Calling the HCR Senate bill a "major corporate giveaway" is as bad as calling it a "govt. takeover"

[jenmito]

They're both inaccurate. It DOES have some good things in it as every liberal Dem. in congress who supports it has said. Both extremes are wrong.

[MNDemNY]

1. No it is a corporate give-away.

Cry all you want, it is. Buy insurance industry stock. But you are right about it NOT being a government take-over, it certainly is not that!!! The bill should be killed. Killed dead.

[jenmito]

2. No it's not. I'm glad no Dem. senators agree with you. n/t

[MNDemNY]

7. It is.

And a lot of "Dem. " Senators do agree that it is, they just OK with that, you know, like Obama is. Corporatist tripe.:+ (you have earned a dead clown)

[jenmito]

12. It isn't. Infinity.

And if you think every single Dem. is a "Corporatist," that's YOUR conspiracy theory-not the majority's.

[MNDemNY]

15. No, some are just gullable.. Like you.

[jenmito]

19. Yeah-you're so much smarter than them (and me). Whatever.

[MNDemNY]

22. You said it!

:D

[DJ13]

8. Pay me a few million, or offer me a good job and I'll agree with you too

[jenmito]

16. You think every Dem. who's voting for this is paid off?

[DJ13]

20. Not every Dem

Just a large majority of them.

[jenmito]

25. Then how do you explain the others who are voting for it? n/t

[DJ13]

31. Pressure by the corrupted Dems in charge of committees

You know how the game works.

Access for their own pet local projects requires they stay in the good graces of the leadership.

[jenmito]

35. Wow-so you think there's not ONE Dem. who can't be pressured?

Sad.

[DJ13]

37. If it walks like a duck

[jenmito]

38. That's your opinion.

[niceypoo]

10. It privatizes universal healthcare

and institutionalizes private insurance.

[Better Believe It]

3. Right. What's a few hundred billion here and a few hundred billion there?

Is handout a more accurate term than giveaway?

[jenmito]

6. What's 31 million more people getting covered?

Nothing to you, apparently.

[MNDemNY]

9. What's 31 million more covered????? A LIE !!!!!!!

It will do no such thing. No matter how much you "Hope".

[Inuca]

23. And you know this because...? n/t

[MNDemNY]

28. I'm smart. Wait, you'll see.

[jenmito]

27. Like I believe YOU over even the most liberal congressman who's voting for it?

:rofl:

[MNDemNY]

30. You should.

[jenmito]

36. Nope.

[Better Believe It]

39. We don't have Mr. Rahm "sharp elbows" Emanuel breathing down our necks and threatening us.

Oh .... sorry. Mr. Emanuel doesn't do that sort of thing .... against moderates, centrists and conservatives.

His only targets seem to be liberals and progressives!

Why do you think that is?

I'm listening!

[treestar]

45. What kind of job do you do?

Some corporation somewhere is buying something or doing some sort of business.

[Hello_Kitty]

13. Half of whom are getting Medicaid.

The other half of whom are going to be mandated to purchase private insurance with billions in subsidies going to guess who...corporations.

Corporate giveaway.

[treestar]

46. Corporation then gives something in return

This is called an exchange.

You go to the store. You give the cashier ten dollars. Cashier lets you take the milk, etc.

[Hello_Kitty]

48. Oh look, it's my favorite DLC race-to-the-bottomer!

:hi:

[Better Believe It]

21. You mean being forced to pay tribute to the private health insurance industry?

Well, that's hundreds of billions of dollars!

The private health insurance industry thanks you and their political whores in Congress!

[OHdem10]

4. All 'things' are not equivalent. For example it is a good thing to

cover more people with Insurance. It takes 10 years and many
will wait 10 years. The Insurance Companies will get their
goodies off the bat.

Paying taxes and fees for 4 years before anyone sees benefits
is a political loser.

I find it interesting that I would be considered extremist in
my thinking.

[Cha]

5. And, it matters not a twit

to either group that it's wrong.

They got a soundbite and they'll run it into the ground until the next best thing.

[jenmito]

14. Exactly...

it matters not a TWIT. :D They can run it into the ground all they want. A bill will still pass.

[burning rain]

17. "It matters not a *whit*."

.

[MNDemNY]

24. Freudian?

[jonnyblitz]

49. considering the source that was my first thought as well.

:crazy: :rofl:

[burning rain]

55. & here, at the end of the year, your remark passes into the hysterical record,...

along with the rest of 2009. :P

[Cha]

34. I meant what I said.

[MNDemNY]

51. Of course.

;)

[burning rain]

53. Whatever ewe slay.

:shrug:

[Inuca]

11. Too many people

both on the right and on the left, think in terms of zero sum games. This is NOT the case here. True, insurance companies will gain (and I cannot stand insurance companies). But this does not mean that everybody else automatically loses. "Kill the bill because insurance companies will profit from it" is an irrational temper tantrum IMHO.

HAPPY NEW YEAR :-)!

[Hello_Kitty]

26. "irrational temper tantrum"

Another stellar talking point. Don't forget, it's you supporters of the bill who need to sell it to the American people. Here's a hint: Insults don't make good talking points.

[Inuca]

32. I personally don't have to sell anything

to anyone. I am just expressing an opinion.

[Hello_Kitty]

41. Probably a good thing because you suck at it. eom

[Cha]

57. All you have is a personal attack.

[Inuca]

71. Incidentally

s/he happens to be correct, I am terrible at selling anything, including myself. All of this of course is completely irrelevant, just saying :-)...

[jenmito]

43. Exactly.

Happy New Year! :party:

[HughMoran]

47. Many dozens of posts here with thousands of words written

...when only a few sentences were needed. Thanks for summarizing the million arguments this year.

[Inuca]

72. Thank you for the kind words n/t

[grahamhgreen]

18. What kind of sick twisted equivocting spin job is this? IT GIVES TRILLIONS TO Big insurance

who will use the money to crush what little reform is in the bill.

It DOES NOT set up a govt insurance program.

[jenmito]

33. It's not a corporate giveaway. It puts new constraints on insurance companies.

And it sure isn't a govt. takeover, either.

[grahamhgreen]

56. Constraints they will never adhere to, cuz ur giving them trillions to fight the reforms in court an

And by buying off congress.

[bornskeptic]

61. Trillions?! You've achieved a new level of absurdity now.

In the best case scenario for the insurance companies, the Senate plan might increase their profits by about $1 billion per year, starting in 2014. At that rate it would take a thousand years for them to collect a thousand in additional profits. Of course that is computed in 2014 dollars, but, figuring an average rate of inflation of 3%, they might have collected a trillion in additional profit in current dollars in about 117 years, or by the year 2131. I don't think the insurance companies will do quite that well, due to the hundreds of pages of regulations they will be subject to, but perhaps the might,
How do I get the $1 billion per year estimate? The CBO estimates that about 31 million will be newly covered, about half through the expansion of Medicaid. That leaves about 16 million to be newly covered by private insurance. Since every exchange will be required to include at least one not-for-profit plan, I think that it is reasonable to assume that no more than half of those 16 billion will enroll in profit-generating plans. If premiums for those new enrollees average $4000, which is probably somewhat on the high side, that would add to 36 billion in annual premiums for those 8 million. Since health insurance company profits have been running at about 3.3% of premium revenues,

http://seekingalpha.com/article/155858-health-insurance-industry-s-profit-margins-rank-86

we get something between 1 billion and 1.1 billion in new annual profits.
Of course, this is just a rough estimate, but at least it puts things somewhat in perspective, comparedto all the raving about hundreds of billions(and now trillions) of alleged subsidies to insurance companies. Combined annual profits of health insurance companies make up about 1% of US healthcare costs, $25 billion out of $2.5 trillion. The hysteria provoked among "progressives" by the possibility that this figure might be increased by a billion or two(highly unlikely) by a bill which would enable more than 30 million people to have access to healthcare who don't have it now, is far beyond the merely bizarre.

[grahamhgreen]

70. "In 2007, the U.S. spent $2.26 trillion on health care, or $7,439 per person, up from $2.1 trillion"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#Overall_costs

About 70% of this money goes through big insurance. That's Trillions.

And for the new con game -

45 million uninsured

x $375/mo

1 trillion every 5 years.

And that's just where they are starting.

Do not confuse stated profit with revenue or CEO pay, or stock value/back room deals, loans, cash flow, hidden assets, and the ability to lobby (Bribe) senators, etc..

Now, even if you discount my numbers and go by yours (and ignore the fact that the so-called non-profits are still big insurance) -

Do you agree that big insurance will take their extra revenue, even if it is a paltry few BILLIONS of dollars and lobby to crush what little reform is in the bill and prevent any real reform from happening in the future?

[backwoodsbob]

60. it puts mimimal restraints on insurance companies

while forcing tens of millions to pay up with no caps.

It's a giveaway..plain and simple

[girl gone mad]

29. It's a massive corporate giveaway, no two ways about it.

From http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2009/10/healthcare-diversions-part-3.html">Professor L. Randall Wray:

"Here’s the opportunity, Wall Street’s newest and bestest gamble: there is a huge untapped market of some 50 million people who are not paying insurance premiums—and the number grows every year because employers drop coverage and people can’t afford premiums. Solution? Health insurance “reform” that requires everyone to turn over their pay to Wall Street. Can’t afford the premiums? That is OK—Uncle Sam will kick in a few hundred billion to help out the insurers. Of course, do not expect more health care or better health outcomes because that has nothing to do with “reform”. “Heckuvajob” Baucus is more concerned about Wall Street’s insurers, who see a missed opportunity. They’ll collect the extra premiums and deny the claims. This is just another bailout of the financial system, because the tens of trillions of dollars already committed are not nearly enough.

You might wonder about the connection between insurance and Wall Street finance. They are two peas in a pod. Indeed, we threw out the Glass-Steagall Act that separated commercial banking from investment banking and insurance with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (note how easily that rolls off the tongue—sort of like a mixture of wool and superglue) that let Wall Street form Bank Holding Companies that integrate the full range of “financial services” such as loans and deposits, that sell toxic waste mortgage securities to your pension funds, that create commodity futures indexes for university endowments to drive up the price of your petrol, and that take bets on the deaths of firms, countries, and your loved ones.

Student loans, credit card debt, and auto leases? Financialized—packaged and sold to gamblers making bets on default. Even the weather can be financialized. You think I jest? The World Food Programme proposed to issue “catastrophe bonds” linked to low rainfall. The WFP would pay principal and interest when rainfall was sufficient; if there was no rainfall, the WFP would cease making payments on the bonds and would instead fund relief efforts. (Satyajit Das, Traders, Guns & Money, p. 32). As are earthquakes—Tokyo Disneyland issued bonds that did not have to be repaid in the event of an earthquake. (ibid) It is rumored that Wall Street will even take bets on assassination of world leaders (perhaps explaining the presence of armed protestors at President Obama’s speeches). Why not? Someone even set up a charitable trust called the “Sisters of Perpetual Ecstasy” as a special purpose vehicle to move risky assets off the books of its mother superior bank, to escape what passed for regulation in recent years. (Das, again) I once facetiously recommended the creation of a market in Martian ocean front condo futures to satisfy the cravings of Wall Street for new frontiers in risk. Obviously, I set my sights too low. The next bubble will probably be in carbon trading—financialization of pollution!—this time truly toxic waste will be packaged and sold off to global savers. According to Das (p. 320), traders talk about new frontiers “trading in rights to clean air, water and access to fishing grounds; basics of human life that I had always taken for granted”

[area51]

59. +1

"They’ll collect the extra premiums and deny the claims."

Says it all. :mad:

[HughMoran]

40. Don't expect your pointing out of the 'Republican-like' hypocrisy to change anything

I agree with you BTW. If you'll notice, many people when asked about why they posted such an inflammatory subject line will say "so it would get attention/read. :think:

[johnaries]

42. True, They are both knee-jerk reactions. nt

[treestar]

44. Yes, I am so tired of that one

It's the ultimate in :tinfoilhat:

[freddie mertz]

50. Sorry, but I think it is one...

The bills establish a bastard form of privatized universal health care for profit.

It makes no sense as policy, and it's almost impossible to see it as anything other than a massive cash transfer from private citizens to private corporations, in exchangee for what promises to be less than affordable and less than high quality health care "coverage."

Sorry, I just hate this bill.

[SpartanDem]

65. So do you think systems in the Netherlands and Swizterlands are bastards

or in any other country where universal healthcare is provided through regulation of private companies instead of public programs?

[TheKentuckian]

74. Are you daring to compare what the Senate proposes

to those extremely regulated sytems?

If you think we're getting anything resembling that you've been mislead.

It is time to stop pretending that an industry purposefully left an anti-trust exemption is going to be seriously regulated.

[Hippo_Tron]

52. It's a major corporate giveaway that also helps some people

Helping corporations and helping people are only sometimes mutually exclusive.

[tledford]

54. Telling the truth is as bad as telling a lie.

?!?!!??

[grahamhgreen]

58. +1

[mmonk]

62. I don't go by the notion of separation of government and corporate interests

as being extreme.

[freddie mertz]

63. How about a "massive, mandated, under-regulated privatization scheme"?

That about sums it up for me.

[mmonk]

64. And me.

[IndianaGreen]

66. HCR is a the largest transfer of wealth from the working class to the insurance industry in history

No amount of spin from the Ministry of Truth can alter that.

[Teaser]

67. doubtful

since a good chunk of the working class will be paying nothing or almost nothing for insurance due to subsidies. I doubt your math works out.

[freddie mertz]

69. In the Senate version, funding for those subsidies comes from a middle-class benefits tax.

Which means that in addition to forcing middle and working class citizens to buy lousy, overpriced, and under-regulated private insurance, those in (mostly) unionized jobs with good policies will be forced to pay for it through reductions in take-home pay and/or their family's health benefits.

This is bad, corrupt, and regressive legislation, and it will have socially and politically suicidal consequences if it goes through in the present form.

[dgibby]

68. Not only is it a massive corporate windfall,

but if the mandate passes, it will set up a LEGAL PRECEDENT which will open the door to more massive corporate windfalls in areas other than HCR. What will stop them from mandating Life Insurance or anything else, for that matter?

[depakid]

73. Unfortunately, it happens to be100% true

and regardless of one's political persuasion- there's no denying that objective fact.

[TheKentuckian]

75. You think we're getting good value for our money and affordable access?

[WT Fuheck]

76. remember, Black Is White

if Someone with a "D" beside their name says it is.