Pick your Poison - Dems to Decide how to pay for Obamacare

2009-07-07 20:20:54

#1

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6557|San Diego, CA, USA

Dems to reveal how they'll pay for healthcare
By Mike Soraghan

The Hill wrote:
By the end of this week, House Democrats may have answered the biggest question looming in the healthcare debate – how they plan to pay for their overhaul.

Leadership aides say they will introduce a bill by Thursday or Friday, in preparation for votes in committee next week. And that bill, they say, will include a way to pay for the bill.

“It is premature to point to any specific provision, but the House is committed to ensure that healthcare reform is paid for,” said Nadeam Elshami, spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Introducing a bill will also solidify the Democrats' blueprint for a "public option." The discussion draft released last month included a government option that closely resembles Medicare, alarming the health insurance industry.

But before the revenue-raisers and the rest of the fine print is rolled out, Democratic leadership will engage in some serious hand-holding.

They have scheduled a caucus meeting with each of the three chairmen handling the bill. Energy and Commerce Chair Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) will lead off Tuesday, explaining the public plan and the numerous other details that could give members relief or heartburn.

House Education and Labor Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.) will brief on Tuesday. And Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) speaks Friday. Rangel and his committee are in charge of finding the cuts and tax increases needed to pay for the bill.

Its going to be bad...

2009-07-07 20:23:16

#2

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6610|132 and Bush

Er.. am I blind? .. or is the thread just telling us that they are going to tell us soon?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-07-07 20:24:20

#3

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6162|what

They'll cut funding to the Iraq war.

2009-07-07 22:08:28

#4

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6538|Global Command

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389397531274003.html

Hospitals to kick in 150 billion.

2009-07-07 22:09:07

#5

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5594

AussieReaper wrote:
They'll cut funding to the Iraq war.

That would be the smart thing to do. That being said they'll instead cut education.

2009-07-08 03:11:45

#6

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6781|PNW

Axe health research, the military, CIA, and raise taxes. Hand out the cheapest possible medicine in the longest lines possible. Ho, US socialism!

2009-07-08 03:53:35

#7

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
They'll cut funding to the Iraq war.
That would be the smart thing to do. That being said they'll instead cut education.

That would be a drop in the proverbial bucket.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-08 04:10:33

#8

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6819|Nårvei

Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-07-09 03:31:08

#9

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

Varegg wrote:
Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread

And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 03:36:43

#10

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6819|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread
And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.

The health insurence companies are critical for your nations GDP?

Please elaborate ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-07-09 03:46:19

#11

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

Varegg wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread
And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.
The health insurence companies are critical for your nations GDP?

Please elaborate ...

Large workforce.

Pharmaceutical companies, medical suppliers, etc would also be negatively affected.

Large medical practitioner workforce. Don't think they will all stick around, either.

The point being that doing that would negatively impact far more than just the health insurance providers.

Last edited by FEOS (2009-07-09 03:46:42)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 03:49:42

#12

PureFodder: Member; +225|6294

FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread
And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.

Yes you'll harm the insurance industry because it's currently massively inefficient and you'll no longer be hurling money at it, but you'll improve all the other sectors of the economy as they are currently the ones paying for the wasteful healthcare industry, making them more able to compete with foreign business and can hire more people.

If you really want you could move to UHC and then continue to pay all the now unemployed insurance workers their full wage to just sit on their ass at home using the money that was saved by swapping systems. That way you get to have UHC and pointlessly waste vast amounts of money keeping people employed in the inefficient private insurance system.

2009-07-09 03:50:58

#13

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6770

We have UHC!!!!!!!! been that way since like after wwii

Last edited by usmarine (2009-07-09 03:51:22)

2009-07-09 03:51:40

#14

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Just drop the health insurance system and whoops you have funded UHC and have money to spare ...

/thread
And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.
Yes you'll harm the insurance industry because it's currently massively inefficient and you'll no longer be hurling money at it, but you'll improve all the other sectors of the economy as they are currently the ones paying for the wasteful healthcare industry, making them more able to compete with foreign business and can hire more people.

If you really want you could move to UHC and then continue to pay all the now unemployed insurance workers their full wage to just sit on their ass at home using the money that was saved by swapping systems. That way you get to have UHC and pointlessly waste vast amounts of money keeping people employed in the inefficient private insurance system.

Sure. If you don't believe in a capitalist economy, letting the private sector compete to provide what people need/want.

Oh wait. Our current administration doesn't.

Nevermind.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 04:23:10

#15

PureFodder: Member; +225|6294

FEOS wrote:
PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.
Yes you'll harm the insurance industry because it's currently massively inefficient and you'll no longer be hurling money at it, but you'll improve all the other sectors of the economy as they are currently the ones paying for the wasteful healthcare industry, making them more able to compete with foreign business and can hire more people.

If you really want you could move to UHC and then continue to pay all the now unemployed insurance workers their full wage to just sit on their ass at home using the money that was saved by swapping systems. That way you get to have UHC and pointlessly waste vast amounts of money keeping people employed in the inefficient private insurance system.
Sure. If you don't believe in a capitalist economy, letting the private sector compete to provide what people need/want.

Oh wait. Our current administration doesn't.

Nevermind.

I believe in using the private sector when that makes sense and using the public sector when that makes sense.

Healthcare has proved itself to be a case where the public sector is more efficient than the private sector.

Is the idea of keeping the healthcare system of the US in the private sector worth over a trillion dollars a year?

2009-07-09 04:24:43

#16

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6770

healthcare is not just in the private sector. we have UHC. jesus christ are you deaf?

2009-07-09 04:26:08

#17

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
PureFodder wrote:

Yes you'll harm the insurance industry because it's currently massively inefficient and you'll no longer be hurling money at it, but you'll improve all the other sectors of the economy as they are currently the ones paying for the wasteful healthcare industry, making them more able to compete with foreign business and can hire more people.

If you really want you could move to UHC and then continue to pay all the now unemployed insurance workers their full wage to just sit on their ass at home using the money that was saved by swapping systems. That way you get to have UHC and pointlessly waste vast amounts of money keeping people employed in the inefficient private insurance system.
Sure. If you don't believe in a capitalist economy, letting the private sector compete to provide what people need/want.

Oh wait. Our current administration doesn't.

Nevermind.
I believe in using the private sector when that makes sense and using the public sector when that makes sense.

Healthcare has proved itself to be a case where the public sector is more efficient than the private sector.

Is the idea of keeping the healthcare system of the US in the private sector worth over a trillion dollars a year?

How much does it contribute to the GDP?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 04:27:20

#18

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

usmarine wrote:
healthcare is not just in the private sector. we have UHC. jesus christ are you deaf?

Which is also where the majority of the governmental costs cited come from.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 04:29:56

#19

PureFodder: Member; +225|6294

FEOS wrote:
PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Sure. If you don't believe in a capitalist economy, letting the private sector compete to provide what people need/want.

Oh wait. Our current administration doesn't.

Nevermind.
I believe in using the private sector when that makes sense and using the public sector when that makes sense.

Healthcare has proved itself to be a case where the public sector is more efficient than the private sector.

Is the idea of keeping the healthcare system of the US in the private sector worth over a trillion dollars a year?
How much does it contribute to the GDP?

How much does it REDUCE GDP. The money that is currently wasted on the private system could be invested economically useful things like an extra trillion dollars in R&D for example, or just used to save US firms collectively a trillion dollars, allowing them to better compete with foreign firms, exporting more and imprting less thusly improving the GDP.

2009-07-09 04:34:12

#20

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6770

FEOS wrote:
usmarine wrote:
healthcare is not just in the private sector. we have UHC. jesus christ are you deaf?
Which is also where the majority of the governmental costs cited come from.

bingo. see, this is why i only bang out a few words. it is pointelss talking to the clueless.

2009-07-09 05:16:58

#21

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6819|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
FEOS wrote:

And you would have pushed the unemployment rate well over 10% and damaged/destroyed a couple of industries that are pretty critical to the nation's GDP.
The health insurence companies are critical for your nations GDP?

Please elaborate ...
Large workforce.

Pharmaceutical companies, medical suppliers, etc would also be negatively affected.

Large medical practitioner workforce. Don't think they will all stick around, either.

The point being that doing that would negatively impact far more than just the health insurance providers.

So with UHC you don't need pharmaceutical companies or medical suppliers according to you?

That's strange because those jobs still excist in other countries that have UHC system or NHS or whatever they call it ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-07-09 05:30:43

#22

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
PureFodder wrote:

I believe in using the private sector when that makes sense and using the public sector when that makes sense.

Healthcare has proved itself to be a case where the public sector is more efficient than the private sector.

Is the idea of keeping the healthcare system of the US in the private sector worth over a trillion dollars a year?
How much does it contribute to the GDP?
How much does it REDUCE GDP. The money that is currently wasted on the private system could be invested economically useful things like an extra trillion dollars in R&D for example, or just used to save US firms collectively a trillion dollars, allowing them to better compete with foreign firms, exporting more and imprting less thusly improving the GDP.

Those companies all CONTRIBUTE to the GDP and to the tax base. It's CONTRIBUTE, not REDUCE.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 05:31:51

#23

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6420|'Murka

Varegg wrote:
So with UHC you don't need pharmaceutical companies or medical suppliers according to you?

That's strange because those jobs still excist in other countries that have UHC system or NHS or whatever they call it ...

But far more exist here. Far more medical discoveries are made here. It's because of the profit inherent in successful investment. That's the driver.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-07-09 05:32:59

#24

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6819|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:
PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:

How much does it contribute to the GDP?
How much does it REDUCE GDP. The money that is currently wasted on the private system could be invested economically useful things like an extra trillion dollars in R&D for example, or just used to save US firms collectively a trillion dollars, allowing them to better compete with foreign firms, exporting more and imprting less thusly improving the GDP.
Those companies all CONTRIBUTE to the GDP and to the tax base. It's CONTRIBUTE, not REDUCE.

All companies contribute ... but you used the word critical about the health insurence business ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-07-09 05:36:21

#25

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6819|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:
Varegg wrote:
So with UHC you don't need pharmaceutical companies or medical suppliers according to you?

That's strange because those jobs still exist in other countries that have UHC system or NHS or whatever they call it ...
But far more exist here. Far more medical discoveries are made here. It's because of the profit inherent in successful investment. That's the driver.

Of course it does ... you have far more scientists and doctors ... they can still do exactly the same with a UHC system dropping the health insurance companies that pr date actually "steals" money from healthcare and research ... the huge profit they make can easily be channeled into a healthcare system giving more health pr buck ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

BF2S Forums Pick your Poison - Dems to Decide how to pay for Obamacare

The Hill wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

usmarine wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

usmarine wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Board footer