How do you think Hillary would have paid for this? Duh.

Obviously, I don’t think so. We don’t need another disaster, thank you very much.

With Obama worrying about paying back all of his big donors and special interests and so many add on’s, deletions or limits, we can end up with a huge disaster.

And, you may have not noticed, but if they are talking about rising health care costs and wanting to give an option to buy in the a public option, why do you think folks will be rallying paying more for their health care in the end?

right.

The lightbulb doesn’t go on much in the Obama brain, unless of course teleprompter of the US has been turned on.

The question everyone needs to ask, if the proposed Democratic Health Care plan is so wonderful, fair and cost efficient, how come the Congress, Senate and other Federal Employees won’t be required to participate if the exemptions stand? Yep, that tells me all I need to know if they’re not willing to require themselves to be bound by the same coverage and plans.

1) A very clear majority of Americans support a public option or the governments involvement in healthcare (check recent poll numbers here http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll_graphic_ready.html). The Republicans will put another nail in their coffin if they fight the public on this one.

2) A majority of Americans are even willing to pay more taxes for healthcare (check same poll numbers). Other countries with public healthcare do not really pay all that more taxes, particularly when you factor in total taxation (local, state, federal, consumption).

3) The trillion $ number mentioned by CBO and inflated by all these right-wing nuts does not factor in the impact of a government option using its market power to drive costs down. The trillion ??? analysis is not complete and does not take into consideration all factors. From the CBO on the costs in their analysis:

“They do not reflect the likely interactions that will occur with other elements of comprehensive health reform that may be included — such as an expansion of Medicaid or the creation of a public insurance plan, which is the most controversial issue in the health reform debate.”

4) The supposive $1 trillion number over 10 years. Who cares? Can likely be manageable, particularly if a new systems drives down overall costs and reduces overall spending per GDP. CBO actually said $1 trillion, but dead-enders like McCain pump it up to $3 trillion. http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm

5) Medicare costs, a government run program, are lower. So already a tract record of a govt run program being done cheaper.

6) How does the cost (trillion $) you outline compare to what we got now? The U.S. spent 16% of GDP on healthcare in 2007, higher than any other developed nation, and the CBO says that could rise to 25% of GDP by 2025 if nothing is done. The healthcare costs of today’s system leave this country uncompetitive. http://www.cfr.org/publication/13325/ The status quo is not an option.

and look at this: http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf

The WHO ranks the U.S. 37 in terms of overall healthcare performance. We spend more than anyone for 37. Great.

7) Why is it that all these other countries on the planet can provide better healthcare for a lot cheaper, by a very wide margin, through a public run plan?

You are just speculating on some proposals, but you have no details of an actual plan, so your comments are not all that relevant till you have something to comment on or more likely critize. By the way Amy you always seem to fall hook, line and sinker for any criticism the conservatives have. I guess that fits your trash Obama at any cost modus operandi.

What the democrats are proposing of having a public option to spur competition actually makes some sense, given that single-payer would be difficult to mandate at this point, given the lobbying, and that doing nothing is not an option.

At least the Democrats and Obama are trying to tackle healthcare. If your buddy John McCain got in, we would have nothing. Just like the Republicans sat on this for the last 8 years. McCain would have done zero and the failing healthcare system would continue.

I’m sorry, I am unfamiliar with the specifics of Hillary’s plan.

What’s their endgame with trying to scare the bejesus out of us abt what will happen to our health care if they take it over? Is it to stay in the pockets of the insurance, pharmaceutical, and medical industries?

They are trying cheat us out of single payer health care AGAIN with ugly visions of bureaucratic run government health care. The unspoken is message is that we will be at the mercy of government run health care, unable to have any say in it – and that is a lie.

So I think we aught to scare them right back by hitting the streets just as you say and let them know we want it, we want it now, and we want it to serve OUR BEST INTEREST – or else.

What I don’t like is choosing a model that has already proven to be flawed. That’s a set-up for disaster, and is short-sighted from the get-go.

What I don’t like is the gov’t essentially choosing my health care for me, which it will be doing if it starts taxing employers on these benefits (and my partner is already taxed on the money she pays for my benefits), as discussed above.

I have no problems with Medicare- my mom benefits from it, too. But this Administration has already made it harder for Medicare recipients, as well as providers, and we’re supposed to believe they’ll do better for the rest of us? I don’t see how that is possible, especially if they follow the model mentioned above.

You know, they coulda asked Hillary abt her plan – hers was widely considered to be the best one of anyone’s, with the lowest cost. So, it begs the question, why didn’t they?

Enough with the insurance companies holding Americans hostage.

Women bear a disproportionate responsibility for the health of their family. Why are we letting men get away with telling us what type of healthcare we are going to be allowed to have?

If Iranian women can show guts, why can’t we? Why aren’t we out there marching for universal coverage for ourselves and our families?

Self-employeds must provide their own insurance and their groups are so small that they pay more than larger employers. Are they “supplementing” larger employers?

We don’t need “health care” reform as much as we need “health insurance” reform. Last year, the eight largest health insurance companies spent $30 billion for “selling, general and administrative expenses.” Not one dollar of that went to health care. It went to pay for that cute duck we see on TV. Their overhead is 20-30%. Medicare’s overhead is 1-2%.