The Costs of Obamacare

Once more Estrich proves herself no more than a dissembler and deceiver on behalf of the lying liar in chief and the liars of the Democratic party.
Remember the oft repeated lie by Barry the boy liar to the low info voters that premiums will drop by about $2500 per annum per family or that obamacare will add no more than 900 billion over 10 yrs or that if you have insurance or like your doctor or policy nothing will change. Lies lies and damned lies.
Now more lies from Estrich.
Day by day the truth comes out.
I for one will watch with glee as the idiots find out just how much it is going to cost them, how indeed there is no free lunch, how they will see their jobs go or hours drastically cut. Screw them all! LOL!

This Op-Ed provides a tidy rationalization for the on-going mess that is Obama Care (OC). Ms Estrich provides a list of anecdotes concerning the benefits of OC. However, she strikes closer to the true heart of the OC debate when she states:

"Of course we should be cost-conscious. Of course changes will have to be made. There will be problems...But the bottom line, for me anyway, is this: There is no such thing as a free lunch..."

Yes, in the end we will all be paying more for OC. Right now, we have absolutely no idea of what all the costs will be and whether the overall benefits obtained will be worth the cost. Note well, these costs aren't just what we will pay for going to the doctor. Consider the people who have had their hours (i.e., Salaries) cut to make them non-covered, part time employees. Consider the lost economic activity from companies that can't afford to expand from 49 to 50 employees because it would trigger OC coverage. These costs are just as real, but are not nearly as easy to estimate or to measure.

Far from being just a simple algebraic evaluation, the 'success' of CO will ultimately be based on the values of the person doing the evaluation. Those who value physical health well above economic well being will declare it a success no matter how bad the cost to benefit ratio. The opposite is likely to be true for those who place economic well being above access to health care. Those of us trying to balance both concerns are likely to be ambivalent and confused about OC and it's effects for years to come.

In the end, OC is a grand experiment in substituting the competition for scarce health care resource by individuals via a market mechanism with the rationing of those same scarce resources by the government in a supposedly ‘rational' (but ultimately political) fashion. The government will be taking care of us. One only has to look at the government's success in taking care of the Native American population to be, like me, less than sanguine about the ultimate outcome.

This article is terrible and devoid of reality. Estrich tries to play the moral superiority card here, but there is nothing moral about bending peoples will to the will of beaurucrats. And lets not forget about the morality of death panels, which absolutly do exist in the massive 2,700+ page bill. Estrich also tries to play off subsidies as reducing the cost to families without pointing out that the money for the subsides comes from taxpayers in the first place. Its like taking $1000 dollars from a family, wasting $600, giving them back $400 in health care subsidies, then acting like you've just saved their life. This bill and this author are both pathetic.

Susan loves the fact that we are well on our way to the destruction of medical insurance and the introduction of socialized medicine which really isn't medicine at all. It's all about the elitist telling us what, when, where and IF if can get health care! The cost is insignificant.

"If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan." Barack The Won.
Recently we've n\been reading about companies reducing employee hours to eliminate having to pay for the ever-increasing costs of heath insurance plans due to obamacare. How's that for an unintended consequence. Oops.

Where are the low info imbeciles and libtards like Morgan, Lipka, et al ??? LOL !

To all libtards and Obama drones out there.

Remember these words from the lying liar in chief aka barry the boy liar that you jackasses put into office " I will not sign the Affordable Healthcare Bill if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period."
Well the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has estimated that " Obama the liar ocare" will add $6.2 trillion to the long term federal deficit. Barry the boy liar knew this, the media knew this and anyone with a brain knew it would be so. Still the hand out seeking mooching recipient class voted the lying POS into office. They were sold the proverbial "pig in a poke
"
Now Estrich actually tries to put lipstick on that pig.

Estrich tries to cover the lies and deception with no free lunch and your gonna love all the new services and subsidies will help.

But " Obama the liar ocare' was not sold that way. It was sold on the premises that more people would get coverage AND that premiums would go down AND that the medical cost curve would bend down AND if you liked your coverage you could keep it AND your doctor AND there would be no addition to the deficit. ALL LIES. ALL LIES CALCULATED TO FOOL THE LOW INFO DUPES. AND IT DID. GOD HELP ME !

Now especially for you younger Obama besotted tools; not everyone will qualify for subsidies. You, the young and healthy will be required to pay much more for coverage that you do not need nor want and it is you that will be asked to pay for the coverage for others and for the subsidies for others. How does that feel? Bit like someone stuck their hand in your wallet? Well welcome to the modus operandi of the Democratic party. I have never met a Dem yet that was not a liar and did not have its hand in someone else's wallet.

And there's more good news for you tools. Your jobs are going to go, employers will keep workforces below the hellish 50, working hours are going to be cut in order to re classify employees as part time, rationing of healthcare is a certainty, doctors are leaving the profession in droves and will continue to do so.

As I have previously said, it is all just relative for me now, I can sit back a watch, with more than just a little amusement as you tools suffer with increased financial burdens, no mechanisms for subsidies in place, and no jobs or decreased salaries because of reduced hours. You tools brought this upon yourselves. Now suck it up! LOL!

In recent post, someone wrote:

"Where are the low info imbeciles and libtards like..., et al ??? LOL !"
and
"To all libtards and Obama drones out there."
and
"...you jackasses.."
and
"...you tools...", etc...

This is a public forum. Please act accordingly. It just isn't that hard to act in a civil manner.

Acting like a churl makes other Conservative look bad. Leave the name calling to the left.

Re: Old Navy

I know that you have served and it is with due respect to that service that I reply.

It was not "someone" who commented as you describe, it was me, Joseph Wright.

If you feel need to admonish me why not then call me out by name? Would it be too politically incorrect? Would it be too direct? What would it be?

If it were not a public forum, my addressing comments to all the Libtards and Obamadrones" out there would be a little pointless would it not? But that notwithstanding my thanks for pointing out the obvious. I shall try to remember the nature of the forum in future.

And Old Navy, who made you the free speech monitor? I presume that you, having sworn to defend the Constitution, as I have also done, have indeed heard of the First Amendment?

As for civility? I deliberately choose not to be civil to libtards, Democrats and their ilk. I have had enough of civility towards those that would enslave me and mine. I have had enough of civility to the domestic enemies of the Constitution.

You, on the other hand may not have had enough, that is for you to decide. Feel free to debate, to appease, to pander or to coddle all you like, that is your right.

Continue to be as civil as you choose to those that hate you and what you seem to believe and what you seem to stand for, that is also your right

BUT do not presume to instruct me as to how I should conduct myself or how I should speak to or describe those that actively seek our financial and moral downfall and the end of our liberty.

Obamacare was intended to be and remains an instrument designed to destroy our liberty and its proponents are and remain tools for that destruction.

It is so called civility, political correctness, appeasement and pandering to those that would destroy this Republic that has gotten us where we are now, to wit, on the brink of ruin. I will have no part of it.

In his long anti-apologia, JW wrote:
"It was not "someone" who commented as you describe, it was me, Joseph Wright."

Yes, I was aware of that. I was using a method of correcting bad behavior I have successfully used in the past on 5 year-old's. It allows them a face saving mechanism for correcting their behavior. Apparently it didn't work in this case.

JW also wrote:
"If it were not a public forum, my addressing comments to all the Libtards and Obamadrones" out there would be a little pointless would it not?"

No, what you are doing is completely pointless. I'm on this forum to exchange ideas and to try to convince a few people my ideas are correct. I generally try to do this by putting forth a coherent, logical argument. (Whether I succeed, I'll leave up to the readers). However, those arguments will do no good if no one reads them. Hence I act civilly to the blog author and her followers. (i.e., You catch more flies with honey...).

You on the other hand seem to be here to call names and bully people. This won't result in anyone reading your arguments for their intellectual content. I read your comments for completeness only. I'm sure the rest of the crowd primarily reads you out of interest to see what string of insults you've strung together today. This is akin to people running up the street to watch the fire department put out a blaze in a neighbors home. Exciting, but intellectually barren.

In fact, I've often wondered if you weren't a Progressive mole. That you act the way you do to convince others that all Conservatives are howl-at-the moon, froth-at-the-mouth, wing nuts. If so, you can claim some success.

But Occam's Razor tells us the simplest explanation is the most probable. So, I suspect that you actually enjoy all this. Allow me to suggest that instead of blogging you go to a local schoolyard and taunt and beat up the weaker kids. What you are doing on this blog is akin to that kind of activity.

And finally, JW wrote:
"As for civility? I deliberately choose not to be civil to libtards, Democrats and their ilk. I have had enough of civility towards those that would enslave me and mine... It is so called civility, political correctness, appeasement and pandering to those that would destroy this Republic that has gotten us where we are now, to wit, on the brink of ruin. I will have no part of it."

This seems to be a confession that you act churlishly because you are angry about the state of things. I'm also angry about what this country is turning into. However, I choose to control my anger and use it in a constructive way.

You however you seem to use it as an excuse to act like a boor. Behaving like a schoolboy will accomplish nothing. Please, look into some kind of anger management training. It will lower your blood pressure and you'll live longer.

Re: Old Navy
Yes, exactly. Thank you.

Re: Old Navy

May God to bless you and your efforts to attract bees with honey via civilized debate.

That said, it is, however clear that you have yet to grasp the fact that in America today we are not engaged in civilized debate. We are not participating in a rational give and take of ideas, or of differing philosophy, and neither are we engaged in a process in which the participant with the best intellectual or philosophical argument will win out. Instead we are in an existential struggle for liberty and for the continuance of a Constitutional Republic with a bitter determined ruthless ideologically motivated and powerful foe, to wit, a corrupt fascist radical administration and its toady enablers: a foe made all the more powerful because there are many who refuse to name it for what it is or its enablers for what they are.

That foe cares not a jot for your intellectual arguments and indeed scorns them in favor of a corrupt but firmly rooted statist/fascist ideology.

If intellectual argument and truth were the guiding force then liberalism and socialism and fascism could never survive. Presenting Intellectual argument to this foe is akin to intellectual masturbation in that it briefly gratifies the proponent, but fertilizes nothing.

I hold absolutely no animus for you indeed I supported and defended your right to intellectualize, to debate, to pander and to coddle if that was your desire. You choose to attack me and to do so ostensibly because of my comments and or the tone of my commentary, which seems to offend you. So be it. That is your right. Have at it.

But like your civil discourse and ineffectual making of intellectual argument, with those that would bankrupt us morally and financially and would destroy us for the sake of a false ideology, it will change nothing. In that sense your complaints are noted but are pointless and unavailing. I shall continue as before.

Now, to the substance of your post.

I think that you need to re calibrate your premises as to “face saving” and “confession” and the like. I have no desire or need to "save face", because I neither want nor need the respect of the obama drones or the statists. I have no need of the respect of those I despise and indeed I despise this administration from top to bottom and every single one of its enablers. I have no wish to find accommodation with them but simply want to see them crushed and defeated.

My point/purpose is not to make argument or to persuade them for that is an act of futility, but it is primarily to poke them in the eye, to pour scorn upon them, to ridicule them for the drones and imbeciles they are and to have others repeat my comments, which I note that you have done not less than twice.

You have observed that I enjoy attacking and that I am angry at what is happening in America today and that my comments are boorish. Well done! But it is hardly an astute observation because I purposefully make that crystal clear every time I post. Master of the bloody obvious is a phrase that comes to mind.

I seek no control over how you use your anger. Leave me to mine.

We shall simply have to agree to differ.

And finally keep up the good work, whatever that may be.

Why do they call it “Obama-care” anyway. It should be called “Obama-insurance” and having insurance does not mean one will actually get health care.

After “Obama-insurance” goes into effect, the cost of insurance will double and the quality of health care will drop by half.

There is not a sane person in America that believed that:

(1) Obama-insurance would not increase the cost of insurance for most people;
(2) Obama-insurance would not decrease the quality of health care for most people;
(3) Obama-insurance would not add to the national debt;
(4) Obama-insurance would not cover illegal aliens; and
(5) Obama-insurance would not have death panels deciding who gets medical treatment and who does not and that such decisions will be made based on the politics involved.

September 9, 2009: Rep. Joe Wilson Calls Obama a Liar. Joe Wilson was and is correct.

NOT ONE of the "shocking" unexpected costs of Obama-Insurance was not foreseeable back when Joe Wilson pointed out that Obama was a liar.

We all knew Obama was a liar even the people acting shocked today.

If ever a group of people deserve to go to hell, that group of people would be Democrats and Liberals.

Re: SusansMirror

Amen to that !

Estrich ignores the facts. The BLS reported that the cost of health care rose 9% to employers in 2011; the highest increase ever recorded. The cost to cover one employee with full family coverage averaged $12,580 per year.
In 2014 when Obamacare kicks in, everyone will be required to have a health care plan. Organizations with 50 or more employees will be required to offer a health care plan. Employees can take the employer's plan or opt for the Government plan. If they opt for teh Government plan, the employer will pay a tax/fine of $2000. The employee will also pay afee.
This will create an enormous bureaucracy, bring up inflation, cause layoffs and increase unemployment.
Obviously Estrich ignores this and like the rest of the media pundits hasn't a clue when it comes to ALL the facts.
Her thinking is similar to that of Nancy Pelosi, " We'll pass it and then see what's in it"
Estricch is typical of what we in the media - short of truth, facts and reality- long on bias and speculation

In his 'response', JW wrote:
"My point/purpose is not to make argument or to persuade them for that is an act of futility, but it is primarily to poke them in the eye, to pour scorn upon them, to ridicule them for the drones and imbeciles they are and to have others repeat my comments, which I note that you have done not less than twice...You have observed that I enjoy attacking and that I am angry at what is happening in America today and that my comments are boorish. Well done! But it is hardly an astute observation because I purposefully make that crystal clear every time I post. Master of the bloody obvious is a phrase that comes to mind."

Every time I think you have hit bottom, you come back with something worse! Today's comments are the most disturbing yet. You admit you just want to hurt people. This really isn't a good sign.

The advice from my previous note stands. Seek professional help.

I recommend the rest of us on this blog just ignore JW's comments in the future. He isn't interested in exchanging ideas or acting in a civil manner. Lets not give him the attention he seems to desire.

Re: Old Navy
You may not have noticed, but you are the only one actually responding to me and the only one that can be said to be actually giving me any attention. Oops!

But, if you are determined to pay me continuing homage by responding to me as you advise others not to do, then do try to get what I said correct. Try not to attribute to me admissions that I did not make or to tag me with actions that I cannot perform through words on a minor fairly ridiculous liberal blog. I cannot actually poke someone in the eye thru a comment and so I cannot actually physically hurt anyone.

One would have imagined that even you could discern, given your self professed astuteness and intellectual ability, that the phrase poke in the eye was a metaphorical version of the physical action it describes. LOL!

Seems some desperation is setting in. Getting a little frustrated? Getting a little peeved with the truth that your intellectual masturbation was, is and will remain fruitless as regards the foe we face and is indeed destined to please only you? Well that is the way of intellectual masturbation, is it not ? I have heard that counseling can help.
At least Lipka, Morgan et al would take me on and fight me and try to metaphorically poke me in the eye individually, and for that I give each of them some credit and respect.

You on the other hand have capitulated and run off telling tales to the metaphorical blog "mommy" LOL again !

I have now grown bored with playing this game with you.

Lipka and Morgan where are you?

Re: joseph wright;... I will be happy to admit that the health care system, and the government do not work if you will join me in revolution...Life and liberty are still rights, n'est pas??? it is hard to say that anyone made a slave to hospital bills is free, or that anyone dying for the want of care has a life... All you guys on the right have to admit to feel revolting is the fact that this is our land, and the commonwealth was never supposed to be sold off from under us for nothing, but was in private or in public hands supposed to support the people and their government through taxation...
Do you think it is all free and clear... Check it again; because as long as the people of this land hold the ultimate title to this place they are entitled, and have the right to tax it for their support, and if the tax cannot be paid, they can establish themselves on it... Today your government is the government of the rich... They have designs to charge the miiddle class to support the poor who are everyday made more numerous... I will give you the facts: property is not a right, but a privilage; and one that must pay for its own support... When people own property they own certain rights in it, and those rights are only as good as the social support for them... They do not stand on their own, but stand with the good will of the people...
Why should people suffer slavery, illness and death all the while supporting property that does not support them??? If I agree that people are tards, it is only because they are by nature conservative, and unable to imagine change without fear... The fact is that this society does not work, and is dying... Your hostility towards the left is only a symptom of your own mental distress... In fact, they are only working against the signs of social destruction, and not the cause... I am working against the cause of social destruction... I am a revolutionary...
Thanks...Sweeney

Re: joseph wright;... Sir, the democrats and liberals are not bad for wanting to do good, but the republicans and reactionaries are bad to resist them, and publish a lot of lies inthe process...
Health care is going to be expensive... The general unhappiness leads to a lot of self destructive behavior... When health care is most effective, in the form of education and regular checkups to youth, it is usually denied by penny pinchers practicing a false economy... Still, public health is a public problem, and while too much of it is put on the middle class as a cost, it is your party continually protecting the rich from fair taxation that is bound to raise the cost on the middle... Fixing symptoms of a failing society is ultimately a waste of time... On the other hand, if you are unwilling to grant your neighbor, or fellow citizen the care he needs, you are in fact denying yourself, and you would only do so out of stupidity or cruelty... The thing is, the word: Nation, will never hold the traditional meaning for us; but we will not be a nation in any sense of the word without the ability to care for one another... You have lost your heart, but in this issue you have also lost your mind... In the event of war, disaster, or epidemic; we need that big old expensive health care system in place, and nothing is going to remove that need any time soon... For you to think you can have medicine as long as you have a cow to pay your doctor bill with means you are living in the past with all the dead people who died of poor medicine...
Thanks...Sweeney

Re: joseph wright
You are right. We are at war with the progressive liberals who threaten to destroy our country. In war you are fighting for your life and that of those you love. Nicety doesn't cut it.

I can understand both sides here. Insults and name calling are more a tactic of the left and it certainly accomplishes nothing in terms of changing peoples minds. But at this point, if someone still thinks "Obama insurance" (thanks Mirror) is going to save them money, they are too far into the kool-aid and unlikely to change their minds desipite all the evidence in the world. Joe did admit that his goal is simply to antagonize people and not be persuasive. So at least he has no illusions to what his posts can and cannot accomplish. Morgan hasen't posted on this forum for many months now, and is unlikely to return. Perhaps she found another forum. And I don't think even lipka wants to touch the Obama insurance. His premiums most likely went up too.

Re: James A, Sweeney
You have addressed your comments to me, but where does one start with this hodgepodge of socialist dogma, claptrap and BS?

Firstly you are not a revolutionary. You might like to be and may even believe that you are but in reality you are just the willing but nevertheless unwitting dupe and tool of radicals and anarchists, likely made so by years of liberal fascist and envy indoctrination in public schools or in our so called colleges and centers of higher “learning”. You may even today teach this BS to other fools and dupes.

I cannot say that after reading the following response that you will be any wiser but you will certainly be better informed.

Let's start with healthcare and then move to private property rights and then to the false notion of Democratic party altruism.

I am of the right but have never sought and neither am I aware of the Republican Party (for which I have no love) ever seeking to prevent people from obtaining healthcare. There are differences as to how the scarce resource of healthcare should be provided and paid for but no disagreement that it should be made available effectively, economically and to as many as possible.

Although you do not mention it by name, it is presumed that when you speak about healthcare you are speaking about the monstrosity known as The Affordable Healthcare Act. You really ought to know that obamacare has nothing whatsoever to do with healthcare or with the provision of healthcare.Obamacare was, is, and always will be about two things and two things only. Firstly it is about the theft of private property by government from one individual in order to redistribute that property to another. Per Democrat Sen. Max Baucus: "This legislation [obamacare] will have the effect of addressing mal-distribution of income in America." Secondly it is about the theft of liberty and the consolidation of power in a federal government.

So if henceforth you discontinue wrongly conflating healthcare and obamacare you might start to grow up and understand the value of the concept of every citizen having equal right in his person and in his property and in their management by him.

You also really ought to try to grasp the true role of private property in a free society. Few concepts have been so misunderstood and wrongly maligned by the left and by pseudo intellectuals as the concept of private property. You are no exception. Indeed you are the ill-informed norm.

It has been demonstrated time and time again that in creating incentive to use scarce resources effectively that the concept of private property is far superior to the collective ownership you seem to wrongly posit exists but which has never existed.

Without clearly defined private property rights economic development is just not possible. I could expound upon this more fully but it is sufficient for now to say that secure private property rights is the basis of limited and civilized government, it discourages arbitrary confiscation by private individuals or by government, tends to make decision makers make best use of resources and forms the basis of all exchange necessary for economic development.

As to your misguided notion of common ownership and “that this is our land” Private property rights avoid the so called "tragedy of the commons", which occurs when there is no means to exclude others from a resource.

Garrett Hardin illustrated this in 1968 as follows. Villagers shared access to a field upon which each could put as many cattle as he desired. Each then added cattle for so long as adding the last cow benefitted him more than it cost him. Since a portion of the cost created by the addition of the additional cow was firstly the reduction of grass available to the cows of others no villager took account of the total cost to the village. The field became overgrazed and destroyed. No-one had the incentive to stop the overgrazing. Why? Without the power to exclude cattle any grass left for tomorrow by a villager not adding a cow would be eaten by another villager's cow today.

The left's communal ownership actively encourages the destruction of resources. Private property rights create incentive to maintain and improve resources. I thought you of the left were all in favor of conservation. Seems I am wrong! The tragedy of the commons will be the tragedy of this economy if this administration continues unchecked.

You say “Sir the democrats and liberals are not bad for wanting to do good but the republicans and reactionaries are wrong bad to resist them”. BS.

This is the parroting of the same old false altruism of the left and of the Democratic party in particular. Altruism declares that any action taken (ostensibly) for the benefit of others is good and any action taken for one's own benefit evil. The beneficiary of the action is therefore the criterion of moral value of an action.

Any dictator in the eyes of the left (and there is no murdering dictator that the left does not love) is regarded as moral no matter how unspeakable his actions, if those actions are ostensibly for the benefit of the people not himself. LOL!

The totalitarian left along with its dupes and tools like you are willing, nay eager to forsake all individual liberty for the false sake of the collective, for the false “common good” whether it be by forced redistribution, by overburdening taxation, by regulation or by fiat or by executive order or by force.

Sober up !