>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I thought it was clear enough, that I think Obama should be fighting back more forcefully. The opponents of health care reform have succeeded in stirring up FUD. Even something as insane as death panels is something they have gotten people to believe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>At some point it became clear that there would be no support from Republicans. Rather than give away the farm in an effort to bring Olympia Snowe around, they should have just rammed it through.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike, maybe you should read this article that is posted on one of the most "liberal" networks:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33161911/ns/politics-health_care_reform/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This is the Health Reform that you support???
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't expect a response because it appears that when someone presents valid arguments, you exit the conversation by saying "Have a good day...)
>>>>>
>>>>>No, that is not the plan I support. The one I support(ed) was one including an optional public plan, which has already been kiboshed. That was our best hope of controlling costs.
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>You've got me confused. I understood that you were for Obama's Health Care Reform. He has indicated support of Sen. Baucus bill, which is one of the bills being used as an example in this article. So............what you're now saying is you do NOT support a bill that Obama supports???
>>>>
>>>>I mean, it must be okay because it's been created by Democrats...right?
>>>
>>>Obama's plan included a public option. Sen. Baucus's bill dropped that. But that's democracy in action -- a group of six senators, the three most influential being from the major population centers of Montana, South Dakota, and Maine, make a big part of the decision.
>>>
>>>You may have me pegged as more partisan than I am.
>>
>>Other than a much higher cost, could you tell me what you like about the Public Option and why you think it is good for the country?
>
>I don't think it would lead to higher costs, but the opposite. We have about the most expensive health care in the world with the all private system. The costs just go up, up, up. It is not unreasonable to think a competing government plan would exert downward pressure on costs. Right now, what real incentive do the insurers have to control costs?
>
>Please understand clearly, as some seem not to, that this government plan would be an alternative to the private insurers, not required. Anyone who thought it would be more expensive for them would not have to sign up for it.
>
>All a moot point now, of course. Dead as a doornail.

Let's see if I got this right.

We're going to add over 40 million people to the rolls of insured. A large majority of these people are lower middle class and the very poor. They are hardly able to put gas in a car to get themselves back and forth to work (if they have jobs). These people can't pay $10.00/month for insurance, so I assume the government (we the taxpayers) will subsidize the vast majority of them.

To keep cost low, let's say insurance for one for a year would be $5k times 40 million newly insured. This would be $200,000,000,000.00 (200 Billion) per year.

So, my question is, where does this money come from?

Don't assume I'm a heartless sob, because I'm not. I do believe some type of reform is necessary, and, many people believe that todays uninsured cannot/do not receive medical care. They do, and if they can't pay it's free. No emergency room can turn people away because of lack of insurance. As above, we the taxpayer pay the bills. And, these bills are high because the hospitals charge the full amount allowed.

An example would be the hospital provides me a service. They bill $2,000. The negotiated rate they have with my insurance company is $300.00, so that's all my insurance pays to satisfy the charges. Now, if the hospital is satisfied with the $300 for me, why should they be able to charge the uninsured $2k and expect full payment? Odds are, the uninsured is not going to pay anything, but some do pay a little every month trying to pay off the bill.....and the collections department continually bombards them with telephone and letter threats.

As I said, some reform is needed, but the crap that Obama, Pelosi and Reid are trying to shove down our throats just for the sake of allowing Obama to say he kept his promise is too much. They're trying to do too much, too fast. I don't believe the majority of those filling seats in the House, Senate and White House have a clue of what it's like to be poor and uninsured and what it's going to take to fix the problems. Rather than reading and understanding the different bills, they rely on others to tell them the contents and meaning. Many of these "others" are lobbyists that cannot and should not be trusted to be impartial.

So, anyone that believes they can trust their president, senator or congressmen to always make decisions in the best interests of the electorate......then, I've got a bridge you may be interested in purchasing. These people are all on an ego trip and truly love the power of their positions. We really need the checks and balances of the two party system because when it's out of balance, as it is now, the party in control is really screwing things up.