A report from Obama's Health Care Canary

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

As the New York Times, CNN and Obama supporters have repeatedly told us, the model for ObamaCare is RomneyCare--the Massachusetts system for "universal" medical insurance. It's a government-run program. It's subsidized by taxpayers. And, we were promised, by giving everyone coverage, costs would go down.

That's what the O-bots are about to shove down our throats in Washington, so let's check in with today's Boston Globe-Democrat to see how well it's working for us canaries here in the ObamaCare coal mine:

Health costs to rise again
Insurers to boost rates about 10%; Shift of expenses to workers likely

The state’s major health insurers plan to raise premiums by about 10 percent next year, prompting many employers to reduce benefits and shift additional costs to workers.

Increases will range from 7 to 12 percent, capping a decade of consecutive double-digit premium increases, according to a Globe survey of the state’s top health insurers. Actual rates for 2010 will depend on the size of the employer and the type of coverage, with small businesses and individuals expected to be hit hardest. Overall, premiums are more than twice as high as they were 10 years ago.​

Or to use a little doctor's office lingo on you: "Ouch!"

In just the past year, with inflation driving prices down 1 percent, health care costs in Massachusetts went UP 5 percent. And we pay more for our insurance than any other state in the country. AND we pay more in taxes than anyone else thanks to our state-run "Commonwealth Care" system, which was supposed to cost $100 million a year, but in fact took around $700 million of the current state budget.

Here's the painfully ironic quote of the day:

“State health care reform has had some unexpected results,’’ suggested Tim O’Brien, senior vice president at Blue Cross Blue Shield’s headquarters in Boston. “The actual costs have been much higher than what were anticipated when health care reform went into effect in 2007.’’​

That's right, folks. Our version of ObamaCare has only been in place for TWO YEARS, and it's already 600% over the original budget.




This is shocking news to the Boston Globe-Democrat, which supported an even larger, more expensive and more government-centric version of RomneyCare. But the Wall Street Journal and others have been writing about this for months. Here was their conclusion back in March, when the news wasn't as bad as it is today:

Which brings us to Washington, where Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats are about to try their own Bay State bait and switch: First create vast new entitlements that can never be repealed, then later take the less popular step of rationing care when it's their last hope to save the federal fisc.

The consequences of that deception will be far worse than those in Massachusetts, however, given that prior to 2006 the state already had a far smaller percentage of its population uninsured than the national average. The real lesson of Massachusetts is that reform proponents won't tell Americans the truth about what "universal" coverage really means: Runaway costs followed by price controls and bureaucratic rationing.

And remember: The only people who DON'T want to repeat this disaster at the national level are racists.

 

[veritas]

You didn't attribute this composition. Why do you keep doing this?

This is a piece by:

"Michael Graham — Boston's maestro of conservative controversies"

The Natural Truth | A Report From Obama's Health Care Canary

 

[Oddball]

I guess you missed the attribution in the thread title, eh puddinhead??

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As the New York Times, CNN and Obama supporters have repeatedly told us, the model for ObamaCare is RomneyCare--the Massachusetts system for "universal" medical insurance. It's a government-run program. It's subsidized by taxpayers. And, we were promised, by giving everyone coverage, costs would go down.

That's what the O-bots are about to shove down our throats in Washington, so let's check in with today's Boston Globe-Democrat to see how well it's working for us canaries here in the ObamaCare coal mine:

Health costs to rise again
Insurers to boost rates about 10%; Shift of expenses to workers likely

The state’s major health insurers plan to raise premiums by about 10 percent next year, prompting many employers to reduce benefits and shift additional costs to workers.

Increases will range from 7 to 12 percent, capping a decade of consecutive double-digit premium increases, according to a Globe survey of the state’s top health insurers. Actual rates for 2010 will depend on the size of the employer and the type of coverage, with small businesses and individuals expected to be hit hardest. Overall, premiums are more than twice as high as they were 10 years ago.​

Or to use a little doctor's office lingo on you: "Ouch!"

In just the past year, with inflation driving prices down 1 percent, health care costs in Massachusetts went UP 5 percent. And we pay more for our insurance than any other state in the country. AND we pay more in taxes than anyone else thanks to our state-run "Commonwealth Care" system, which was supposed to cost $100 million a year, but in fact took around $700 million of the current state budget.

Here's the painfully ironic quote of the day:

“State health care reform has had some unexpected results,’’ suggested Tim O’Brien, senior vice president at Blue Cross Blue Shield’s headquarters in Boston. “The actual costs have been much higher than what were anticipated when health care reform went into effect in 2007.’’​

That's right, folks. Our version of ObamaCare has only been in place for TWO YEARS, and it's already 600% over the original budget.




This is shocking news to the Boston Globe-Democrat, which supported an even larger, more expensive and more government-centric version of RomneyCare. But the Wall Street Journal and others have been writing about this for months. Here was their conclusion back in March, when the news wasn't as bad as it is today:

Which brings us to Washington, where Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats are about to try their own Bay State bait and switch: First create vast new entitlements that can never be repealed, then later take the less popular step of rationing care when it's their last hope to save the federal fisc.

The consequences of that deception will be far worse than those in Massachusetts, however, given that prior to 2006 the state already had a far smaller percentage of its population uninsured than the national average. The real lesson of Massachusetts is that reform proponents won't tell Americans the truth about what "universal" coverage really means: Runaway costs followed by price controls and bureaucratic rationing.

And remember: The only people who DON'T want to repeat this disaster at the national level are racists.

You're a racist for posting it! You Racist! Why do you hate black people? Huh?

 

[Old Rocks]

And still the inconveniant truth, for Conservatives, remains. We pay more for less health care than any other industial nation in the world. Even little Costa Rica does health care better than we do. But we do create a whole bunch of very multi-millionaires with our system. People who gain their wealth by denying the care that others paid for with their premiums.

Now we have the usual sheeple here defending the right of the very rich to continue to plunder the American Citizen.

 

[veritas]

I guess you missed the attribution in the thread title, eh puddinhead??

guess you missed the edit...........

 

[Zander]

And still the inconveniant truth, for Conservatives, remains. We pay more for less health care than any other industial nation in the world. Even little Costa Rica does health care better than we do. But we do create a whole bunch of very multi-millionaires with our system. People who gain their wealth by denying the care that others paid for with their premiums.

Now we have the usual sheeple here defending the right of the very rich to continue to plunder the American Citizen.

Obamacare is dead and the democrats are the ones killing it. Deal with it.

 

[Maple]

As the New York Times, CNN and Obama supporters have repeatedly told us, the model for ObamaCare is RomneyCare--the Massachusetts system for "universal" medical insurance. It's a government-run program. It's subsidized by taxpayers. And, we were promised, by giving everyone coverage, costs would go down.

That's what the O-bots are about to shove down our throats in Washington, so let's check in with today's Boston Globe-Democrat to see how well it's working for us canaries here in the ObamaCare coal mine:

Health costs to rise again
Insurers to boost rates about 10%; Shift of expenses to workers likely

The state’s major health insurers plan to raise premiums by about 10 percent next year, prompting many employers to reduce benefits and shift additional costs to workers.

Increases will range from 7 to 12 percent, capping a decade of consecutive double-digit premium increases, according to a Globe survey of the state’s top health insurers. Actual rates for 2010 will depend on the size of the employer and the type of coverage, with small businesses and individuals expected to be hit hardest. Overall, premiums are more than twice as high as they were 10 years ago.​

Or to use a little doctor's office lingo on you: "Ouch!"

In just the past year, with inflation driving prices down 1 percent, health care costs in Massachusetts went UP 5 percent. And we pay more for our insurance than any other state in the country. AND we pay more in taxes than anyone else thanks to our state-run "Commonwealth Care" system, which was supposed to cost $100 million a year, but in fact took around $700 million of the current state budget.

Here's the painfully ironic quote of the day:

“State health care reform has had some unexpected results,’’ suggested Tim O’Brien, senior vice president at Blue Cross Blue Shield’s headquarters in Boston. “The actual costs have been much higher than what were anticipated when health care reform went into effect in 2007.’’​

That's right, folks. Our version of ObamaCare has only been in place for TWO YEARS, and it's already 600% over the original budget.




This is shocking news to the Boston Globe-Democrat, which supported an even larger, more expensive and more government-centric version of RomneyCare. But the Wall Street Journal and others have been writing about this for months. Here was their conclusion back in March, when the news wasn't as bad as it is today:

Which brings us to Washington, where Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats are about to try their own Bay State bait and switch: First create vast new entitlements that can never be repealed, then later take the less popular step of rationing care when it's their last hope to save the federal fisc.

The consequences of that deception will be far worse than those in Massachusetts, however, given that prior to 2006 the state already had a far smaller percentage of its population uninsured than the national average. The real lesson of Massachusetts is that reform proponents won't tell Americans the truth about what "universal" coverage really means: Runaway costs followed by price controls and bureaucratic rationing.

And remember: The only people who DON'T want to repeat this disaster at the national level are racists.

Why would anyone design a national plan after a failed state plan is beyond me. There is no cost savings in any of these plans. I loved that part in 2 years it was 600% over budget. Can you imagine what that would look like on a national level???? Good lord. This plan like the other adds app 1 trillion dollars to the national debt, now multiply that by 600% and are you sure you want this. This plan is already causing rationing, I beleive I heard a 6 week wait on a new patient exam.

Thanks Pilgrim, everyone needs to read this, and don't be fooled by all the political rhetoric this has been tried and it is failing miserably.

This is going to hurt Romney's run for the Presidency in 2012, make no doubt about it.

 

[Maple]

And still the inconveniant truth, for Conservatives, remains. We pay more for less health care than any other industial nation in the world. Even little Costa Rica does health care better than we do. But we do create a whole bunch of very multi-millionaires with our system. People who gain their wealth by denying the care that others paid for with their premiums.

Now we have the usual sheeple here defending the right of the very rich to continue to plunder the American Citizen.

Old rocks, you can fix health care through legislation. 85% of Americans who have insurance like what they have now. Fix the 15 % through tort reform, pre-tax health insurance savings plans, high deductible inexpensive catastrophic plans, group small business, open competition, legislate that people can not be denied coverage and have extended coverage when they lose their jobs.

They keep talking about the fraud in medicare, .20 on the dollar, well then go get it and fix it, why they have not done that up until now shows how inefficient, incompetent, and irresponsible they are. Now you want to turn the entire nation into a Massachuchett's plan. The facts are in on both of these plans and both of these plans would be total failures and they would bankrupt this country as well. Should the government get involved this deeply in any health care plan you will end up with.

A system that has the compassion of the IRS.
The efficiency of the Postal Service.
The response time of Fema and it will look like the aftermath of Katrina.

Open your eyes, it's happening now in Massachucetts.

Being in denial does not make it better.

 

[Old Rocks]

And you are in denial about that fact that there are many systems that are doing far more with less, all over the world. Have a look at these

FRONTLINE: sick around the world | PBS

 

[Old Rocks]

And still the inconveniant truth, for Conservatives, remains. We pay more for less health care than any other industial nation in the world. Even little Costa Rica does health care better than we do. But we do create a whole bunch of very multi-millionaires with our system. People who gain their wealth by denying the care that others paid for with their premiums.

Now we have the usual sheeple here defending the right of the very rich to continue to plunder the American Citizen.

Obamacare is dead and the democrats are the ones killing it. Deal with it.

We shall see.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I still say if obama is truly interested in reform he should pick at the low hanging fruit instead of the entire fruit tree.

Start with tort reform. You will get support from both reps and dems on tort reform and its something the citizens of the country would support.

Its easy to do, just pass a tort reform bill, he could have it by christmas no problem. Then he would have actually gotten a real and effective cost saving reform done. This would not only boost his approval and the people's trust in him on health care, it would also boost congress' approval.

The boost in approval would lead to him being able to pass insurance reform next, another item of health care that he can get bi-partisan support for.



But I'm just a racist since I dont like the massive overhaul method

 

[Skull Pilot]

I still say if obama is truly interested in reform he should pick at the low hanging fruit instead of the entire fruit tree.

Start with tort reform. You will get support from both reps and dems on tort reform and its something the citizens of the country would support.

Its easy to do, just pass a tort reform bill, he could have it by christmas no problem. Then he would have actually gotten a real and effective cost saving reform done. This would not only boost his approval and the people's trust in him on health care, it would also boost congress' approval.

The boost in approval would lead to him being able to pass insurance reform next, another item of health care that he can get bi-partisan support for.



But I'm just a racist since I dont like the massive overhaul method

Do you really think that Obama, who has gone out of his way to avoid tort reform, and Sebelius who was the chief lobbyist for a trial lawyer association will enact tort reform?

 

[Skull Pilot]

You didn't attribute this composition. Why do you keep doing this?

This is a piece by:

"Michael Graham — Boston's maestro of conservative controversies"

The Natural Truth | A Report From Obama's Health Care Canary

since when is reporting specifically on newspaper articles a "conservative controversy"?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

You didn't attribute this composition. Why do you keep doing this?

This is a piece by:

"Michael Graham — Boston's maestro of conservative controversies"

The Natural Truth | A Report From Obama's Health Care Canary

since when is reporting specifically on newspaper articles a "conservative controversy"?

I have Veritas on my iggy list right now.....Veritas Read the OP's title man dont be a ninnyhammer.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I still say if obama is truly interested in reform he should pick at the low hanging fruit instead of the entire fruit tree.

Start with tort reform. You will get support from both reps and dems on tort reform and its something the citizens of the country would support.

Its easy to do, just pass a tort reform bill, he could have it by christmas no problem. Then he would have actually gotten a real and effective cost saving reform done. This would not only boost his approval and the people's trust in him on health care, it would also boost congress' approval.

The boost in approval would lead to him being able to pass insurance reform next, another item of health care that he can get bi-partisan support for.



But I'm just a racist since I dont like the massive overhaul method

Do you really think that Obama, who has gone out of his way to avoid tort reform, and Sebelius who was the chief lobbyist for a trial lawyer association will enact tort reform?

See thats the beauty of my idea, if he does this he will show the right that he is indeed truly interested in real reforms and not all the shenanigans we have seen in HR3200.

.