Is the Health Care bill really affordable?
Congressional budget analysts put the legislation's cost at $979 billion over a decade and said it would reduce deficits over the same period while extending coverage to 94 percent of the eligible population.
At the very least come up with good reasons, not one liners, and if you can, provide links.
I have heard over and over again that it is not affordable, but the article says it is. That is why I ask the question, not because I did not read the link, but because I have heard the opposite. Not saying I believe it, but I am asking nevertheless.
It is Congressional budget analysts, I assume that means overseers of bills and the cost of them, done by non partisans, possibly outside the government altogether?
Good follow up, but do you have a link to the Dutch scenario, I would be very interested in reading it.
- The PatriotLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Yes, because no change will cost America more.
I do not understand why so many Americans have fallen for lies about healthcare in the USA, abroad and also the planned reforms . I mean, if the healthcare system in the USA is so good, why have no other nations taken it up? Could it be due to the following facts?
FACT - the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet .
FACT - the US has higher death rates for kids under five than western European countries with universal health coverage .
Or if the US healthcare system is run so well, why not run the fire service like the healthcare system? 
Maybe that is because in the USA, insurance companies push up costs, buy politicians and refuse to pay claims that people pay for . (Look up Wendell Potter on YouTube to hear more if the link below is too long.)
Obama wants to make insurance cheaper, stop insurance companies from refusing health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and make sure they pay out when they are meant to , a system similar to that which works in Taiwan . He debated this before he was elected .
Is it right that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and so many other industrialised nations with universal healthcare?
If you think my arguments are wrong, e-mail me with proof. But if you can not, let Obama try to help America. If he fails, vote him out in 2012.Source(s):  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/subjects/h...  http://allcountries.org/health/usa_health_care_200...  http://www.unicef.org/sowc08/docs/sowc08_table_U5M...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhpUG4apgrE  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/health...  http://www.annals.org/cgi/reprint/148/4/313.pdf  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdTalCKyW-g
- capixabaLv 71 decade ago
Note the emotional tone, the unsupported claims that the government does nothing right (like NASA, TVA, Medicare (costs 1/10 of what it costs to administer Blue Cross--some efficiency in the for-profit sector!), the armed forces, the Veterans Administration (despite Bush attempts to gut it), the highway system, the national parks, etc.). Can such claims be believed? What is the REAL agenda of people who favor a system that can drop them if their care becomes too expensive or deny them care if they have preexisting conditions?
Note that no one has addressed or contested the facts provided by The Patriot. Cannot anyone answer his/her question, "Is it right that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and so many other industrialised nations with universal healthcare?" If everyone opposed to the bill sent to the Senate floor continues to duck his arguments, facts, and questions, you can take it for certain that they have no good reply.
- RoadkillLv 61 decade ago
No not really. Although I think the budget analysis is fair, who knows how accurate. Using history as a guide these things always cost more than planned. The analysis is limited as I understand it to a particular window in time. Which is how politicians phony up the numbers. In this case the actual program would not begin until several years after they started collecting taxes for it. And then the time frame for the budget study runs out before the full effect of the plan would be in place.
Also it makes a lot of assumptions about how much the cost of Medicaid will be reduced by a reduction in benefits which are part of the bill in general terms but making specific cuts to Medicaid is going to be politically difficult and probably won't happen.
These budgets are less than worthless. Its just like the budgets Presidents continually propose that extend out 2 years past their term in office. They claim to be reductions but for their 8 years in office there are no reductions. The reductions (for the budget study) all come after the President has left office. Then he can always say if they had stuck to my plan the budget would be lower.
- glennonLv 44 years ago
notice the emotional tone, the unsupported claims that the government does no longer something right (like NASA, TVA, Medicare (expenditures a million/10 of what it expenditures to manage Blue bypass--some performance interior the for-earnings sector!), the defense force, the Veterans administration (regardless of Bush tries to intestine it), the line device, the nationwide parks, etc.). Can such claims be believed? what's the actual time table of folk who prefer a device that could drop them if their care will become too costly or deny them care in the event that they have preexisting situations? notice that no person has addressed or contested the info offered with the help of The Patriot. can't everyone answer his/her question, "Is it right that a lifeless American 4 365 days previous might have had a greater effective possibility of existence in the event that they have been born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and an excellent number of alternative industrialised international locations with widespread healthcare?" If everyone antagonistic to the bill despatched to the Senate floor maintains to duck his arguments, info, and questions, you are able to take it for specific that they have got not got any sturdy respond.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- turkeybrooknjLv 71 decade ago
Yeah, well do your research and you will see that the health care bill is going to raise taxes on ALL Americans, reduce the benefits you can receive and the care you hope will be available (not to be determined by a doctor, mind you, but to be determined by a government assigned panel) and cut Medicare. There is no good reason to punish all of us with this horror of a bill (which will have many, many changes taking place which will harm rather than help. You will see the current expenditures to the public increase and you will see companies opting out of this plan putting you in the government's hands to make the choices which you can now make for yourself. If people would actually read the bill, then they might find out that this is not affordable, not better and is far worse than those pushing it would have you believe. Once we lose what we have now, there is no turning back and what we have now is the best health care available anywhere in the entire world. How foolish to give it up without a major fight. I, for one, will fight until the end to try to get this bill from going into law.
PS If the law were actually followed, then we wouldn't be put in the situation of supporting millions of illegals (breaking the law by being here, in the first place). They should be sent home and made to follow the law to get here legally but then the Obama administration is pushing to make them instant citizens! This administration and this President are destroying the Nation we loved and making it into the Socialist nation he has always wanted.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Your own source says that it will help reduce the deficit, which means it will cost LESS than the current patchwork of government programs that covers people who don't go to the hospital until it's an emergency. Did you read your own source?
Paranoid ranting is not a substitute for evidence. The Dutch have a VERY similar system to what's being proposed, as do the Swiss. Both countries spend less on health care than we do. Both countries have longer average life-spans, lower infant mortality, and lower rates of morbidity than we do. If someone tells you that a bill similar to what other countries have will cause mass chaos and destruction, but can't explain why those policies don't cause chaos and destruction in other countries, then that's a good sign that the someone you're talking to is a liar.
- 1 decade ago
Left out of that figure is a separate bill of $220 billion that is supposed to pay doctors some of the gap in fees they get from Medicaid/Medicare patients. That will be deficit spending. These people are playing a shell game and we are all the losers. The wool is being pulled over our eyes. While they claim to be cutting the deficit, the reason for that is that OUR health care costs will continue to rise along with rising taxes while the amount the government covers will decrease. This is their answer rather than finding out why health care is so expensive in the first place. They only recently began to tackle the fraud in Medicare. Why haven't they been taking care of this for years and years? That should be some kind of indication of what is in store for all of us. Bad news.
- 1 decade ago
So let me get this straight...You believe the politicians when they say if they spend more money it will reduce "deficits?" It won't work if you use common sense. I'll tell you what, name one time the government has ever made itself smaller, because that's is part of paying down the debt. They lie to stay in power and fools believe them because they think government will save them. The link you provide isn't proof of anything, you present it like it is some sort of scientific fact when it is nothing more then political opinion to get you to buy whatever it is they are selling. Did the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan reduce the debt? Does Medicare, Welfare, Social Security, Homeland security etc. reduce the debt? Hell NO. The only thing that reduces the debt is less spending not more. A routine doctor visit costs about $100 and is only to see you and not do anything to you. You think paying for everyone will be cheap and easy? Common sense is a good reason/
- 1 decade ago
Considering our government can't even manage Medicaid or Medicare I don't see it being a great idea that they have anything to do with health insurance for American's.
Just think about HOW much money we could save with healthcare if we stopped allowing illegal aliens from any country here get free healthcare. BILLIONS of dollars upon billions, that's how much. However the healthcare "help" the government wants to do is really to control more of the American people's private lives, decisions & choices about how we care for ourselves, where we eat & what we drive.
In the end we will suffer dearly for this treachery. However I do believe once Obama & his Democratic cronies lose office & power in the next 3 years that the Republican's will take back control & reverse alot of this nonsense.
Just think, fining American's for not getting health insurance coverage that WILL be even more expensive than it is now is NOT right. If people can't even afford it now what makes our beloved trusting government think we could pay fines then?!? The COST of the healthcare bill WILL surely be more than $1 trillion dollars over the next several years, IF it becomes law. In the next ten years we will be in even more debt & China might even call us out on alot of it. I don't like where were heading when our stupid inexperienced president & our foolish Congress are trying to force America to it's knees with more debt. You can't save money (which they claim to be doing) by spending more.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The Government does NOTHING better than private industry.
Adding layers of bureaucracy and covering illegals and deadbeats which won't do for themselves what is necessary to take care of themselves and/or their families... will cost us big. The usual shell game will be played so that there is NOT a true accounting - except that "fees" and "Add-ons" will end so it may not be CALLED a tax - but more of your hard earned money will be going to the GOVERNMENT so they can give it away.
If the illegals and deadbeats won't pay for their OWN health care - WHY SHOULD I?
Look at the BANG UP JOB that the Government has done running MEDICARE!
Obama is going to partially fund his bill - with 5 BILLION in waste?
What does that say about the way they are running it now.
1) 5 Billion in waste shows MAJOR incompetence.
2) If there really is 5 Billion in waste - that money should go back to the AMERICAN TAXPAYER rather than being SHANGHAIED to be wasted elsewhere. (the GULL!)
3) If they can't run this smaller program - why should we trust they can run the bigger one.