Posted on 11/06/2013 5:07:34 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather
Taxpayers will have a choice: settle for single-payer or bail out private insurance, which otherwise won’t survive the ravages of Obamacare.
Think back to the fall of 2008. Congress was asked to pass a $700 billion taxpayer bailout for Wall Street. We were told it had to be passed, or else the economy would collapse, perhaps into another Great Depression.
House conservatives voted it down. The stock market fell hundreds of points in response. In the ensuing panic, Congress went along and passed the bailout.
That bailout, and the insane, nearly $1 trillion “stimulus” bill passed just a few months later as Obama’s first act, gave birth to the Tea Party revolution that gave Republicans a 63-seat landslide in the House in the 2010 elections. Voters supported that to stop the run on taxpayer funds.
Next on the horizon is an Obamacare “death spiral” for the private health insurance industry. Taxpayers will now be told a new bailout of hundreds of billions for the private health insurers must be passed, or else private health insurance will go out of business under Obamacare. That would leave the government in complete control of American health care, especially as he who pays the piper calls the tune.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
And it could lead to a repeal of Obamacare.
That doesnt seem like a very good option for Dems anymore than bailing out the banks helped the GOP in fall of 2008. Recall what happened in that election.
If this were a one-time bailout of a plan that might marginally work...then folks might believe it’s worth the effort.
The trouble is....bailouts over the last couple of years....lead to more bailouts, and accepting someone’s version of ‘truth’ really doesn’t work well anymore.
If you had a hundred Americans and asked them if they trust their butcher or the President more....most would say their butcher. Admitting that....really says something about where we’ve been and where we are going.
The lock-step march to single-payer was already baked into this cake (to mix metaphors). As soon as Hillary is coronated, it will happen. The charade has already begun to demonize the insurance providers. They will become even more evil, then the “fix” will be to go to the single-payer plan which has been the goal all along. We were warned, and the GOP-e got wobbly knees. We are SO screwed.
Not only that but any of the bailouts are used for other things rather than what they say they are and it is definitely true with Obama at the helm.
There are no one-time bailouts in the world of baseline budgeting. Each bailout raises the amount spent, which sets a higher baseline for the next year’s budgeting.
That’s why, after TARP, the Dem-controlled Senate never voted on a budget, but instead relied on continuing resolutions keyed off of a higher baseline. And, that’s why the federal government expenditures jumped from around 20% to 25% under Obama.
And, not satisfied with that, Obama tries to load the states up with additional mandated spending—like increased Medicare, lured through temporary payments in the ACA.
Obamacare is cancer on the USA. It looks like this will be Obama’s cudgel to bring down the country. The America haters behind him must love articles like this one and can’t wait to see the burning ruins of the US.
Mutual insurance companies already get a bail out in the tax codes.
Beyond that, what kind of bail out would work, subsidies?
No, I don’t see that happening.
Meanwhile, O care is getting a bailout right now just trying to force feed the website to “work”. The cost is probably close to a billion and rising.
His excellency is not going to admit a problem because he knows this thing is hanging now by a string. They admit they were wrong and delay the whole thing and allow for monumental changes or it crashes and burns on its own weight. A true Hobson’s choice. Given what O dope has said on the record though, it looks like door A, he will march along and fire money into it.
Logically it would be better to put it off for a year, past the elections, because when the 100+ million lose their coverages they have, it will be much better for them for that to happen AFTER the election than now but fortunally the narciciss will not do that, his ego may be the ultimate defunder of this monstrocity. He does get one benefit though, all the other scandals are off the front page now.
“Taxpayers will have a choice: settle for single-payer or bail out private insurance,”
1. Our side needs a consistent story-line aka the truth but in coherent and dramatic prose why single payer is a non-starter.
I think the compelling story of the man in NC who got the documents for the man in SC is telling. If you are the NC guy: Do you want SC guy’s medical records used to dictate your health care??
No one can trust this administration to build a system in time for a single-payer answer to the mess ObamaScare created. Credibility and trust have been shredded.
2. Repeal of OScare and return to status quo ante would be the fastest and cleanest solution.
3. Bail out a non-starter. Because it would not solve anything. A band-aid on the black hole created by ACA.
I predicted a month ago that an insurance company bailout would be coming.
Insurance companies cannot ‘cancel’ as many policies as their are cancelling each day and not have their bottom line hit.
The main question will be: How much of the bailout to insurance companies will find its way back into the coffers of politicians?
I saw a Canadian on Fox the other day and he said CGI will just sit there overseeing and fixing the defective product they created while they soak up more money over the long haul.
Perhaps you meant Medicaid?
Indeed I did. Still on the first cup o’ coffee.
As long as we can hold the House, any bailouts or saving “fixes” to Obamacare are a non-starter.
If he can’t lie his way out of this Barry is kinda SCROOOOOOOD.
This would not suprise me at all.
How about the correct answer: Let private insurance companies that made a bad bet on socialism lose a little money. The private companies that stayed out of that corrupt game won't be hurt, and we will be better off. Note: Even the losers won't lose much. If I remember correctly, insurers are covered for losses beyond 3% by the law itself. Government should never (or almost never) bail out private business.
So what would the US taxpayer be subsidizing? I think it's the pharmaceutical companies and retailers who have no incentive to keep the prices low. And we'd be subsidizing the insurance companies that won't immediately get their gift of being able to force their regular customers into more expensive plans that include things the consumer doesn't want or need. And meanwhile, besides adding to the federal debt both through bailouts and insurance subsidies, the consumer is promised more expensive insurance forced on him still, just a little further in the future.
Isn't there anyone who can stop this madness? Just dropping the mandate would give it a chance to self-correct, eventually, maybe.
re: medicaid. I’m wondering how poor folk who thrive by gaming the system are going to feel about that. I have a relative on Medicaid. It’s real dictatorial about care.
A sane capitalist pro-market economy would do that. The enablers who run things don't really want to let the insurance companies off the hook for their deal with the devil, so to speak.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.