Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (7585)	7/16/2009 1:06:45 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Respond to of 42652

I believe that for him proceeding is a given and whatever it ends up costing, that's the price we have to pay. I absolutely think you're right. Some in Congress are focused on the cost (some only because it is necessary to convince ANYONE to vote for it). But one doesn't get the sense that the administration cares; it is more important to them to get the legislation passed, then whatever taxes are necessary down the road to fund it are FINE with them. This is consistent with the CBO scoring, BTW -- in which they have indicated the costs are heavily backloaded in the out years. So, while the cost may be a trillion for 10 years, they found the last five of those years average $171 Billion -- nearly ALL the cost. So, instead of being a $100B/year deal, it is really more of a $200B/year deal to begin with. Over time, it will become trillions just as Medicare has.

To: Lane3 who wrote (7585)	7/16/2009 1:57:51 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

Do you really think that there's a cost scenario that would cause him to re-evaluate going forward? OK this is pure speculation. I think he is looking at long term costs, and ways to bring them down. My personal and humble opinion is that we are on our way to primarily a single payer system, with insurance companies selling supplemental policies. I think that the public option is the first step. So yes, I think he is willing to accept a short term increase in cost on the presumption that over time, as the public option/options grow then total costs will be reduced. Again... speculation about someones motives is always dicey at best.