June 2009
M T W T F S S
« May   Jul »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

The Real Crisis is Obamacare

If the "health" of the U.S. dollar is not restored, nothing else will matter very much.

President Obama has never met a crisis he didn't love; particularly the ones that involve spending trillions of dollars. What fun it is to propose programs that involve borrowing or taxing Americans to death.

On June 9, the Associated Press reported, "President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration's emerging health care overhaul."

Since the stealth heathcare "reform" that Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to foist on Americans during the 1993-94 Congress, this "crisis" has been off the radar screen of Americans who have the audacity to think they should decide whether and how much health insurance they want, and to expect healthcare that is not rationed on the basis of how old they are and other factors determined by some faceless government bureaucrat.

Liberals obsess over healthcare options because, of course, they want "fairness" no matter how much it will cost Americans in general and the economy in particular.

To that end, various "progressive" (liberal) groups have gotten together and have launched an $82 million campaign to support President Obama's healthcare program.

The umbrella for this massive public brainwashing is called Health Care for America Now. Why is it that everything Obama wants has to be done "now"? Oh yes, I forgot. It's a "crisis."

Health Care for America is directed by Richard Kirsch and has been joined by the AFL-CIO, MoveOn.org, and Democracy for America, a group founded by former Democrat National Committee Chairman, Howard "the scream" Dean. The group is essentially a re-branded version of liberal lunatic groups.

An excellent analysis of Obamacare has been published by the Cato Institute in a May 21 Policy Analysis (No. 638) titled, appropriately, "Seven Bad Ideas for Health Care Reform." Authored by Michael Tanner, it points out some very ugly truths.

  • At the time of rising unemployment, the government would raise the cost of hiring workers by requiring employers to provide health insurance to their workers or pay a fee (tax) to subsidize government coverage.
  • Every American would be required to buy an insurance policy that meets certain government requirements.
  • A government-run plan similar to Medicare would be set up in competition with private insurance.
  • The government would undertake comparative-effectiveness research and cost-effectiveness research and use the results to impose practice guidelines on providers, initially in Medicare and Medicaid, but ultimately extending the rationing to private insurance plans.
  • Private insurance would face a host of new regulations.
  • Subsidies would be available to help middle-income people purchase insurance while expanding Medicare and Medicaid.
  • Finally, the government would subsidize and manage the development of a national system of electronic medical records.

According to a June 8 Bloomberg News report, "President Barack Obama wants Congress to consider taxing the wealthy instead of workers to pay for a health-care overhaul." This is yet one more lie by the Obama administration in the run-up to impose the most vile form of government control over everyone's lives imaginable.

The American Medical Association, the nation's largest physician organization, has let it be known that it will oppose creation of a government-sponsored insurance plan.

The promise of the Declaration of Independence that everyone has a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness will be rendered meaningless by Obamacare if your life depends on government policies regarding healthcare.

A June 1 Business Week commentary pointed out that "there are only three ways to pay for universal coverage: Raise taxes, cut payments to medical providers, or ration care." All three are the worst possible options imaginable.

"The Congressional Budget Office estimates that covering the uninsured could add anywhere from $1 trillion to $2 trillion to the federal budget over ten years," said the BW commentary. "On top of that, government economists expect Medicare to run out of money in 2017 if current spending trends continue."

Here's a handy tip regarding estimates by government economists. Multiply them by a factor of ten!

As this healthcare horror awaits its run through Congress, think of it as a massive Medicare, the government program for seniors that cost 3.2 percent of the country's Gross Domestic Product in 2008 and which will become insolvent this year!

Medicare faces $34 trillion in unfunded liabilities; the cost of services for which seniors are eligible in the future. 

According to the Medicare Trustees, the program will require a 134 percent increase in the payroll tax paid by every working American in order to remain solvent!

And this insane Democrat-controlled Congress wants to expand on Medicare while requiring everyone to purchase healthcare insurance, even if they don't want to. Then it will compete against existing private insurance companies without having to have the funds in place as they must to meet their obligations.

This isn't healthcare reform. It is the destruction of the best healthcare system in the world. It is the destruction of the nation's economy. It, along with the tax on energy use, must be stopped.

We are being attacked by one "crisis" after another when the only one that matters is the restoration of the full faith and credit of the U.S. dollar. If the "health" of the U.S. dollar is not restored, nothing else will matter very much.

1 comment to The Real Crisis is Obamacare

  • milbrat

    The Threat of Obamacare

    Let's forget, for a moment, that most Americans are used to making their own health care decisions and focus instead on the cost.

    The CBO released figures yesterday that nationalized health care would cost $1 trillion over the next decade. Further in the release CBO said this would cover 39 million Americans however it would have the unintended effect of throwing another 23 million off current company roles. 39 million minus 23 million is 16 million. That works out to $6,250 per person per year. I'm only paying $4,960 per year for 'top-of-the-line' coverage.

    Alan Caruba says in his fourth paragraph that "Liberals obsess over health care options because, of course, they want "fairness" no matter how much it will cost…" I take exception to that statement. Liberals never want 'fairness'. They may say that 'fairness' is the stated goal of their 'flavor of the month' program; but the real goal is 'sameness'. Fairness would be each American competing in the same market for the best health care they could afford. Sameness is everyone receiving the same treatment regardless. This is tantamount to saying that being equally ill is preferable to be unequally healthy.

    You can be certain of two things: When the AFL-CIO, MoveOn.org, and Democracy for America join together to help our President solve a "crisis"; the solution cannot be anything other than dangerous. Britain has had socialized medicine for 60 years, Canada for almost 40. Both countries are trying desperately to reverse these decisions with little success. The momentum of such a program, once started, is difficult to stop.

    Anyone interested in how the Canadian system works may read all about it here
    http://www.theadvocates.org/freeman/8903lemi.html
    Basically, enrollment in the Canadian health care system is compulsory. In order to control the costs of "free' care, the government has had to reduce reimbursements to doctors, trim available bed space in hospitals, control the salaries of health care professionals, causing strikes and work stoppages.

    My final question is this; why would anyone allow the same entity that has sickened everything it's touched in the last few months control the entire health care system of the United States? And just how do you expect this will make Americans healthier?

You must be logged in to post a comment.











IC Archives