How magnanimous of you, RetiredNewbie. We'll have no problem telling when you start.

That' OK Poobah, I'll be nice enough for both of us, since it doesn't seem to be in your nature.

Be nice, Poobah. Haven't you had enough posts removed by the Gazette staff lately?

LibertyBelle said, "I don't think (and I'm no Math Teacher) but only 31% of Americans like Obamacare."

The first two parts of your sentence are quite honest -- "I don't think (and I'm no Math Teacher)."

Sure billnewbie-poobah? John? - same BS, different post.
I don't think (and I'm no Math Teacher) but only 31% of Americans like Obamacare.
That's not "Most".

He Poobah, are you John Eyster???

johnnyreb6977, you jumped on gonfo5's wagon two minutes too early. All members of Congress and Congressional Staff are REQUIRED to be a part of "it" the second everyone else is a part of it. See my previous comment.

gonfo5, what a wonderful story, but you could have saved yourself some time if you had researched the ACA prior to commenting.

The Affordable Care Act REQUIRES that all members of Congress and Congressional staff purchase their healthcare insurance from the same exchanges that everyone else purchases their healthcare insurance from.

From Section 1312 of the PPACA [ http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerc... ]:

(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.—

(i) REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are—

(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or

(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).

(ii) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

(I) MEMBER OF CONGRESS.—The term ‘‘Member of Congress’’ means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate.

(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF.—The term ‘‘congressional staff’’ means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a
Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.

If ocrapacare is so wonderful, why aren't the politicians going to be part of it?????? Waiting for your reply eyster, even though many of us know that you won't reply!

Ok Editor who believes what this other guy wrote, my question to you is this, "Why did congress hold another vote after they passed this wonderful healthcare reform bill to keep what they already had"? If what they were setting in place for the rest of the country was so wonderful, why didn't they want to be the first ones to try it out and make sure it was great? Great Slogan, "We don't want it, but you're going to love it! Just trust us, we are politicians, we don't lie"!

* AlterNet feature by Joshua Holland...who is the author of The 15 Biggest Lies About the Economy: And Everything else the Right Doesn't Want You to Know About Taxes, Jobs and Corporate America*

Snort! What's so "alternative" about yet more lefty-biased pabulum? You could get the same garbage from MSNBC/CBS/ABC/NBC/PBS/NPR/NYT/WAPO/NEWSWEEK/TIME on and on ad nauseum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uls9R742p...

As Government Expands, Liberty Contracts

The true threat to our republic is out of control military spending. The most recent case in point being the breakdown of the Soviet Union. America spends almost as much on military spending ($687 billion per year) as the next twenty highest spending countries combined ($690 billion per year) and almost four times as much as Russia and China combined ($176 billion).

This level of military spending is unsustainable and coupled with the Reagan tax cuts of the 80's set America on the same course as the Soviet Union. America was wealthier than the Soviet Union and we were able to outlast them. But unless military spending is significantly reduced by at least $500 billion per year, we won't outlast China. America will end up looking like the separate states/regions that comprised the former Soviet Union.

Have you seen this article in the Milw. Journal-Sentinel yet John? http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/business/1...

It's about something they're calling "Obamascam". The idea is to get people to give personal info to the scammers posing as agents that will deliver free money for utility payments from the government. The only reason such a scam could work is because the idea of getting free money from the government is now a days so plausible.

It does seem as though we are developing such a taste for and an expectation of free lunches to the point that we can be lead into a scam by it, eh?

Most people like free lunches too, but few like having to foot the bill for everyone else to eat for free.

I've been posting these Ben Franklin quotes a few times recently in regard to Obamacare. I'd be curious to know what you think of them, John, and how you think they might relate to the subject.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty."

Now I could change that first quote to satisfy the ambitions of Democrats by saying "Democracy is two lambs and a wolf voting on what to have for lunch" since some might say that the wolf has it coming. But it's tough for 2 lambs to force their will on a wolf. So it is with all those rich people you'd like to use the power of government to fleece. They won't just stand still while you get out the clippers, you know. They can move their finances, and the jobs that those finances create elsewhere and never lose a penny.

The second quote I find most appropriate to Obamacare. Obamacare appeals to folks who see it as an opportunity to have the government pick up the tab for their healthcare. We as a country seem to be developing a taste for free lunches payed for by our government. How long can that be sustained, I wonder, as more and more people get in the lunch line while fewer and fewer are available to foot the bill?

The third quote also applies well to Obamacare. Obamacare revokes the liberty of people to choose whether or not to carry health insurance. It does no good to argue that such a choice impacts us all and therefore can be revoked because every day, we all make such choices that can impact others. Such is the nature of liberty. Obamacare revokes liberty in favor of financial safety. Legal or not, is that what this country really wants to become? What other choices that we are now free to make will the government consider preempting by law for our own safety?

Obamacare may well herald the end of our republic.

Ha, ha!
Good one!

Gary, What happened to you? You used to be so nice.

You may want to talk about dung piles,
but I am not interested in your home
or personal life.

What's the matter, Fedup?
Have too much for breakfast?

I object to the 2,700 page bill that is as easy to understand as quantum mechanics. Also the >13,000 regulations that have (so far) been written to enforce the law. If it is such a great piece of legislation, why did our congress exclude itself from coverage?

donnaw wrote:...50% of those doctors in his practice are going to be quitting because of the healthcare bill."
---------------------------
Because of globalization, those disgruntled doctors can quit. There are plenty of willing replacements with one million legal (not illegal) immigrants entering the U.S. every year. If those doctors can find another spot on the globe where they can earn more than in in the U.S., they are free to leave. Ironically, globalization is resulting in Communism, where a few at the top in the Pubic Sector Elite and Private Sector Elite have inflationary incomes, while the masses have deflationary incomes at 1973 levels (adjusted for inflation). Obviously, doctors' fees will have to adjust to 1973 levels also. Because the masses cannot afford to consumer spend, this massive income inequality is forcing some sectors of the U.S. economy into a deflationary spiral, while commodity prices soar because the wealthy are speculating in commodities. Presently, the Public- and Private Sector Elite own 40% of all U.S. wealth.
"When employment in the U.S. eventually recovers, it's likely to be because American workers swallow hard and accept lower pay. That has been the pattern for decades now: Shockingly, pay for production and nonsupervisory workers—80% of the private workforce—is 9% lower than it was in 1973, adjusted for inflation. Sure, back in the 1950s pillars of the economy such as General Motors paid generously, because they could. Contracts between GM and the United Auto Workers set a pattern for pay throughout the economy, says Harley Shaiken, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley who specializes in labor issues. But while unions covered 36% of private-sector workers in 1953, the figure plunged to less than 8% by 2008. "Today, working conditions are set either by trends in the global economy or by nonunion firms in the U.S.," says Shaiken. He points out that while GM was the largest U.S. employer in the 1950s, "today that role is played by Wal-Mart (WMT), with very different consequences."

The Left has run out of excuses so now all they can do is blame the rich (the Republican rich that is as I am sure the Democratic rich get a pass as usual).

Maine...you have pointed out one aspect of the problem...costs. Obamacare does little to control costs but adds more layers and costs on top. The GOA comes out every day almost with newer higher estimates on the cost of thiis bill. You are just touching the tip of the iceberg. But politicians will not solve the problem as long as they need money to run for office and pander to the special interest groups on both sides of the aisle.

One percent of the U.S. population owns approximately 40 percent of the nation's wealth. That's a distribution that most Americans don't know about, Dan Ariely of Duke University discovered in a recent study. Respondents of all demographic categories mistook Sweden's even wealth distribution for that of the United States. Host Noah Adams speaks with Ariely about his study.

This is socialism for the wealthy:

Tax Cuts For Wealthy Americans Cost Treasury $11.6 Million Every Hour: Report
Tax cuts for America’s top earners are costing everyone, every hour of every day, a new report from the National Priorities Project finds.
Tax cuts for the wealthiest five percent of Americans cost the U.S. Treasury $11.6 million every hour, according to the National Priorities Project. America’s top earners will get an average tax cut of $66,384 in 2011, while the bottom 20 percent will get an average cut of $107.

Health Care Costs Out of Control, Oct. 30, 2011: Our healthcare system is bankrupting the country. It's been many years since an ordinary American could pay annual health care bills without assistance from the government or an employer. American healthcare used to be just a bit more expensive. Now it's nearly twice as expensive as our economic competitors, and getting steadily worse. Because it now represents 16 percent of the economy — double its proportion in 1970 — it's distorting the budgets of every business, and every level of government. You'd think, amid the worst economy in decades, that health insurers would be show restraint, but you would be wrong. Premiums went up 9 percent in 2011. Think about that figure. It's three times the current inflation rate, business as usual. The health inflation juggernaut rolls on, impervious to all attempts to control it. Americans look for villains in these situations, and there are a few. My favorite is Anthem, the mega-insurer that cleverly took over nonprofit Blue Cross plans in a host of states, including Maine and New Hampshire. The "Blues" as we once called them, struggled to contain rate increases while maintaining adequate reserves. Anthem showed them what they were doing wrong. Impose huge annual increases, make lots of money and stop worrying about whether people can afford it. Since taking over Maine Blue Cross in 1999, Anthem has raised regulated rates on individual policies every year, usually requesting increases of 10 to 15 percent

Some privileged Americans have access to healthcare that they can afford, but millions have access to healthcare that they cannot afford, which means those unpaid bills go into collection and for too many lead to foreclosure:
#1 Cause of Foreclosure in the US Attributable to Healthcare Costs by B. Jaquette, 9/23/2009: The Social Science Research Network performed a study to determine the top causes of foreclosure in the U.S. The result? The number 1 cause of foreclosure (with almost HALF) is healthcare costs. To fix the economy and the “foreclosure crisis” the U.S. MUST obviously address healthcare costs.
North Carolina Hospitals Sued 40,000 Patients Over Unpaid Bills: Hospitals in North Carolina are taking debt-collection to a whole new level. Certain North Carolina hospitals sued 40,000 patients for unpaid bills between 2005 and 2010, including bringing a $200,000 case against a Vietnam veteran whose leg was amputated.

I am suspect of the govt's ability to run any program. One CNN Money article just out announced that the govt has overpaid $14 BILLION in unemployment benefits which is 11% of the programs benefits. Wow! Anybody watching the store here? Being efficient in just this one program would do a lot to solve our debt! But no, the administration wants new programs like Obamacare. Can you imagine the fraud and overpayments in that program?

Met with our cardiologist last week and he said 50% of those doctors in his practice (a large one in Madison) are going to be quitting because of the healthcare bill. One onerous part he told us is the medical reporting and for every 30 minutes he spends with a patient he spends another 30 minutes on the computer doing reports. He said he didn't go into medicine to spend half his day on the computer. He said the reports have become more important than the patients.

People do know what's in it now that it has passed (because Pelosi) wouldn't read it before. Americans still hate it 2-1 in recent polls.
Tax not care. Control and intrusion.
IRS agents galore, 15 member death panel, and 83% of Doctors consider quitting.
118 days left for nightmare #2 to be repealed and replaced..

ToTellTheTruth writes:
..... socialist America....
-----------------------------
Giving tax breaks to the wealthy (Bush tax cuts), who do NOT need tax breaks to begin with, is socialism for the wealthy, so we already have a socialist America.

"5 - And Nobody Ever Talks About the Employer Mandate - Starting in 2014, companies with 50 or more full-time workers will have to pay penalties if they don't cover their employees' health insurance."

Economic principal #: People respond to incentives. If the government is going to mandate that employers pay for employees' health insurance, many employers are going to limit the number of their full-time employees to 49.

Obamacare is an excellent example of just how stupid government can be.

Haha, 83% of doctors are thinking of quitting. I heard another story today - 97% of conservatives are going to vote for Obama.

Also-Do women like being called "CHICKS"? Of course Democrats can do that,can't they?

Awww... did somebody drop their ice cream?

Please, those of you who say this is going to cost everyone millions and millions of dollars to insure people who currently do not have insurance: Who is paying for these people's medical care now? When they go to the ER, who covers the bill? When they are admitted and have to stay in the hospital for an extra 3-4 days because there's no where for them to go post-discharge because they don't have coverage for short term rehab, who pays the excessively high cost of that stay (when a short term rehab facility would have cost much less)? Who pays when uninsured people use the ER as their primary care facility because primary care clinics won't see them without insurance?

Please....use a little common sense and get over your liberal vs. conservative bias and realize that something has to be done about health care. I'm not saying this is the answer, but it's more than has been done in the past 20+ years. It's a start. With a lot more work to be done. Spin it all you want, but the first step to beginning to solve America's health woes is making sure everyone has access to care.

poobah-Hi. I think YOU would be better writing this blog. You at least can see both sides most of the time and have your facts and research better. And you won't repeat the same thing in two of the first three paragraphs and have the sense not to quote far left wing blogs as facts.
And yes I read the whole thing before posting-and I don't believe a word of it.

Full speed ahead to bankruptcy !!

garyprimer

Just because I read it, does not make me a "fan".

I used that link specifically for the liberals on this site who constantly think that if Politifact says it...it has to be true.

Thank you for the article, John. The point made by Holland that people will be getting checks in the mail to help them pay for their healthcare premiums isn't quite accurate. Premium credit assistance dollars will be given directly to healthcare insurance providers that people select from their state exchange and not to the insured individual.

PART 2
One of the parts that is liked by both consumers and the health insurers is keeping your children on your policy until age 26. Before the Supreme Court decision most health insurers sent letters saying that the age 26 rule would stay regardless of the court's decision. These young people are statistically the least likely to buy health insurance on their own. By being on the parent’s policy the insurers get to charge for that person, thus deriving income where it previously didn't exist.
A change that would revolutionize the health insurance industry is the ability to sell health insurance across state lines. The insurance lobby is very powerful and neither party has proposed a change in this area.
Obamacare will never be repealed in full, but chunks of it will be discarded by new laws or the courts. Much like Roosevelt's 'New Deal'.

PART 1
Your blog is coming from a liberal political perspective but assumes the general public agrees.
In the interest of full disclosure the following should be included.

"AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a progressive/liberal activist news service." (Wikipedia)

"Joshua Holland, an editor and senior writer at AlterNet...."
All of the articles by Mr. Holland cited by Mr. Eyster have only been published at alternet.org.
http://www.alternet.org/authors/6645

Let's look at 4 of Joshua Holland's points:
“1 - People Will Be Getting Checks - Call it a crazy hunch, but my guess is that the law will look a lot less tyrannical when people start getting checks in the mail to help pay for their insurance.”
How nice, a check from the government. Is this not the ultimate in wealth redistribution? Taking money from one and sending it directly to another.

2 – “The Richest Americans Are Going to Pay More Taxes - Wealthy investors are outraged, but most people probably don't know that a 3.8% surcharge on investment income – dividends and capital gains -- kicks in this January for everyone with an adjusted gross income of over $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers). So those currently enjoying the lowest rate on investments in our nation's history will pay for a decent chunk of the bill.”
It appears that Democrats look at class warfare as a winning strategy for this year's elections.

3 – “Insurers' Overhead – and Profit Margins -- Are Limited.”
Price controls? They have never worked in the history of this or any other country. (See Richard Nixon presidency 1968-1974)

5 – “And Nobody Ever Talks About the Employer Mandate - Starting in 2014, companies with 50 or more full-time workers (two part-timers count as one full-timer for this purpose) will have to pay penalties if they don't cover their employees' health insurance.”
Mandates on businesses are paid for by the middle class consumer, the ones the left says they are protecting. A business plan has a percentage of profit that is needed for the business to survive. If expenses (including taxes, increase than so must prices to reach the required percentage of profit.

Northman...great post!

“Most People Like Obamacare when...”
Most people like ice cream when . . . somebody else is paying for it!

Most people don’t like ice cream when . . . they go to get some, and find out that they are paying for their ice cream, along with everybody else’s!

Yes, Obamacare is wildly popular with the entitlement crowd. More free stuff is always welcome to them. But the money isn’t just falling out of the sky, it’s all debt being bankrolled by China. How hard is it to figure out that we can’t keep spending more than we have, that sooner or later there will be a day of reckoning?

“Shaves the Deficit”. Now, think about this for a minute. You’re promising new or expanded health care benefits to millions. The number of medical personnel doesn’t change. What happens when you have the same amount of product but more consumers wanting the product? Prices go up, and there are shortages. It’s a different cause but with similar results as the gasoline lines of the 70’s. You can only soak the rich just so much, but even if you took everything they had (which you can only do once, but the way) you still couldn’t finance this monstrosity without incurring more debt.

“People will see some tangible benefits, and the fearmongering will prove unfounded.” Let’s pretend I’m your friend. You own a half million dollar house which you can’t make the payments on, given your current income. You just bought a new car, your son is entering college, and your daughter is getting married next month. So naturally, now you’re thinking about buying a new boat and a couple of skimobiles. As your friend, I strongly suggest you scale back on your current debts, and absolutely avoid any new debt. Now, is that fearmongering, or common sense and good advice?

gary the next time you are browsing that empirically even handed politifact do a casual browse over the number of times they review each side of the isle.

I though y'all liked Sarah P.

Obamacare is like putting lipstick on a pig!

Also glad to see that you are a fan of politifact.
It is curious that you would cite that website.
Check out the latest entries and see what all of your friends have been saying.
It would appear that Republicans miss the truth about ten times as often
as Democrats unless you only see what you want to see and disregard the rest.

Believe it!

Way too long to read. People will be getting checks? Why the waste? If the feds want to take over health care then the health care facilities should be federally owned or funded. People shouldnt have to pay the actual facility anything... Take it out of taxes. That way you dont have double, tripple paying of stuff.. I pay taxes, govt sends check to me, I send check to doctor... All this sending.. Are we trying to keep the post office open? I havnt studied much of this plan... so im not sure. But it looks like an unorganized disaster. Sending people checks? how many are going to go buy booze and cigs with it?

Dear John, that check in the mail---why don't you tell the people where most of the checks will be going??????
We don't know the full cost but it has doubled since it was passed. Saved us a lot there right?
Do you really think taxing the rich more will lower costs??? Dream on.
Do you really think quality will improve when the workload increases for the medical personnel?
Who are you going to call when the 15 member board that is set up decides that you DON'T NEED A CERTAIN PROCEDURE because take your choice:1. You're too old. 2. It is too expensive and not cost effective. 3. Asprin will relieve the pain in place of the operation.

Johnny...come back to reality! Your "well respected, non-partisan" CBO has already shifted the cost of this program from $940 billion to $1.76 trillion.....Kinda funny how the cost keeps rising and rising, yet you cheer about people getting checks from the government in the mail? Just where do you think that money is going to come from??
I hope Walker fights the implementation of this mess to the very end. I know myself and the others that put him in office would completely support him in doing just this regardless of the outcome.....

Pelosi
Under the health care law, "everybody will have lower rates, better quality care and better access."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

"Most People Like Obamacare!"

The first line of this blog entry is blatantly untrue.

Yes RAF because you're such a believer in civil discourse.

It's hard to have that when the right wingers admittedly don't have the patience or attention span to read an entire blog entry. What do these people do when they see a book? Or are they too busy with Jersey Shore or DTWS to bother?

John, So, because "people will be getting checks,...the richest Americans are going to pay more taxes...Chicks will dig this," we should check our morals (not to mention intelligence and common sense) at the door? Really? The CBO has re-calculated the cost of this abomination and it increases the deficit. It is a tax on the middle class, when it was HOWLED from the oval office and from Mr. Obama's handlers that is was not a tax--until it was argued before the Supreme Court, of course. It was rammed through under false pretenses. What's not to like? Seriously, John, if you lean any further to the left you're going to fall over.
-

Oh, and if you're not responding to me because I don't use my real name, you already know who I am. I've e-mailed you twice using my real name. You've not bothered to respond either time. Blessings!

Yes John, this shows more about you than anything else. The author shares similar "views" as you, your echoing of his "thoughts" on the program only echo your views.

1. You both cherish the idea people will be "getting" something free. In your case you have already wrote about your "free stuff", while the current repeated authors piece first position is a view people will like GETTING free money and like it.

2. You both cherish the idea you want others to pay higher taxes while neither of you are willing to do the same on your own.

3. You both cherish the idea of making OTHERS do things that you want them to, regardless of freedoms.

Your repeated attempts to reinforce your own position by writing about other peoples opinions who have the same views of taking others money and forcing your will to them is indicative of your party and their positions. The only thing more piteous is your first two para declaring those that don't share your views are attackers, so much for that left-wing view of a civil discourse.

Unbelievable!

I wouldn't waste my time reading all of this nonsense. Only a socialist like eystercaps would try to tell others what they like and what they don't like. How dare you eystercaps !

Your posts are too long to read, so I didn't.
Sorry.
I'm just sayin'...

I can give you trillion$ of reasons not to like it.