http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

"Eddie" wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul


If it does, expect a doubling in HC costs by 2019... from about $8K per
person on average to $16K/person.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
news
On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 10:41:10 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Eddie" wrote in message
. ..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul


If it does, expect a doubling in HC costs by 2019... from about $8K per
person on average to $16K/person.

I didn't see anything in the Senate bill to stop that.


Neither did I, but I did see plenty in the House bill that would.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:27:00 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If it does, expect a doubling in HC costs by 2019... from about $8K per
person on average to $16K/person.

I didn't see anything in the Senate bill to stop that.


Neither did I, but I did see plenty in the House bill that would.

The house bill was DOA in a democratically controlled Senate. What was
there was irrelevant. I never even looked at it.


Umm... just as the Senate bill is DOA in the House. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 17:19:34 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:27:00 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If it does, expect a doubling in HC costs by 2019... from about $8K
per
person on average to $16K/person.

I didn't see anything in the Senate bill to stop that.


Neither did I, but I did see plenty in the House bill that would.

The house bill was DOA in a democratically controlled Senate. What was
there was irrelevant. I never even looked at it.


Umm... just as the Senate bill is DOA in the House. What's your point?

It would have been possible to get the senate bill through committee.
The house bill would never make it.

You absolutely don't know that.


In real life I doubt anyone has actually spent that much time
analysing the house bill since they knew it was dead. It is another
omnibus thousand page pork fest.

Except the CBO.


If either one of these bills had actually done something to provide
cheaper care (not just artificially limit the price or subsidize it by
the taxpayer) it might have gotten some traction.

Nope. The House bill did all that and more. It wasn't perfect, but it was
darn good.

We need to increase the supply of care givers if we are going to
reduce cost but the AMA will never let that happen.

Come on... suddenly the AMA controls the world??

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Eddie" wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

Since the DC crooks turned it into another big friggin payoff for the
insurance companies, good riddance. If it stands there will be a big need
for more prisons to house those that can't afford or just wont play this
stupid game.
The idea is good, but they need to fix the broken end- the providers, not
the American tax payers who our corrupt government made victim of this
system.

On 07/02/2010 8:35 AM, mmc wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

Since the DC crooks turned it into another big friggin payoff for the
insurance companies, good riddance. If it stands there will be a big need
for more prisons to house those that can't afford or just wont play this
stupid game.
The idea is good, but they need to fix the broken end- the providers, not
the American tax payers who our corrupt government made victim of this
system.

Bingo. That is what they should do, fix the issues as they are,
continious improvement if you will. But no government profit in it.
Democrats started this whole ruse as so government would get the revenue
and be able to skim it while rationaing health care to lower their costs.

But Obama likes to talk a lot and spend a lot on nothing. Wonder when
the senate and congress are going to get sick of the talk and want some
results.

On 2/7/10 12:41 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 07/02/2010 8:35 AM, mmc wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

Since the DC crooks turned it into another big friggin payoff for the
insurance companies, good riddance. If it stands there will be a big need
for more prisons to house those that can't afford or just wont play this
stupid game.
The idea is good, but they need to fix the broken end- the providers, not
the American tax payers who our corrupt government made victim of this
system.

Bingo. That is what they should do, fix the issues as they are,
continious improvement if you will. But no government profit in it.
Democrats started this whole ruse as so government would get the revenue
and be able to skim it while rationaing health care to lower their costs.

But Obama likes to talk a lot and spend a lot on nothing. Wonder when
the senate and congress are going to get sick of the talk and want some
results.


There's not a lot funnier than an ex-pat like you, someone with no
skills and no bonafides, dropping poop economics in a usenet newsgroup.

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/2010 8:35 AM, mmc wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

Since the DC crooks turned it into another big friggin payoff for the
insurance companies, good riddance. If it stands there will be a big need
for more prisons to house those that can't afford or just wont play this
stupid game.
The idea is good, but they need to fix the broken end- the providers, not
the American tax payers who our corrupt government made victim of this
system.

Bingo. That is what they should do, fix the issues as they are,
continious improvement if you will. But no government profit in it.
Democrats started this whole ruse as so government would get the revenue
and be able to skim it while rationaing health care to lower their costs.

But Obama likes to talk a lot and spend a lot on nothing. Wonder when the
senate and congress are going to get sick of the talk and want some
results.


You're not only a liar, but a dumb liar. Pathetic.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/2010 8:35 AM, mmc wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/..._care_overhaul

Since the DC crooks turned it into another big friggin payoff for the
insurance companies, good riddance. If it stands there will be a big
need
for more prisons to house those that can't afford or just wont play this
stupid game.
The idea is good, but they need to fix the broken end- the providers,
not
the American tax payers who our corrupt government made victim of this
system.

Bingo. That is what they should do, fix the issues as they are,
continious improvement if you will. But no government profit in it.
Democrats started this whole ruse as so government would get the revenue
and be able to skim it while rationaing health care to lower their costs.

But Obama likes to talk a lot and spend a lot on nothing. Wonder when
the senate and congress are going to get sick of the talk and want some
results.


You're not only a liar, but a dumb liar. Pathetic.

--
Nom=de=Plume
Just for clarification, when I said "DC crooks" I meant both parties.
The Repubs love the mega business give aways and when Hillary was pushing
healthcare during Bill's administration, her plan consisted of mandatory
health insurance for all, which was also just a big bonanza for the
insurance scum. Same crap as today.
I've worked hard to be able to afford overpriced health insurance and as I
figure it, 40-45% of my earnings go to one tax or another. Our corrupt
politicians need to focus on the cause or root of this problem and not the
end result. The end result shows you there is a problem, from there you back
track and find the cause. In medical vernacular, DC is "treating symptons".
Like trying to treat diarrhea by buying more toilet paper.