Obama's Townhall - Are the rip-offs and corruption continuing?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Let me just give a few statistics. Many of you already know these.  In the last nine years, premiums have risen three times faster than wages for the average family. I don't need to tell you this because you've seen it in your own lives.

 

One of the things that has continued in an outrageous fashion are taxes that pay for Medicare and Social Security.  They've gone up, and up, and up over the years.  There is no trust and the fund is empty.  What is Obama going to do to fund future liabilities?  Still waiting for an answer.

Unless we act, within a decade, one out of every $5 we earn will be spent on health care.  And for those who rightly worry about deficits, the amount our government spends on Medicare and Medicaid will eventually grow larger than what our government spends today on everything else combined -- everything else combined. 

 

What about the debt repayment?  Interest payment on all the Obama borrowing?  How much will that consume in the future?  How many jobs will be lost?

And I'll just give you one example.  We spend right now about -- over the next 10 years, we will spend $177 billion -- $177 billion over the next decade -- in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies under something called Medicaid Advantage -- Medicare Advantage.

 

People who sign up for this "private insurance subsidized" may do this because it is cheaper than the traditional Medigap policy ($150 or more based on age, may be in the thousands PER MONTH).  The MA plan may offer no or low premiums.

...People who are signed up for this private insurance subsidized program don't get any better care than those who aren’t.  The subsidies don't go to the patients; they go to the insurance companies.  Now, think if we took that $177 billion and helped families so that they could have insurance, and that we could have preventive care.

 

If I recall correctly, and I am no expert, money to fund Social Security and Medicare comes directly from my paycheck.  Employers kick in a hefty amount too.  The self-employed pay double.  From what I remember, this has been a separate tax for a LONG time.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/07/obama-health-care-townhall.html

Obama has brought up Medicare Advantage plans for months, maybe years (since the campaign trail). 

If there is waste, or unfair subsidy, why hasn't he discontinued it and lowered taxes? 

Why hasn't he used this 'excess' or 'wasted' money to REALLY build/fund for future care?

Why doesn't he give this money back to hard working Americans who are struggling?  

One of the BIG problems with politicians is that they borrowed/used the trust fund money to fund their pet projects, ear marks, waste, and slush funds for generations.  Social Security/Medicare were broke some time ago.  

Now, Obama wants to continue the practice.  This money should be used for Social Security or Medicare.  It belongs to the people.  Give it back.  

There is no trust, there is no fund, and the ripoffs continue.

Integrity needs to return to Washington big time.

Audit the Federal Reserve, Treasurey, and cut back Federal government that continues to malfunction.

Obama and his administration have ramped up the debt, raised unemployment, plans to increase taxes, unemployment, and job loss.  He's had more than enough time to address the Medicare Advantage ripoff he keeps talking about.

Debt bondage/slavery continues.  When will integrity return to Washington.

jmho

[nonesuche]

Thanks for identifying all of the gaping holes in Obama-spendarama's presentation at the town hall yesterday. He prefaced all with major fear factor, relating our economy would not grow and likely tank should we not all bow down and accept his latest debt burden to our backs.

Surely voters will wake up and see his agenda finally??? Dare we hope for some lucid thought on the part of our citizens? Or are they asleep and like sheep willing to leap off the cliff?

I'm not, I wrote my congressman last night. We have affordable health care for those even unemployed in our state via BCBS or family and children services, but the unemployment numbers are now breaking the back of our state and our government's capacity to pay out unemployment to over 11% of our state's population.

Our schools are being hit the hardest with significant downsizing of teachers, yet yesterday Obama blithely states we can also improve our schools. How?

HIGHER TAXES.......only the foolish or the totally naive will believe otherwise.

[WhiskeyGirl]

I listened yesterday and wondered about all those numbers he keeps using.  What he needs to produce is some kind of balance sheet, with sources and reasonsing.  His numbers do not make sense - unless your goal is to destroy the nation through debt, shell games, and ponzi schemes.  jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

From the Canadian experience -

According to researchers, wait times to see a doctor and receive treatment dragged the Canadian ranking toward the bottom:

o Patients were waiting between 3-15 months for treatment, when they could have received the same quality of care in Germany, France or the Netherlands in two weeks.

o While Canada is one of the highest per capita spenders on health care, patients don't get much for their money.

o On the so-called "bang for the buck scale," that measured health care results for the number of dollars spent, Canada ranks dead.

Moreover, the Canadian system is in some respects held hostage by vested interests, such as public sector unions, say researchers. Some of these groups like to attach themselves to one method of service delivery, and they become religious about it. They become kind of fundamentalists about public health care delivery, as opposed to saying how can we do it like Europe, and have a variety of service providers.

http://www.fcpp.org/main/index.php

How does a system reduce waiting lists?  Some ideas -

Increase the number of providers and technicians.

Reduce the number of tests and procedures you allow.

Reduce the number of individuals 'diagnosed' so that you can reduce the number of those receiving procedures and needing additional care. 

Who decides what tests are necessary?  Doctors or politicians?  Say someone has symptoms and the doctor wants three tests, and is only allowed one.  What if the two denied would detect something additional?  What if a disease or condition is missed because government only allows one test?  Going a step further, what if the condition worsens, and is in such an advanced state, the government will not allow treatment?  If caught earlier, treatment may have prevented death or disability.

Testing can be a good thing to prevent disease or disability.  Who decides how government will skimp on care?

The rich, including politicians, can go elsewhere, to SA or maybe Thailand to get treatment for their families.  What is Obama leaving for the rest of us?

jmho