Re: Timeline of Major Provisions in the Democrats’ Health Care Package • Fair enough, have a nice day!
What happened under the auspices of reform was in reality an enormous power grab of our health care system. That isn’t reform. It’s socialism and redistribution of wealth, and its antithetical to our constitution and everything America used to stand for. What it amounts to is sacrificing the future of our country so that the 15 percent of the people who for whatever reason don’t have health insurance can have Medicaid insurance for a limited amount time, because this travesty, which in reality is tyranny, will ultimately lead to the total and complete collapse of America. Not only that but it will it lead to massive layoffs as companies like Caterpillar, Verizon, and many others scramble to make ends meet. In addition, unlike the federal government, the states can’t print new money and thus will be forced to pass on the additional cost of these un-funded massive federal mandates to the people in the form of increased taxes and fees. Thus, if you are gullible enough to believe that this massive power grab won’t raise your taxes and insurance premiums, then you must be smoking something. Not to mention that this notion that if you make under $200,000 annually you want see your federal taxes rise is nonsense. At the rate the Obama administration is printing new money, with inflation $200,000 will be the median income in only a few years. This healthcare bill is like calling a slush fund a stimulus bill or a jobs bill. What it really amounts to has nothing to do with what it really is. Healthcare reform…my ass! It’s an enormous power grab by our Marxist hijacked government and it has nothing whatsoever to do with reform. It’s socialism and redistribution of wealth pure and simple. In other words, it’s Marxism. Reduce the deficits? My ass! It will explode them and wreck our economy and government at the same time!
link FOXNews.com - Little-Known Health Care Law Provision Is a Budget Buster, Critics Say Quote The Class Act, otherwise known as the Community Living Assistance Services and Support Act, is the federal government's first long-term care insurance program. Under-reported and the under the radar of most lawmakers, the program will allow workers to have an average of roughly $150 or $240 a month, based on age and salary, automatically deducted from their paycheck to save for long-term care.
I used to understand LTC very well, but it is too hazy. For the VAST MAJORITY it is a rip off. It has to do with the "deductible" though it is not called deductible, the length of time in LTC facility, and the length of time you live after being put in one. There are lots of numbers (data) on this, and I spent about 15 years as a health data wonk. Yes, if you are unfortunate to have a bad hand in the cards of life, maybe you need it, but actuarially, based on the above factors, it is not a good deal at all. Additionally, those rates are outrageously high, unless the payees are pretty old. You must ask yourself, why do insurance companies push LTC? Cause it is a money maker, they make huge amounts on the interest on the principle alone, even if you are one of the few that even use the benefit. Don't forget the time value of money. I suspect the experts have only looked at one side of the LTC equation. When they wise up, their tune will change. hwr
Newsmax - Napolitano: Supreme Court to Strike Down Obamacare Napolitano: Supreme Court to Strike Down Obamacare Friday, 26 Mar 2010 06:32 PM Article Font Size By: David A. Patten President Barack Obama is one of the worst presidents ever in terms of respecting constitutional limitations on government, and the states suing the federal government over healthcare reform "have a pretty strong case" and are likely to prevail, according to author and judicial analyst Andrew P. Napolitano. In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV's Ashley Martella, Napolitano says the president's healthcare reforms amount to "commandeering" the state legislatures for federal purposes, which the Supreme Court has forbidden as unconstitutional. "The Constitution does not authorize the Congress to regulate the state governments," Napolitano says. "Nevertheless, in this piece of legislation, the Congress has told the state governments that they must modify their regulation of certain areas of healthcare, they must surrender their regulation of other areas of healthcare, and they must spend state taxpayer-generated dollars in a way that the Congress wants it done.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601010&sid=auDlhzXGuFjI March 26 (Bloomberg) -- AT&T Inc. will book $1 billion in first-quarter costs related to the health-care law signed this week by President Barack Obama, the most of any U.S. company so far. A change in the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies triggered the non-cash expense, and the company will consider changes to the benefits it offers current and retired workers, Dallas-based AT&T said today in a regulatory filing. AT&T, the biggest U.S. phone company, joins Caterpillar Inc., AK Steel Holding Corp. and 3M Co. in recording non-cash expenses against earnings as a result of the law. Health-care costs may shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits, according to an estimate by benefits consulting firm Towers Watson. AT&T employed about 281,000 people as of the end of January. “Companies like AT&T, that have large employee bases, are going to have higher health-care costs and, therefore, lower earnings unless they can negotiate something or offer less to their employees,”
Insurers Might Delay Covering Pre-Existing Conditions - NYTimes.com Coverage Now for Sick Children? Check Fine Print WASHINGTON — Just days after President Obama signed the new health care law, insurance companies are already arguing that, at least for now, they do not have to provide one of the benefits that the president calls a centerpiece of the law: coverage for certain children with pre-existing conditions.
