ObamaCare 2011: Finding out what’s in it!

So here we are, about a year after that statement by San Fran Nanny, and we are beginning to find out what’s in it. Now, I have a family who is made up entirely of liberals. They are willing to argue with me always about the merits of the new Health Care Law.

“Flyovercountry,” they say, “this bill does nothing more than offer medical care to those people who can not afford insurance,” (ie. like every other liberal policy, somewhat mitigates the disastrous results of previous liberal policy.) To them I would say this — if they allowed me to answer their statements — “Why then are so many of the Laws most fervent supporters opting out of it? Why is this game of ‘good for thee but not for me’ allowed to go on?”

As we almost immediately found out, the CBO estimates of deficit reduction were a sick fairy tale (although, that hasn’t stopped some on the left from repeating it as though we were all to foolish to see the red ink.)

Every insurance company today who sells health insurance fits the legal definition of financially distressed. This is due to the fact that the Law mandates a percentage of premiums received be paid in benefits. The insurance laws mandate that a percentage of premiums received be held in reserve for future solvency. Predictably, there is an overlap of funds, and it ain’t small. We were promised by our President that this was not a Law designed to force current health insurers out of business. The previous statement not withstanding, the President has already been caught on video several times stating that this law will cause all health insurers out of the heath insurance business, (as well as making that statement to the SEIU during the 2008 campaign.) Those of you with kids in College may have noticed increased difficulty this year in processing student loans. Well, all student loans now are made by a single bank in South Dakota. What that was doing in a law for health care is any one’s guess.

Starting in 2014, there will be a 3% tax on all residential real estate transactions. Starting in 2011, a 1% tax on all financial transactions, including cashing your paycheck. Still in love with it? Try this on for size, even as doctors all over the country are refusing service to patients with medicare, (due to the government’s refusal to pay claims at a rate acceptable to said doctors,) several cancer fighting drugs have lost FDA approval due to the price tag involved in their usage. That’s right, rationing of services has already begun.

So, with all that, at least we all get the same care and burden, in a more fair manner right? Not quite. It seems that so far, a combination of large corporations and powerful unions won’t be able to afford their share of the cost of this sink hole of a law. To date, over 150 waivers have been issued. In other words, the President’s political supporters and allies get to be exempted from the very bill they inflicted on the rest of us. The SEIU, (you recognize them as the purple shirted thugs who acted as bouncers for various Congressional town hall meetings and Obama health care rallies,) will not be participating in the new Law. GE, sorry, they won’t be helping out either. McDonald’s, nope, it turns out that they would be better able to provide health care to their employees sans the new law. (Ironic, since McDonald’s was vilified by the left as the quintessential company which would not provide its employees with health insurance.) What this also means of course is that the rest of us must pick up an increased share of the burden. The costs of benefits did not go down simply because the cheerleaders for this travesty don’t want to pay for it personally.

We need to repeal this monstrous increase in governmental authority. It was never about health care, it was about centralization of federal control over our lives.

Originally posted here.

4 Comments
  1. Ahhh, where to start. First of all, I’m a college educated 36 year old white guy. I’m a liberal who supports ObamaCare and supports it more everyday that goes. Sure, it’s easy to spin the complicated facts on a complicated issue to make whatever point you want to make, much harder to offer real policy THAT’S PAID FOR(SOMETHING NO CONSERVATIVE HAS DONE IN MY LIFETIME..ANY POLICY…EVER!!!!!!!) when you have big corporate interests whose profit interests are against your succeeding.
    One point that the rural sheeple buy that is simply baseless is the point of the “biggest supporters opting out”. Yes, this is complex legislation. It isn’t mandating 1 single plan that all Americans must take(although some might argue that would be the cheapest thing). It ISN’T A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER. There is no way for DEM Congressman/women to OPT IN to the healthcare plan other than I guess like that one GOP new congressman rejecting the Congressional healthcare plan(unlike new GOP Congressman Andy Harris who whined like a little sissy that he couldn’t get his faster) but unlike him buying a policy from the exchange instead of on their own. Either way this isn’t about OPT-OUT or OPT-IN, but I guess makes a good talking point that the rural sheep buy.
    As for the realestate tax. Again you don’t accurately describe it either intentionally(probably) or unintentionally. Either way, the ignorant sheeple will buy it, don’t worry. The truth is that it is a 3.8% tax on PROFITS made from real-estate transactions above a certain threshold, not ANY REAL-ESTATE TRANSACTION. http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/realestate.asp
    The way home values have gone lately, the last thing anybody should be worried about is paying a tax on an excessive(yes, even if a disgusting terrorist, I mean beaurocrat, is deciding what is excessive or not) profit made from the sale of a home. Much like paying any tax of any rate no matter how high on a CONFIRMED REALIZED PROFIT should be the last thing any HEROIC SMALL BUSINESS OWNER(Today’s US small business owners are the greatest heroes in economic history. They do GOD’S HOLIEST WORK: CREATE JOBS!) should be concerned about, like for a tax hike on a PROFIT/PERSONAL income made, AFTER paying employee salaries and ALL OTHER POSSIBLE EXPENSES UNDER THE SUN, that comes to over $250k year…. but that’s another debate. The 1% tax is only for those who make over $250k again something you neglect to mention.
    As for these waivers, they are temporary not permanent and all expire by 2014 most by 2012, again you leave that out. That said, I think both parties screwed up royally. Obama should’ve never granted these temporary waivers to SUCH HIGHLY PROFITABLE COMPANIES such as McDonalds(check out hte stock performance of MCD), and McDonalds shouldn’t have sought them. Sure, paying for more healthcare when your workforce is very temporary will be expensive. Well, that’s the cost of doing business when you’re a successful large public corporation whose public image and feeling about your company is a big part of what you sell. With all trillions of bank writeoffs from housing sales at the top of the market, I think a $100 million writeoff for healthcare for the 60,000 employees who currently took the plan and maybe the 40,000 more who would if it were better would be just about the best value for any writeoff in the last few years. Then they could do feel good commercials(which they do anyways) saying this. I’m not saying offer a Cadillac plan or anything near, just a better deal like how about putting up some money so that those $5k, $10k, and $20k annual maximums are double. Something to say, “We here you public. We care”. That’s not charity. It’s good business. I don’t have to eat a McDonalds and won’t until they do this. Yes, I know these are franchises not corporate owned, but most are very profitable and this could still be done from the corporate side.
    As for you CBO estimates stuff. The most important thing to say about them is that they actually have one, unlike say the UNPAID FOR WELFARE MONSTROSITY OF MEDICARE PART D(and it is nothing more than UNPAID FOR WELFARE) that was ramrodded down our throats by GWB&the GOP congress. No need for re-estimates there, because it’s completely UNPAID FOR. The GOP once again like they’ve done for 30 years decided to really stick to GenX&GenY people and stick them with a $600 billion debt over 10 years. Where are the calls to repeal the UNPAID FOR MEDICARE PART D? They are only from liberals like me. Anyways, these are still estimates, and yes they were adjusted. Obamacare has not cost us 1 dime yet in the way the CBO is talking about in 2014. Of course, conservatives can’t afford to wait to find out, because then they will be on the wrong side of history on another 50 year issue just like they were on the wrong side of Civil Rights and Medicare.
    To a broader point, I’m a liberal DEM because the conservatives have spent the last 30 years really screwing my generation and younger generations. Something Paul Ryan denies and says the opposite. Sorry Paul, just because you say it, it doesn’t make it true. Meanwhile they have cowtowed to the baby boomer & older generations lavishing them with trillions in unpaid for spending & entitlements that our generations will have to pay for and then fighting tooth and nail against the policies that will benefit GenX&GenY primarily(like ObamaCares guaranteed subsidies). Paul Ryan & the GOPs voted for the UNPAID FOR $1 trillion Iraq War(which among other things provides for free health care for Iraqis) that baby boomer & older generations voted for and GenX&GenY voted against(best measuredy by the age break down of the 2004 election where a vote for for GWB was a vote supporting the Iraq War;a vote for Kerry was a vote against the Iraq War. Paul Ryan & the GOPs ramrodded their unpaid for GOVERNMENT WELFARE MEDICARE D down our throats, and now Paul Ryan acts like a fiscally responsible saint in bashing ObamaCare which is either completely or mostly paid for. At least more paid for than any GOP spending in my lifetime.

    1. Libertarianism has plenty of room for former (and quasi) Democrats, heck, Mike Gravel came within two rounds of balloting (out of seven) of being the LP presidential candidate (round #6 he lost to Mary Ruwart, a classical libertarian ideologue who really should have been the candidate IMO), just put your ACLU hat on and join the party. Having said that, both you and flyovercountry are really missing the bus on libertarianism 101: ALL government money is ultimately coerced from the people via taxation, and thus any spending thereof is “fruit of the poison tree”. Having said that, sometimes, the market fails, and it IS kinda nice for the government to be the fallback of last resort, either via regulation or via providing a fiscal “hand up”, but until taxation is replaced by some sort of voluntary subscription, it’s still stolen money that’s funding it. In the case of “Obamacare” (Actually, this is EXACTLY the same as the GOP counterproposal to “hillarycare”, which was exactly the same as the GOP counterproposal LBJ’s “great society”), it’s a lot of regulation and a little extension of previously-existing government services, and the expanded services needed paying for, since the GOP insisted on cutting taxes without correspondingly cutting the budget years ago, there’s no extra money laying around to put towards the expansion (conservative? what’s this conservative you speak of?). Of course true libertarians loathe the idea of extra taxation, but you’ll find most libertarians are pragmatic enough to see that you can’t fix everything at once, and it’s much better to see a balanced budget with scads of coerced money than a budget that relies on borrowing against future coerced money, so tend to weakly support “revenue-neutral” bills. The natural next step in a libertarian’s eye would be to reduce that budget so as to remove the coerced money angle entirely, but that’s a different fight. Just remember, Libertarians had the “liberal” moniker a LOT longer than the Democrats did, we can claim liberalism in the 1783 sense, where it was a radical idea that government was the result of a Social Contract, one that is being abrogated entirely too much as of late.

  2. DID you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That’s $3,800 on a $100,000 home etc. When did this happen? It’s in the healthcare bill. Just thought you should know.
    SALES TAX TO GO INTO EFFECT 2013 (Part of HC Bill)
    REAL ESTATE SALES TAX
    So, this is “change you can believe in”?
    Under the new health care bill – did you know that all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax? The bulk of these new taxes don’t kick in until 2013 If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes. Does this stuff make your 2012 vote more important?
    Oh, you weren’t aware this was in the obama-care bill? Guess what, you aren’t alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren’t aware of it either

%d bloggers like this: