This is not free market vs. socialism, this is today's robber barons

[Bfgrn]

This is not free market vs. socialism, this is today's robber barons; unadulterated greed to the detriment of hard working families...this is exactly why government regulations and anti trust laws were necessary...

No one is against companies that are profitable, but the current health care system is a scam that makes insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies excessively rich while making too many hard working citizens uninsured, under insured, uncovered, bankrupt or dead...

The Health Care Lobby: Watch What They Do

excerpts:
The health care lobby has employed one basic theme in trying to stop health care: scare the hell out of Americans by decrying a "government takeover" of health care. But in the age of Obama, they want to be seen as part of the solution, not simply part of the problem.

So last week, the leading health care trade associations - -the lobbies for insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, plus a union -- stood with the president to pledge dramatically to "do our part" to reduce the rate of soaring health care costs by 1.5% a year over the next decade, a promise that if fulfilled would save some $2 trillion from the cost of care. Not surprisingly, the president - eager to show that his efforts to give everyone a seat at the table were bearing fruit - was happy to hail that promise.

The lobbies got national coverage that their clients were for reform and would make a real contribution to it. Outside the photo op, however, the reality was very different. A new report released today by Health Care for America Now, a leading citizens' coalition pushing for comprehensive health care reform, put the industry claims in sharp relief.

The HCAN report shows that after 400 mergers involving health insurers over the last 13 years, concentration has gone up in local markets across the country. The single largest provider of small group coverage (for small businesses, for example) controlled a median market share of 47% in 2008. The AMA says 94% of insurance markets in the US are highly concentrated.

The result, of course, is soaring prices - with premiums up, on average, more than 87% over the past six years. Profits at 10 of the country's largest publicly traded health insurance companies in 2007 rose from $2.4 to 12.9 billion (428%) from 2000 to 2007. The CEOs of these companies in 2007 alone collected an average compensation of $11.9 million each. Nice work if you can get it.

Insurers use their position to pass rising costs onto the insured. And, not surprisingly, Medicare does better. A recent study by University of California professor Jacob Hacker for the Institute for America's Future (which I co-direct) shows that from 1997 to 2006, private health insurance spending per enrollee grew at an annual rate of 7.3% while that of Medicare was at 4.6%, or more than one-third less.

The concentration of insurance markets and the lack of private competition provide compelling reasons for the Congress to establish a public plan like Medicare as an option for those seeking insurance. Give consumers a real choice. The public plan would provide both a benchmark for private plans and much needed competition in what are now perversely concentrated markets.
http://scdfa.org/robert-l-borosage-health-care-lobby-watch-what-they-do

 

[sealybobo]

This is not free market vs. socialism, this is today's robber barons; unadulterated greed to the detriment of hard working families...this is exactly why government regulations and anti trust laws were necessary...

No one is against companies that are profitable, but the current health care system is a scam that makes insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies excessively rich while making too many hard working citizens uninsured, under insured, uncovered, bankrupt or dead...

The Health Care Lobby: Watch What They Do

excerpts:
The health care lobby has employed one basic theme in trying to stop health care: scare the hell out of Americans by decrying a "government takeover" of health care. But in the age of Obama, they want to be seen as part of the solution, not simply part of the problem.

So last week, the leading health care trade associations - -the lobbies for insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, plus a union -- stood with the president to pledge dramatically to "do our part" to reduce the rate of soaring health care costs by 1.5% a year over the next decade, a promise that if fulfilled would save some $2 trillion from the cost of care. Not surprisingly, the president - eager to show that his efforts to give everyone a seat at the table were bearing fruit - was happy to hail that promise.

The lobbies got national coverage that their clients were for reform and would make a real contribution to it. Outside the photo op, however, the reality was very different. A new report released today by Health Care for America Now, a leading citizens' coalition pushing for comprehensive health care reform, put the industry claims in sharp relief.

The HCAN report shows that after 400 mergers involving health insurers over the last 13 years, concentration has gone up in local markets across the country. The single largest provider of small group coverage (for small businesses, for example) controlled a median market share of 47% in 2008. The AMA says 94% of insurance markets in the US are highly concentrated.

The result, of course, is soaring prices - with premiums up, on average, more than 87% over the past six years. Profits at 10 of the country's largest publicly traded health insurance companies in 2007 rose from $2.4 to 12.9 billion (428%) from 2000 to 2007. The CEOs of these companies in 2007 alone collected an average compensation of $11.9 million each. Nice work if you can get it.

Insurers use their position to pass rising costs onto the insured. And, not surprisingly, Medicare does better. A recent study by University of California professor Jacob Hacker for the Institute for America's Future (which I co-direct) shows that from 1997 to 2006, private health insurance spending per enrollee grew at an annual rate of 7.3% while that of Medicare was at 4.6%, or more than one-third less.

The concentration of insurance markets and the lack of private competition provide compelling reasons for the Congress to establish a public plan like Medicare as an option for those seeking insurance. Give consumers a real choice. The public plan would provide both a benchmark for private plans and much needed competition in what are now perversely concentrated markets.
http://scdfa.org/robert-l-borosage-health-care-lobby-watch-what-they-do

Expect to be called a conspiracy theorist.

Expect to be asked, "why do you hate the rich"?

And even if you could prove your theory 100% without a shadow of a doubt, expect the right wingers on this board to dismiss the facts and just call you a socialist/communist.

I even showed them this, which 100% vindicates everything I have said:

Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006
Share of Income Going to Corporate Profits at Record High

Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

And they don't care. No matter how much proof you provide, they just don't care.

But I do. Glad to see you get it.

 

[Annie]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

Carrie Budoff Brown, Chris Frates
Fri May 15, 1:12 am ET
The president of the American Hospital Association said Thursday that a deal with the White House to cut the growth in health care spending has been “spun way away from the original intent.”

President Barack Obama described the agreement this week with six major health care organizations as a “watershed event,” hailing what the White House said was their promise to reduce spending by 1.5 percentage points annually for a decade, which he said could save as much as $2 trillion over that span.

But in a conference call Thursday, President Richard Umbdenstock told 230 member organizations that the agreement had been misrepresented. The groups, he said, had agreed to gradually ramp up to the 1.5 percentage-point target over 10 years – not to reduce spending by that much in each of the 10 years, .

“There has been a tremendous amount of confusion and frankly a lot of political spin,” Umbdenstock said on the call. “And I want to assure you that the American Hospital Association is at the table and a responsible part of this, but that we’ve been very clear on what we have committed to.”...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

May 15, 2009
Health Care Leaders Say Obama Overstated Their Promise to Control Costs

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — Hospitals and insurance companies said Thursday that President Obama had substantially overstated their promise earlier this week to reduce the growth of health spending.

Mr. Obama invited health industry leaders to the White House on Monday to trumpet their cost-control commitments. But three days later, confusion swirled in Washington as the companies’ trade associations raced to tamp down angst among members around the country.

After meeting with six major health care organizations, Mr. Obama hailed their cost-cutting promise as historic.

“These groups are voluntarily coming together to make an unprecedented commitment,” Mr. Obama said. “Over the next 10 years, from 2010 to 2019, they are pledging to cut the rate of growth of national health care spending by 1.5 percentage points each year — an amount that’s equal to over $2 trillion.”

Health care leaders who attended the meeting have a different interpretation. They say they agreed to slow health spending in a more gradual way and did not pledge specific year-by-year cuts.

“There’s been a lot of misunderstanding that has caused a lot of consternation among our members,” said Richard J. Umbdenstock, the president of the American Hospital Association. “I’ve spent the better part of the last three days trying to deal with it.”

Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, said “the president misspoke” on Monday and again on Wednesday when he described the industry’s commitment in similar terms. After providing that account, Ms. DeParle called back about an hour later on Thursday and said: “I don’t think the president misspoke. His remarks correctly and accurately described the industry’s commitment.”

The Washington office of the American Hospital Association sent a bulletin to its state and local affiliates to “clarify several points” about the White House meeting.

In the bulletin, Richard J. Pollack, the executive vice president of the hospital association, said: “The A.H.A. did not commit to support the ‘Obama health plan’ or budget. No such reform plan exists at this time.”

Moreover, Mr. Pollack wrote, “The groups did not support reducing the rate of health spending by 1.5 percentage points annually.”

He and other health care executives said they had agreed to squeeze health spending so the annual rate of growth would eventually be 1.5 percentage points lower....

 

[sealybobo]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

Carrie Budoff Brown, Chris Frates
Fri May 15, 1:12 am ET
The president of the American Hospital Association said Thursday that a deal with the White House to cut the growth in health care spending has been “spun way away from the original intent.”

President Barack Obama described the agreement this week with six major health care organizations as a “watershed event,” hailing what the White House said was their promise to reduce spending by 1.5 percentage points annually for a decade, which he said could save as much as $2 trillion over that span.

But in a conference call Thursday, President Richard Umbdenstock told 230 member organizations that the agreement had been misrepresented. The groups, he said, had agreed to gradually ramp up to the 1.5 percentage-point target over 10 years – not to reduce spending by that much in each of the 10 years, .

“There has been a tremendous amount of confusion and frankly a lot of political spin,” Umbdenstock said on the call. “And I want to assure you that the American Hospital Association is at the table and a responsible part of this, but that we’ve been very clear on what we have committed to.”...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

May 15, 2009
Health Care Leaders Say Obama Overstated Their Promise to Control Costs

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — Hospitals and insurance companies said Thursday that President Obama had substantially overstated their promise earlier this week to reduce the growth of health spending.

Mr. Obama invited health industry leaders to the White House on Monday to trumpet their cost-control commitments. But three days later, confusion swirled in Washington as the companies’ trade associations raced to tamp down angst among members around the country.

After meeting with six major health care organizations, Mr. Obama hailed their cost-cutting promise as historic.

“These groups are voluntarily coming together to make an unprecedented commitment,” Mr. Obama said. “Over the next 10 years, from 2010 to 2019, they are pledging to cut the rate of growth of national health care spending by 1.5 percentage points each year — an amount that’s equal to over $2 trillion.”

Health care leaders who attended the meeting have a different interpretation. They say they agreed to slow health spending in a more gradual way and did not pledge specific year-by-year cuts.

“There’s been a lot of misunderstanding that has caused a lot of consternation among our members,” said Richard J. Umbdenstock, the president of the American Hospital Association. “I’ve spent the better part of the last three days trying to deal with it.”

Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, said “the president misspoke” on Monday and again on Wednesday when he described the industry’s commitment in similar terms. After providing that account, Ms. DeParle called back about an hour later on Thursday and said: “I don’t think the president misspoke. His remarks correctly and accurately described the industry’s commitment.”

The Washington office of the American Hospital Association sent a bulletin to its state and local affiliates to “clarify several points” about the White House meeting.

In the bulletin, Richard J. Pollack, the executive vice president of the hospital association, said: “The A.H.A. did not commit to support the ‘Obama health plan’ or budget. No such reform plan exists at this time.”

Moreover, Mr. Pollack wrote, “The groups did not support reducing the rate of health spending by 1.5 percentage points annually.”

He and other health care executives said they had agreed to squeeze health spending so the annual rate of growth would eventually be 1.5 percentage points lower....

Quit siding with and swallowing mis information from known liars. They promised Carter they would cut their costs, and they didn't. They promised Clinton, and they didn't. So here they are again making promises they don't intend to keep.

And when they break their promises, you'll blame Obama. Try blaming the senators who will block any healthcare reform because the healthcare industry has paid them to work for them. Not for you and me, but for them. But being a corporate defender who doesn't care about the citizens of this country as much as you do the corporations, I'm sure you are cool with that.

Man, I don't know why he wanted this job. I wouldn't want to be president, although if I were, I would give single payer a seat at the table.

Do you even like your healthcare?

 

[Bfgrn]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

Carrie Budoff Brown, Chris Frates
Fri May 15, 1:12 am ET
The president of the American Hospital Association said Thursday that a deal with the White House to cut the growth in health care spending has been “spun way away from the original intent.”

President Barack Obama described the agreement this week with six major health care organizations as a “watershed event,” hailing what the White House said was their promise to reduce spending by 1.5 percentage points annually for a decade, which he said could save as much as $2 trillion over that span.

But in a conference call Thursday, President Richard Umbdenstock told 230 member organizations that the agreement had been misrepresented. The groups, he said, had agreed to gradually ramp up to the 1.5 percentage-point target over 10 years – not to reduce spending by that much in each of the 10 years, .

“There has been a tremendous amount of confusion and frankly a lot of political spin,” Umbdenstock said on the call. “And I want to assure you that the American Hospital Association is at the table and a responsible part of this, but that we’ve been very clear on what we have committed to.”...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

May 15, 2009
Health Care Leaders Say Obama Overstated Their Promise to Control Costs

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — Hospitals and insurance companies said Thursday that President Obama had substantially overstated their promise earlier this week to reduce the growth of health spending.

Mr. Obama invited health industry leaders to the White House on Monday to trumpet their cost-control commitments. But three days later, confusion swirled in Washington as the companies’ trade associations raced to tamp down angst among members around the country.

After meeting with six major health care organizations, Mr. Obama hailed their cost-cutting promise as historic.

“These groups are voluntarily coming together to make an unprecedented commitment,” Mr. Obama said. “Over the next 10 years, from 2010 to 2019, they are pledging to cut the rate of growth of national health care spending by 1.5 percentage points each year — an amount that’s equal to over $2 trillion.”

Health care leaders who attended the meeting have a different interpretation. They say they agreed to slow health spending in a more gradual way and did not pledge specific year-by-year cuts.

“There’s been a lot of misunderstanding that has caused a lot of consternation among our members,” said Richard J. Umbdenstock, the president of the American Hospital Association. “I’ve spent the better part of the last three days trying to deal with it.”

Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, said “the president misspoke” on Monday and again on Wednesday when he described the industry’s commitment in similar terms. After providing that account, Ms. DeParle called back about an hour later on Thursday and said: “I don’t think the president misspoke. His remarks correctly and accurately described the industry’s commitment.”

The Washington office of the American Hospital Association sent a bulletin to its state and local affiliates to “clarify several points” about the White House meeting.

In the bulletin, Richard J. Pollack, the executive vice president of the hospital association, said: “The A.H.A. did not commit to support the ‘Obama health plan’ or budget. No such reform plan exists at this time.”

Moreover, Mr. Pollack wrote, “The groups did not support reducing the rate of health spending by 1.5 percentage points annually.”

He and other health care executives said they had agreed to squeeze health spending so the annual rate of growth would eventually be 1.5 percentage points lower....

Health care executive agreed to "squeeze" health spending? HOW, deny coverage for more illnesses and create more "preexisting" conditions?

Hey Annie, why doesn't the 400 mergers, the 428% increase in insurance company profits and self indulgent CEO's bother you? Are you THAT in the tank for the elite and corporations?

 

[Annie]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal

Carrie Budoff Brown, Chris Frates
Fri May 15, 1:12 am ET
The president of the American Hospital Association said Thursday that a deal with the White House to cut the growth in health care spending has been “spun way away from the original intent.”

President Barack Obama described the agreement this week with six major health care organizations as a “watershed event,” hailing what the White House said was their promise to reduce spending by 1.5 percentage points annually for a decade, which he said could save as much as $2 trillion over that span.

But in a conference call Thursday, President Richard Umbdenstock told 230 member organizations that the agreement had been misrepresented. The groups, he said, had agreed to gradually ramp up to the 1.5 percentage-point target over 10 years – not to reduce spending by that much in each of the 10 years, .

“There has been a tremendous amount of confusion and frankly a lot of political spin,” Umbdenstock said on the call. “And I want to assure you that the American Hospital Association is at the table and a responsible part of this, but that we’ve been very clear on what we have committed to.”...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

May 15, 2009
Health Care Leaders Say Obama Overstated Their Promise to Control Costs

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — Hospitals and insurance companies said Thursday that President Obama had substantially overstated their promise earlier this week to reduce the growth of health spending.

Mr. Obama invited health industry leaders to the White House on Monday to trumpet their cost-control commitments. But three days later, confusion swirled in Washington as the companies’ trade associations raced to tamp down angst among members around the country.

After meeting with six major health care organizations, Mr. Obama hailed their cost-cutting promise as historic.

“These groups are voluntarily coming together to make an unprecedented commitment,” Mr. Obama said. “Over the next 10 years, from 2010 to 2019, they are pledging to cut the rate of growth of national health care spending by 1.5 percentage points each year — an amount that’s equal to over $2 trillion.”

Health care leaders who attended the meeting have a different interpretation. They say they agreed to slow health spending in a more gradual way and did not pledge specific year-by-year cuts.

“There’s been a lot of misunderstanding that has caused a lot of consternation among our members,” said Richard J. Umbdenstock, the president of the American Hospital Association. “I’ve spent the better part of the last three days trying to deal with it.”

Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, said “the president misspoke” on Monday and again on Wednesday when he described the industry’s commitment in similar terms. After providing that account, Ms. DeParle called back about an hour later on Thursday and said: “I don’t think the president misspoke. His remarks correctly and accurately described the industry’s commitment.”

The Washington office of the American Hospital Association sent a bulletin to its state and local affiliates to “clarify several points” about the White House meeting.

In the bulletin, Richard J. Pollack, the executive vice president of the hospital association, said: “The A.H.A. did not commit to support the ‘Obama health plan’ or budget. No such reform plan exists at this time.”

Moreover, Mr. Pollack wrote, “The groups did not support reducing the rate of health spending by 1.5 percentage points annually.”

He and other health care executives said they had agreed to squeeze health spending so the annual rate of growth would eventually be 1.5 percentage points lower....

Health care executive agreed to "squeeze" health spending? HOW, deny coverage for more illnesses and create more "preexisting" conditions?

Hey Annie, why doesn't the 400 mergers, the 428% increase in insurance company profits and self indulgent CEO's bother you? Are you THAT in the tank for the elite and corporations?

Doesn't it bother you that you just buy into anything that's said by the administration?

 

[Bfgrn]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

Health care executive agreed to "squeeze" health spending? HOW, deny coverage for more illnesses and create more "preexisting" conditions?

Hey Annie, why doesn't the 400 mergers, the 428% increase in insurance company profits and self indulgent CEO's bother you? Are you THAT in the tank for the elite and corporations?

Doesn't it bother you that you just buy into anything that's said by the administration?

I believed we needed health care reformed BEFORE this administration... are you always so partisan?

 

[sealybobo]

It's not the right that is misrepresenting 'facts' it's the administration:

AHA head: W.H. misstated deal




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/health/policy/15health.html?_r=1

Health care executive agreed to "squeeze" health spending? HOW, deny coverage for more illnesses and create more "preexisting" conditions?

Hey Annie, why doesn't the 400 mergers, the 428% increase in insurance company profits and self indulgent CEO's bother you? Are you THAT in the tank for the elite and corporations?

Doesn't it bother you that you just buy into anything that's said by the administration?

Do you know what I think about assholes like you? I think, "how do they hear all the horror stories about healthcare and not care"?

Fascinating.

But its greed. I work with people like you. Nice people, just ignorant and greedy. My buddy says, "I went to college and EARNED my healthcare.

There is so much that is wrong with that statement, I don't even know where to begin.

First off, his healthcare sucks for what he's paying. Secondly, he didn't EARN the right to go to highschool. We as a society a long time ago decided that education was important, so we gave it to everyone. Why isn't healthcare more important?

Last thing. Fox was crying that they might ration healthcare. Ration? Is that anything like when an insurance company bean counter looks for ways to deny their customers coverage?

Stop swallowing the rights bullshit. Are you a corporation? Are you filthy rich? Then just stop it. You are voting outside your own tax bracket.

 

[editec]

This is not free market vs. socialism, this is today's robber barons; unadulterated greed to the detriment of hard working families...this is exactly why government regulations and anti trust laws were necessary...

No one is against companies that are profitable, but the current health care system is a scam that makes insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies excessively rich while making too many hard working citizens uninsured, under insured, uncovered, bankrupt or dead...

The Health Care Lobby: Watch What They Do

excerpts:
The health care lobby has employed one basic theme in trying to stop health care: scare the hell out of Americans by decrying a "government takeover" of health care. But in the age of Obama, they want to be seen as part of the solution, not simply part of the problem.

So last week, the leading health care trade associations - -the lobbies for insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, plus a union -- stood with the president to pledge dramatically to "do our part" to reduce the rate of soaring health care costs by 1.5% a year over the next decade, a promise that if fulfilled would save some $2 trillion from the cost of care. Not surprisingly, the president - eager to show that his efforts to give everyone a seat at the table were bearing fruit - was happy to hail that promise.

The lobbies got national coverage that their clients were for reform and would make a real contribution to it. Outside the photo op, however, the reality was very different. A new report released today by Health Care for America Now, a leading citizens' coalition pushing for comprehensive health care reform, put the industry claims in sharp relief.

The HCAN report shows that after 400 mergers involving health insurers over the last 13 years, concentration has gone up in local markets across the country. The single largest provider of small group coverage (for small businesses, for example) controlled a median market share of 47% in 2008. The AMA says 94% of insurance markets in the US are highly concentrated.

The result, of course, is soaring prices - with premiums up, on average, more than 87% over the past six years. Profits at 10 of the country's largest publicly traded health insurance companies in 2007 rose from $2.4 to 12.9 billion (428%) from 2000 to 2007. The CEOs of these companies in 2007 alone collected an average compensation of $11.9 million each. Nice work if you can get it.

Insurers use their position to pass rising costs onto the insured. And, not surprisingly, Medicare does better. A recent study by University of California professor Jacob Hacker for the Institute for America's Future (which I co-direct) shows that from 1997 to 2006, private health insurance spending per enrollee grew at an annual rate of 7.3% while that of Medicare was at 4.6%, or more than one-third less.

The concentration of insurance markets and the lack of private competition provide compelling reasons for the Congress to establish a public plan like Medicare as an option for those seeking insurance. Give consumers a real choice. The public plan would provide both a benchmark for private plans and much needed competition in what are now perversely concentrated markets.
http://scdfa.org/robert-l-borosage-health-care-lobby-watch-what-they-do

Expect to be called a conspiracy theorist.

Yes, expect that for sure

Expect to be asked, "why do you hate the rich"?

Yes, that too. Class envy will be the charge.

And even if you could prove your theory 100% without a shadow of a doubt, expect the right wingers on this board to dismiss the facts and just call you a socialist/communist.

Right again

I even showed them this, which 100% vindicates everything I have said:

Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006
Share of Income Going to Corporate Profits at Record High


Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The apologists for this system will explain that everybody but the rich are simply losers.

And they don't care. No matter how much proof you provide, they just don't care.

Oh they care, Sealy, believe me, they care.

That's why the government has lord only knows how many armed police forces... to keep the people in check.

But I do. Glad to see you get it.

You and hundreds of millions of us.

But don't even try to galvanize those people into action because if you do, you will be declared a potential terrorist or a potential lone wolf terrorist or something like that.

You have all the freedom of speech you can stomach but only so long as your freedom of speech doesn't actually work effectively.

Become a real threat to the establishment, and believe me, you will not go unpunished in one way or the other.

Typically you're simply be marginalized, but in extreme cases you'll be nuetralized in less benign ways.

 

[del]

does this mean that all those workers that caterpillar called back after the stimulus bill passed will have to pay more for health care?

what?

they didn't get called back?

but obama said the president of caterpillar told him he'd be calling back workers as soon as the bill was passed!

what's that? the president of cat didn't say that?

hmmm.... looks like a pattern to me.

CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees - ABC News

 

[sealybobo]

This is not free market vs. socialism, this is today's robber barons; unadulterated greed to the detriment of hard working families...this is exactly why government regulations and anti trust laws were necessary...

No one is against companies that are profitable, but the current health care system is a scam that makes insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies excessively rich while making too many hard working citizens uninsured, under insured, uncovered, bankrupt or dead...

The Health Care Lobby: Watch What They Do

excerpts:
The health care lobby has employed one basic theme in trying to stop health care: scare the hell out of Americans by decrying a "government takeover" of health care. But in the age of Obama, they want to be seen as part of the solution, not simply part of the problem.

So last week, the leading health care trade associations - -the lobbies for insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, plus a union -- stood with the president to pledge dramatically to "do our part" to reduce the rate of soaring health care costs by 1.5% a year over the next decade, a promise that if fulfilled would save some $2 trillion from the cost of care. Not surprisingly, the president - eager to show that his efforts to give everyone a seat at the table were bearing fruit - was happy to hail that promise.

The lobbies got national coverage that their clients were for reform and would make a real contribution to it. Outside the photo op, however, the reality was very different. A new report released today by Health Care for America Now, a leading citizens' coalition pushing for comprehensive health care reform, put the industry claims in sharp relief.

The HCAN report shows that after 400 mergers involving health insurers over the last 13 years, concentration has gone up in local markets across the country. The single largest provider of small group coverage (for small businesses, for example) controlled a median market share of 47% in 2008. The AMA says 94% of insurance markets in the US are highly concentrated.

The result, of course, is soaring prices - with premiums up, on average, more than 87% over the past six years. Profits at 10 of the country's largest publicly traded health insurance companies in 2007 rose from $2.4 to 12.9 billion (428%) from 2000 to 2007. The CEOs of these companies in 2007 alone collected an average compensation of $11.9 million each. Nice work if you can get it.

Insurers use their position to pass rising costs onto the insured. And, not surprisingly, Medicare does better. A recent study by University of California professor Jacob Hacker for the Institute for America's Future (which I co-direct) shows that from 1997 to 2006, private health insurance spending per enrollee grew at an annual rate of 7.3% while that of Medicare was at 4.6%, or more than one-third less.

The concentration of insurance markets and the lack of private competition provide compelling reasons for the Congress to establish a public plan like Medicare as an option for those seeking insurance. Give consumers a real choice. The public plan would provide both a benchmark for private plans and much needed competition in what are now perversely concentrated markets.
http://scdfa.org/robert-l-borosage-health-care-lobby-watch-what-they-do

Yes, expect that for sure



Yes, that too. Class envy will be the charge.



Right again



The apologists for this system will explain that everybody but the rich are simply losers.



Oh they care, Sealy, believe me, they care.

That's why the government has lord only knows how many armed police forces... to keep the people in check.

But I do. Glad to see you get it.

You and hundreds of millions of us.

But don't even try to galvanize those people into action because if you do, you will be declared a potential terrorist or a potential lone wolf terrorist or something like that.

You have all the freedom of speech you can stomach but only so long as your freedom of speech doesn't actually work effectively.

Become a real threat to the establishment, and believe me, you will not go unpunished in one way or the other.

Typically you're simply be marginalized, but in extreme cases you'll be nuetralized in less benign ways.

'The apologists for this system will explain that everybody but the rich are simply losers. "

Last night I was on here and a couple of right wingers were calling me exactly that.

They think I'm complaining for myself. In some ways I am, but it isn't like I lost my job or was denied healthcare because of a previous condition. It isn't like my wages were cut so low that I can't save. And my home is still worth more than I paid for it.

So all of these things have not hurt me any more than they have hurt the right wingers that I argue with. They say I'm a whiner. My question is, "why aren't they whining too"?

I do think healthcare reform will benefit me.

Republicans think For Profit Corporations should be in charge of deciding if I should get that $100K medical procedure

Republicans blamed Freddy & Fanny for the home values going down. I don't defend Freddy & Fanny because I got a loan from them or because I am poor. I am not.

Republicans attack unions because not a lot of us are in unions. Liberals understand that Republicans aren't just attacking unions, but all labor. When they break the unions, they'll start saying that northerners/yankees make too much and are lazy.

I think thats a big difference between liberals and Republicans. Liberals think about society as a whole and Republicans only think about themselves.

But Republican policies have hurt me. My 401K, home value, insurance premiums, my share of the national debt, lowered wages.

And you know what amazes me about Republicans? As bad as things are, they are still defending the GOP. No way I would still be a Democrat if the Dems did all this to the country. NO WAY!

I know you don't believe that, but NO WAY!!!

PS. I try to not use the word Conservative when I talk about the GOP. I don't agree with conservatives all the time, but they at least make a lot of sense on a lot of issues.

I think Conservatives need to distance themselves from the Republican party. That party is evil and dead.

They don't mix well. The Republicans bullshit the conservatives and end up making the conservatives look really bad.

 

[sealybobo]

does this mean that all those workers that caterpillar called back after the stimulus bill passed will have to pay more for health care?

what?

they didn't get called back?

but obama said the president of caterpillar told him he'd be calling back workers as soon as the bill was passed!

what's that? the president of cat didn't say that?

hmmm.... looks like a pattern to me.

CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees - ABC News

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

 

[del]

does this mean that all those workers that caterpillar called back after the stimulus bill passed will have to pay more for health care?

what?

they didn't get called back?

but obama said the president of caterpillar told him he'd be calling back workers as soon as the bill was passed!

what's that? the president of cat didn't say that?

hmmm.... looks like a pattern to me.

CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees - ABC News

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

 

[sealybobo]

does this mean that all those workers that caterpillar called back after the stimulus bill passed will have to pay more for health care?

what?

they didn't get called back?

but obama said the president of caterpillar told him he'd be calling back workers as soon as the bill was passed!

what's that? the president of cat didn't say that?

hmmm.... looks like a pattern to me.

CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees - ABC News

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

Says the guy who has nothing to say.

What happened to your little whitty comments?

 

[del]

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

Says the guy who has nothing to say.

What happened to your little whitty comments?

what the fuck is it to you nutbar?

when i want lip from you, i'll scrape it off obama's zipper.

 

[Indiana Oracle]

The dysfunctional state of health insurance in this country has nothing to do with class warfare, the rich and all of that blather. It needs to be overhauled, tort opportunities restructured, free riding eliminated, and all sorts of things that cry out for reform.

Frankly, I don't care how it is done. Federalizing/nationalizing the system will fix little and add to its already high inefficiency. Anyone on the board who wants to characterize this position as right wing or conservative, recommend they take a deep breath and start thinking for themselves. This is a very complex problem and there is no simple pill-like solution for it that will do no harm.

 

[Bfgrn]

does this mean that all those workers that caterpillar called back after the stimulus bill passed will have to pay more for health care?

what?

they didn't get called back?

but obama said the president of caterpillar told him he'd be calling back workers as soon as the bill was passed!

what's that? the president of cat didn't say that?

hmmm.... looks like a pattern to me.

CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees - ABC News

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

A serial liar? Did you see that in any other presidents?

 

[editec]

And you know what amazes me about Republicans? As bad as things are, they are still defending the GOP. No way I would still be a Democrat if the Dems did all this to the country. NO WAY!

The Dems are marginally better for the working classes than the Republicans.

VERY marginally better.

When it comes to the issue of HC, I am inclined to think the Dems are serious about doing something to fix things.

But what they NEED to do and what they're WILLING to do are miles apart.

Ergo they will, I suspect, do something that feels good and looks good but in the long run, doesn't really solve the problem.

Why?

Because in order to solve the problem they would have to seriously attack the HC establishment and they cannot do that because they are beholden to the HC establishment nearly as much as their fellow Rs are.

Doubt me?

Then go check and see how much money various HC establishments have given to our DEMOCRATIC pols over the years.

 

[del]

You are nuttier than a shit house rat.

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

A serial liar? Did you see that in any other presidents?

i saw it in all of them that i can remember.
do you have a point?

 

[Bfgrn]

whatever you say, bozo.
i may be nuts, but i know a serial liar when i see one.

A serial liar? Did you see that in any other presidents?

i saw it in all of them that i can remember.
do you have a point?

Yea, the previous president's lies led to death and destruction. What weight do you place on the consequences of presidential lies?