President Obama's health care overhaul law will increase the nation's health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.Yep -- no doubt about it; if you can't get access to health care, that will save you money.
A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.
But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.
Don't worry about it, though. It's all good. We'll get single payer in a few years and it will all be better. Or if you have enough scratch, you'll be able to go to one of the new maquiladora hospitals that should be springing up soon. We could call it the "Cinco de Mayo" Clinic.
4 comments:
Mark,
I like the term A LOT. So please don't lump me in with the lefties complaining about the name. I haven't been following the news much lately, so I had no idea it was a term of derision. I use the term to refer to the recently passed HCR most of the time, and I am very supportive of the bill that was passed.
You are right about one thing: We will get single payer in a few years and it will all be better.
Now, if you can forward the study that shows that the status quo was going to reign in costs make health care affordable to all, I will reconsider my support of the new legislation.
Regards,
Rich
Well Rich, good for you. Embrace Obamacare! In the immortal words of Zero Mostel, flaunt it, baby, flaunt it!
Now, if you can forward the study that shows that the status quo was going to reign in costs make health care affordable to all, I will reconsider my support of the new legislation.
I don't recall anyone supporting the status quo, so that's a strawman argument. But you know that, of course.
No Mark, I don't think it is a strawman argument, and here's why. Your side had ample opportunity to do something about the growing health care crisis, and you sat on your hands. What is a strawman is pretending that the Right has had any real solutions to the growing pool of uninsured and under-insured folks in this country. I would also note that you had ample opportunities to work with the President to craft the HCR, and chose, instead, to obfuscate and demagogue the issue.
Obama ran on HCR and won pretty handily. Then he actually enacted it. Pretending that he has pulled some outrageous move that came out of left field may make for good politics with your base, but its total BS.
Regards,
Rich
No Mark, I don't think it is a strawman argument, and here's why. Your side had ample opportunity to do something about the growing health care crisis, and you sat on your hands.
At what point would a market-based approach have had any chance of passing through a Congress where Ted Kennedy and his gang would have mounted a filibuster? Go ahead and tell me when that was.
What is a strawman is pretending that the Right has had any real solutions to the growing pool of uninsured and under-insured folks in this country.
It wasn't a top priority. As hard as you might find that to believe, it really wasn't. And the polling then and later bear it out. And you'll also find out more on November 2.
I would also note that you had ample opportunities to work with the President to craft the HCR, and chose, instead, to obfuscate and demagogue the issue.
Keep telling yourself that, dude. The facts say otherwise. Pelosi killed every Republican proposal. Every time. And you know that.
Obama ran on HCR and won pretty handily. Then he actually enacted it. Pretending that he has pulled some outrageous move that came out of left field may make for good politics with your base, but its total BS.
The first point is arguable at best. It was part of his overall platform but was pretty sotto voce. As for the second, that's another straw man argument. I haven't argued that it was some outrageous move out of left field, nor would I. It's been part of the desiderata of the American Left since Harry Truman. But you can cling to those strawmen until November 2.
Post a Comment