Obamacare: $940 Billion becomes $2.5 Trillion

[_bcspace]

Top 10 Disasters of Obamacare

President Obama recently signed gargantuan health care legislation into law that will have major ramifications for every man, woman, and child in the United States. This newly enacted law originates from the Senate health care bill (the “Patients Protection and Affordability Act”) and a sidecar reconciliation bill that originated in the House. Between these two bills are countless provisions that grow federal spending, increase burdensome taxes, and put federal rules and regulations between Americans and control over their health care.

Outlined here are the 10 major ways in which the Left’s so-called health care reform will hurt Americans:

.....

1. New Spending Grows the Federal Deficit
2. Bending the Cost Curve in the Wrong Direction
3. New Taxes and Mandates Hinder Economic Growth
4. Regulations Grow Government Control over Health Care
5. Expanding Broken Entitlement Programs
6. Burdening State Budgets
7. Neglecting Medicare
8. Creates Discrimination Against Low Income Workers
9. Exchange Eligibility Creates Inequity
10. Questions of Constitutionality

....

The End of the Beginning

These disasters are only the beginning of the vast effects the President’s health care overhaul will have on the U.S. As bits and pieces of the law are implemented, its effects on states, businesses, and Americans of every ilk will become manifest. Congress and the American people should not view passage of the liberals’ health care package as the end of the debate on reform. Rather, the long and tedious journey toward restoring personal control over health care dollars and decisions is just beginning.

[_zzyzx]

So spaceKadet, who would you choose to let die for the sake of saving money?

[_bcspace]

So spaceKadet, who would you choose to let die for the sake of saving money?

I'm fairly certain that those in danger of dying would rather have the free market decide rather than a panel which refuses treatment. However, perhaps you should address you question to Paul Krugman of the New York Times who says the Medicare Advisory Panel (the Death Panel) under Obamacare will save a lot of money.

Paul Krugman death panels a cost saver

Not much money being saved when you jump from $940 billion to $2.5 trillion plus. Of course the Democrats knew it would be more but forced the CBO to bend the numbers to hide it.

[_zzyzx]

"Of course the Democrats knew it would be more but forced the CBO to bend the numbers to hide it."

Just as you do on LDS topics, you ignore the questions. Do you wear a tin foil hat too?

[_bcspace]

Just as you do on LDS topics, you ignore the questions. Do you wear a tin foil hat too?

I'm not the one who redirected from the cost of Obamacare to death panels. That was you.

[_Brackite]

I'm fairly certain that those in danger of dying would rather have the free market decide rather than a panel which refuses treatment. However, perhaps you should address you question to Paul Krugman of the New York Times who says the Medicare Advisory Panel (the Death Panel) under Obamacare will save a lot of money.

Paul Krugman death panels a cost saver

Not much money being saved when you jump from $940 billion to $2.5 trillion plus. Of course the Democrats knew it would be more but forced the CBO to bend the numbers to hide it.

Not all of the Democrats within the House of Representatives voted yes on this recently passed health care bill. As many as 33 Democrats within the House of Representatives ended up voting no on this health care bill. And all 178 Republicans within the House of Representatives voted no on this health care bill. There was absolutely Not any bipartisanship for this health care bill within the House of Representatives that was recently passed and signed into law by President Obama.

[_Kevin Graham]

The democrats FORCED the CBO huh?

You've become an idiot beyond reasoning if this is what you're left with.

Brackite, the majority of Democrats who didn't vote for the Bill did so because they felt it gave in to too many Republican requests. The Bill accomodated no less than six Republican ideas, incoprorated them into the Bill, and the Republicans STILL refused to support it, proving once again that they have no ideas, suggestions, or desire to see Health Care Reform of any stripe because they are slaves to their masters; the health care lobbyists.

The biggest hypocrisy is the individual mandate that Mitt Romney incorporated in Romneycare that virtually no one from the Right opposed. But when Obama brings it up, suddenly it is unconstitutional and the final step towards socialism! What a bunch of idiots!

Those on the extreme right are too busy watching Milton Friedman clips and worshipping Reagan to understand that Obama is not a socialist. What does socialist mean? It doesn't seem to matter since Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity seem to have made up their minds for them.

bscpace will float out any scary numbers he can that derive from Right Wing conspiracy theorists and then declare it as a matter of fact. All other experts who disagree are simply being "forced" to by the dark forces of the Democrat party! And he is still babbling about the debunked notion of "death panels"? Jesus this is dumb.

[_Brackite]

...

Brackite, the majority of Democrats who didn't vote for the Bill did so because they felt it gave in to too many Republican requests. The Bill accomodated no less than six Republican ideas, incoprorated them into the Bill, and the Republicans STILL refused to support it, proving once again that they have no ideas, suggestions, or desire to see Health Care Reform of any stripe because they are slaves to their masters; the health care lobbyists.

...

Kevin, I don't know about that. 19 of the 33 Congressional Democrats who voted No on that health care bill come from Conservative and Red States.
For example, Democratic Congressman Jim Matheson from the very Conservative and very Red State of Utah voted No on that health care bill.

[_Droopy]

Brackite, the majority of Democrats who didn't vote for the Bill did so because they felt it gave in to too many Republican requests.

No, its because they didn't want to commit political suicide, a state of affairs empirical evidence is now beginning to make clear a large number of key Democrats have very likely have done this coming November.

The Bill accomodated no less than six Republican ideas, incoprorated them into the Bill, and the Republicans STILL refused to support it, proving once again that they have no ideas, suggestions, or desire to see Health Care Reform of any stripe because they are slaves to their masters; the health care lobbyists.

The Republicans refused to support it because:

1. Most of them are not outright authoritarian socialist ideologues, like most insitutinal Democrats.

2. The country is already headed toward major economic disaster; 12 trillion (if not 14 trillion) in debt. Universal health care is economically unsustainable even if the country were in boom times, and the Democrats know it, just as they knew what was coming if Freddie and Fannie were not reigned in, and the CRA brought to heel.

3. They do not wish another catastrophic electoral loss in November. With 65% of the American people, across party lines, wanting nothing to do with the Obama plan, they're definitely in the running.

4. None of them had read the plan, or knew what was in it, anymore than the Democrats who voted for it or Obaman did when it passed.

The biggest hypocrisy is the individual mandate that Mitt Romney incorporated in Romneycare that virtually no one from the Right opposed. But when Obama brings it up, suddenly it is unconstitutional and the final step towards socialism! What a bunch of idiots!

You sir, calling anyone else here or anywhere else an "idiot" has become the utter apogee of irony. Universal government sponsored healthcare as a concept is unconstitutional Mr. Wizard, as is any idea of forcing anyone to buy insurance to insure himself.

Those on the extreme right are too busy watching Milton Friedman clips and worshipping Reagan to understand that Obama is not a socialist.

If you were to begin again, say in third grade, and this time, pay attention, take your Ritalin, and eat your Wheaties, you might be up to debating an educated conservative on this issue by the time you're posting here in a wheelchair. By that time, however, you'll probably have to get your Geritol by prescription, that is if the bureaucrat in charge of your case decides its worth the limited funds available to give it to you.

Obama is a transformational socialist; he is a leftist progressive who believes in equality of outcome, class warfare/struggle, the thorough government control of business, financial markets, credit, and money (which could make him a fascist as well, but this depends upon whether he goes more for de facto total control of the private sector or, as with healthcare, outright nationalization (or, to put it in greater ideological outline, the expropriation of the means of production of all medical services)), steep, punitive, progressive taxation, redistribution of wealth, philosopher kingesque social engineering, and the thorough dependence of as many American citizens as possible upon the state. Indeed, what Obama is really doing is attempting the proletariatization of America.

What does socialist mean?

A number of things, any one of which are compatible with much of what Obama has done and supported thus far.

bscpace will float out any scary numbers he can that derive from Right Wing conspiracy theorists and then declare it as a matter of fact.

In other words, you don't have any numbers, facts, empirics, or logical arguments at all. I think it wasn't but a year or two ago that you were a staunch conservative who would tackle anyone here on political matters, and who didn't differ in any major respects from myself or bc.

Now, suddenly, you have taken the coward's way out, lurched to the Left, and gotten your season pass to the Great and Spacious Building (must be their timeshare division).

That, you see, is what apostasy from the truth does; darkening and clouding the mind and hardening the heart.

All other experts who disagree are simply being "forced" to by the dark forces of the Democrat party! And he is still babbling about the debunked notion of "death panels"? Jesus this is dumb.

Its not debunked, its fact, and they already exist here and have been here in the Medicare system for a long time, in all but name, and they exist in Canada and the U.K. Anytime a government bureaucrat decides what treatments one can or cannot receive, based upon available funds in the government run system (which will always be critically short), and the treatment in question is a matter of life and death, that is a "death panel" in all but name.

Any time a government bureaucrat schedules someone with a life threatening progressive disease condition for a biopsy, or CAT scan, or MRI, or to see a specialist three months, six months, a year down the road, that is a "death panel" in all but name.

Your witlessness and incivility exceed all prior expectations.

[_Kevin Graham]

Droopy, step aside small fry and let the big boys handle the serious debates. You are just a Limbaugh puppet who likes to relay his trash and pawn it off as your own education on conservatism. You have not a single shred of credibility, especially if you think you get to float out that CRA nonsense as if it hasn't been debunked (even conservative economists admit it!) Obama's bill has gained favor after it was passed. Most Americans are for, not against HCR bill, and the majority of those who oppose it do so out of ignorance because they rely on idiots like you scare them away from it instead of actually reading the bill itself or seeking objective analyses. For example, your ignorant tidbit about how it is universal healthcare. ROFL! Get educated and stop making an arse of yourself.

Individual mandates are unconstitutional you say? Too bad for you constitutional scholars say otherwise. And too bad none of you Right Wingers were freaking out when your messiah Mitt Romney implemented the same mandate when he was governor and then admited he wanted to use Federal tax dollars to help people buy insurance. Oooops? Forgot to wail and moan about socialism and the constitution then did ya? No. The only difference between Obama and Mitt is that the latter wasn't disobedient in the preexistence.

You don't know what it means to be a socialist and neither does bcspace. I have asked numerous Right Wingers this question the past few weeks and I never get the right answer. Too funny. Saying a socialist is whatever Obama does is not an educated answer, but simply tilts your hand far enough to let us all know you are bluffing. You don't know because Glenn Beck hasn't told you how to answer that question yet.

And yes, I take pride in the fact that my mind can be changed if the evidence calls for it. Sue me for proving I can be reasonable.