of ideas that will need to be forged into a plan suitable to our elected officials bosses, the CEO’s OF THE CORPORATE WORLD.
SECREG_756

Fact; 85% of Americans health care is provided by their employers.
Fact I watched R- Sen. J.Boehner slamming his fist on a podium claiming, no government entity will dictate to HIM WHO or WHAT doctor he can see.He’s right. Regardless of what healtcare looks like in the future, his coverage is not changing.Good stage.
IE; Bill’s employer has had the same insurance carrier for years.Times are hard and he looks at what other opportunities are out there. His employer finds a better plan? Cheaper, Higher deductables? Who knows. But he decides to switch plans to United Health Care.
Nancy, one of Bill’s employees has been seeing the same doctor for years. After the switch she calls her doctor to schedule a routine appointment. She gets there,is examined by her usual doctor. On the way out, Nancy hands over her new health care card and her co payment.
Dr. James does not accept United Health Care members. he’s not in their system.
Nancy is responsible for the full cost of the visit. She must also find a new gyn. doctor, one who is on her NEW plan.
Who is telling Nancy what doctor she can or can not see? It’s the Health Insurance Company.
Mr. Boehner’s theatrics had little to do with you, me, or his constiuents. It’s all about theatre with politicians on both sides of the isle.
So stop the name calling. No one politician is better than the other. They ALL take orders from CORPORATE AMERICA’S CEO’s.
SECREG_756
Example