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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (100918)	3/3/2011 2:52:40 PM
From: JakeStraw	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

For example, the Obama administration claims that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), the official name of Obamacare, will cover 32 million currently uninsured Americans. While some of that would certainly happen because of the plan's massive increase in Medicaid, the estimate also includes people whom the administration believes – or at least claims to believe – will buy insurance because Big Nanny tells them to. However, the penalty for not buying insurance is so much lower than the cost of insurance that the plan is likely to cover far fewer people than claimed. If a future administration's Secretary of Health and Human Services is as blind to reality and as subservient to the political wishes of her boss as Kathleen Sebelius is -- and what political appointee won't be? -- the federal government will simply estimate the state's plan to cover fewer people than Obamacare does and deny the waiver -- especially if the requesting state is "red" rather than "blue." The impact on the federal deficit will be even easier to game. After all, any administration that could with a straight face claim that Obamacare will reduce the federal deficit could claim that the moon is made of green cheese -- or that a state's plan is worse for the federal budget than PPACA is. And any Democrat administration will do just that if a state's plan poses a perceived threat to the federal government's involvement in health insurance. Obamacare is, after all, more about power and vote-buying than about a quality health care system for our nation. PPACA's wishful thinking about "affordable" and "comprehensive" insurance is based on massive government subsidies and the cynically rosy assumptions typical of the Obama administration. (Who can forget that if we passed the "stimulus," unemployment would stay below 8%?) No state can afford similar subsidies which will be needed to provide insurance covering every ailment under the sun, every pre-existing condition, and almost every person in the state. In other words, no state will be able to meet the waiver provisions while also keeping health insurance as "affordable" as PPACA because states can't redistribute income on the scale that the federal government does to mask the true price increases. spectator.org

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (100918)	3/3/2011 2:53:23 PM
From: MJ	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224756

The economy has been in recession and depression for a total of 37 months from the time Obama was the obvious winner of the Democrat Party's nomination until the Republicans swept into Congress in November 2010. This recession and depression for families is the longest since the great depression of the 1930's as Mr. Obama, the titular President has created trillions of dollars of Federal Debt. These 37 months will be known as The Obama Depression.