If Past is Prologue When it Comes to Guesstimating Actual Health Care Costs, Well, it Was Nice Knowing You All…

|

Ah, Bart Stupak, ah, humanity! As health care reform lurches across the finish line like a madcap nurses-on-the-gurneys race on an episode of M*A*S*H, consider this while considering all the rosy predictions of cost-containment, deficit reduction, and the vanquishing of simple chronic halitosis via bigger government involvement with the 50 percent of health care dollars it doesn't already spend:

Where's Ted Knight or Robert Mandan now that we need a good spit-take/slow burn? Ah, that's right, they're sleeping with kings and counsellors. 9.17 to 1? That's good enough for government math, don't you think? This may well be the only chart in all of Christendom that makes the Massachusetts Health Reform, which has lead to the highest premiums in the country for the Bay State, look pretty damn good. The chart is from a document, prepared during the long, hot summer of 2009 when teabagging terrorists were shooting up town hall meetings on a daily basis by the Joint Economic Committee's Republican members, so it's all lies anyway, right? Concludes the analysis:

It seems there is a kind of Murphy?s Law of health care legislation: "If it can cost more than the highest available official estimate, it probably will." The House and Senate are currently considering health care reform bills that would cost in the vicinity of $1 trillion over the first 10 years and $2.4 trillion over the first 10 years of full implementation. Given the potentially significant fiscal and budgetary consequences, lawmakers will want to keep this variant of Murphy's Law in mind when considering major health reform legislation.

Bonus flashback to a 1968 Medicare poster. Think of government-mandated health care this way: This poster came out the same year the Beatles released The White Album! Does that make you feel better? And do you know who the first Medicare recipient was? That broken-down haberdasher from Missouri, Mr. Harry S. Truman.

Not sure it's relevant but there's a fun fact: In 2007 dollars, households headed by people between the ages of 65-74 clocked in with a median net worth of $239,400 dollars and those headed by someone 75 or older boasted $213,500. The median net worth for all American households? $120,300. (See table 4.) Maybe old folks are only so rich (relatively and on average) because they don't have to shell out for health care they way they used to in the pre-Medicare world. Or maybe they'd still be rich even if they're retired and paying full price for health insurance (and cups of coffee! and movie tickets!) like they used to. And the way that younger and poorer folks are going to have to once that individual mandate kicks in.

All of which is a way of saying: The future just ain't turning out the way it was supposed to.

Advertisement

NEXT: Curbing school cops

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. No matter how you spin it, today is a huge loss for Progressives. We did not get Universal Health Care. We did get even a public option that would put us on equal footing with the private insurers.

    No. The Democrats who we put into office handed us to every business interest, the pharmaceuticals, AMA, AHA, and even the insurance companies, anyone but the public who had a stake in the outcome got his pocket padded with the public’s money.

    The Democrats even had the mendacity to say they stuck it to the greedy interest while being on our side when all the while they made deals with those corporations with which they sold us down the river.

    You would have to be blind not see that, or you are a pretty big flunky for the Democratic party, and don’t know where you should really stand.

    Damn it. We voted them in, Pfizer didn’t!

    I use to pass by the local free clinic on my way to the office. Most mornings I saw a bone thin old homeless woman walking to and from there. It was later reported in the paper that she had a typhoid infection and those that came in contact with her needed to be treated.

    This gives me an idea that I propose as a means for us as progressives to fight back against this corporate give away that sells out all of our principles by those Democratic traitors.

    We first find homeless people with typhoid and tuberculosis on the streets, and we invite them to our homes where we make them a pleasant place to stay. We can pitch in together. Sponsor three or four homeless for caring for every fifty members of our progressive coalition.

    We then tend meetings together in every major town and city in the country where we intentionally contract typhoid from these homeless people. We can do this in a symbolic and spiritual manner by having the homeless people sip from lukewarm cups of tea and pass the tea around to everyone. We can make this a very beautiful, brave, ennobling occasion to share our commitment to a better world and compassion for the less fortunate together!

    When the majority of us get sick, it will so overwhelm the health care system that it will cause it to fold up and go under. The government will have to step in and create a single payer universal system to take its place when the corporations can no longer operate.

    Let’s spread the word, fellow Progressives. To the Daily Kos, to MSNBC’s blogs, Huffington Post and everywhere! United In Ailment, we can force their hands!

    1. You, too, suck a dick.

      1. That might help her contract something.
        Fucking trolls/sockpuppets are out in force.

    2. Mary,

      The best thing you could do for the country is die a quick painful death. Don’t worry, it will be for the children.

      1. I’m a libertarian, but that John was uncalled for. Progressives really were screwed, in a way that hurts us all.

        Next, I think she is joking.

        1. I still hope she dies. And yes she is joking. Progressives are crying crocodile tears about this. They think it is the way to single payer.

          1. John, oh, John.

            Don’t we all know by now that the race never goes to the swift?

            1. (I know Mary is joking, but I’ll play along)

              Of course. Libertarians know that by experience. Welcome to the club.

            2. Don’t we all know by now that the race never goes to the swift?

              Some races are swifter and more fleet footed.

        2. Progressives really were screwed

          Dark clouds have silver linings.

        3. If she’s joking, she should start submitting for the Friday Funnies.

    3. You should have seen this coming, it’s the Democratic Party you’ve always known and loved.

    4. Progressive = communist who prefers to wear bright, non-threatening colors.

      1. A bit of an exagerration. They’re basically social democrats. Left wing, yes, but not communists.

        1. Just as dangerous.

          1. Probably more dangerous. Communists might not exactly be on the “teach a man to fish” side, but they’ll steal fishing poles from the evil capitalists for the working fishermen.

            Social democrats just start handing out stolen fish until everyone’s dependent on them. Then, when all the fishermen have left or quit or joined the parasite class, their little pyramid scheme collapses and everyone starves. Welfare’s about consumption, not capital — because of that, it never ends or gets better, it just gets worse until the whole house of cards comes down.

        2. Just as dangerous. And no, they don’t believe in democracy or even understand the concept.

      2. They’re called “pastels.” This is why we always get our asses handed to us.

    5. Another Typhoid Mary?

      -jcr

    6. Oh, and this: cool story, bro.

    7. Best troll evah!

    8. Okay, pretty good troll. +1

    9. haha good one OP 10/10 would laugh again

    10. Excellent, “Mary”! Actually, a large number of progressives actually think this, sans the realization that it will bring about single payer in short order. Unfortunately, I think this is part of the reason the bill was so unpopular with the public. Once these “Progressives” realize what they really got, they’ll be against repeal. Repeal will be next to impossible.

    11. You should consider the fact that you are in a minority (most americans don’t want gov’t run healthcare) before you impose your will on the rest of us via a terrorist strike on the healthcare system. Please consider moving to Canada, France, Sweden or some such socialist enclave instead of turning America into one with a coup.

  2. Not sure it’s relevant but there’s a fun fact: In 2007 dollars, households headed by people between the ages of 65-74 clocked in with a median net worth of $239,400 dollars and those headed by someone 75 or older boasted $213,500. The median net worth for all American households? $120,300.

    Oh, it’s quite relevant.

    The fact that Medicare is a broad middle-class entitlement — instead of Medicaid for the elderly poor — accounts for a good portion of its rising costs.

    As sickening as it may be to tax the younger, healthier, poorer, and less likely to vote in order to give money to the older, sicker, richer, and more likely to vote, there is a hellish logic that guarantees Medicare’s costs continuing to rise even faster than health care in general.

    The crap being passed today suffers all the same problems.

    1. This makes me wonder if the 2010s will resemble the 1960s as a time of intergenerational strife?albeit for different reasons. I confess I have personal reasons for half-hoping to see such conflict in my lifetime. I won’t feel so alone in resenting my parents.

    2. For Pete’s sake! You’re looking at net worth, not income. By the time you are 65+ most likely your home is paid off and you’ve been accumulating ‘stuff’ over 40+ years. Does that mean that when you get old you have to sell everything and move into a retirement center or with your kids?
      Now I am 55 and my home will be paid off in 9 years. Over the past 30 years the value of this place has gone up tremendously, but it is still the same old place to me – not a mansion by any means. But once I retire, my only income will be social security and some from a 401k that I was smart enough to start before the company did away with pensions.
      Even with medicare at 65, part D and medicines will still cost me over $900/month – about what the house payment is.
      So if medicare did not exist, what would you do about the sick and the elderly?

      1. Well, for one thing there’d be a lot more money in their hands and the hands of their kids, because nobody would have been paying Medicare taxes for decades.

        1. We’d just blow that money on smartphones and rims. We’re too dumb to take care of ourselves.

      2. Janice, I must say that your post struck a nerve with me. It seems to me that you are laboring under the impression that you are entitled to retire at some point. Many boomers are going to find out really soon that retirement is just not in their future, financially speaking.

        “Does that mean that when you get old you have to sell everything and move into a retirement center or with your kids?” Um, no. Nobody forces oldsters to sell everything and move just because they are old. Oldsters sell & move because financially or for health reasons they must. You may argue that it isn’t fair, but taking care of yourself in your golden years is supposed to be why you were, as you put it, “accumulating ‘stuff’ over 40+ years.”

      3. Well forget about about leaving granny on an ice floe. Thankyou global warming.

        1. In the old days, people depended on their children and neighbors to take care of them. If everybody hates you, that is your own problem. Maybe they hate you for the same reason that I do; you are a generational thief.

          BTW, my comments are obviously focused on Janice. It gets confusing, because my comment appears 3 comments below hers.

        2. “Well forget about about leaving granny on an ice floe. Thankyou global warming.”

          LOL! Thanks for making me smile, I was feeling very dejected.

      4. They can fucking die. You had your entire life to save and prepare. You knew the program was insolvent in the long run years ago. You’ll be luck if you get a single fucking dime from me for a program that will be trillions in the hole 30 year before I can take out one red cent. I want that fucking 15% of my income back you old fucking generational thief. I’ll save for my own goddamn retirement, or else I will act as a likeable person so that maybe when I am old I don’t have to depend on theft to keep me alive. Go fucking die. NOT ONE RED CENT. END MEDICARE AND SS TOMORROW!

        1. A-fucking-men!

          1. I tried to negotiate the terms of surrender with the older generation for years, but they’ve been to stubborn. Negotiations are over, they missed their chance. Now a clean break is the only thing that I will settle for.

        2. > I’ll save for my own goddamn retirement, or else I will act as a likeable person so that maybe when I am old I don’t have to depend on theft to keep me alive.

          You could practice being likeable right now. It’s easy to be likeable when happy. Learn to be likeable when you are really angry and people will probably throw money at you.

          Yours,
          Tom

          1. Go fuck yourself. I have every right to be pissed off right now. At least I’m not using violence in my name to get my way. I’d rather everyone be angry than violent. Dumb ass.

            1. Dickless fuck. I was referring to the fact that maybe if people didn’t treat their own children like shit, they wouldn’t have to depend on the government in the future. Their own children would welcome them with open arms and take care of them.

              1. if people didn’t treat their own children like shit, they wouldn’t have to depend on the government in the future.

                Actually, this is not true.

                What most of the now-aging Boomers treated their children like was not shit, it was royalty. They feared striking them for fear of “teaching them violence.” They feared teaching them sexual restraint for fear of being called “hypocrite.” They feared teaching them respect for law because they did not respect law.

                The children came to despise their parents because their parents were so obviously, and so easily, controllable. These children knew in their hearts that they should have been restrainted, taught, and occasionally punished. They got away with murder, and despised their parents for letting them.

                And now, they will abandon their parents when the parents need them most — not because the parents treated them badly, but because the parents chose not to teach them basic humanity.

                And because they were not taught basic humanity, they will rationalize their inhumanity by claiming, falsely, that their parents treated them like shit.

                Don’t worry, young’n. We actually deserve it. What’s going to get you in the end, though, is how your kids end up treating you. Karma is a real bitch.

                1. My parents are boomers and they haven’t done shit for me. All boomers are for more concerned with houses than they are with their own kids futures. I know this from experience. My dad’s and mom’s parents worked their asses off to buy their kids their first car and pay for college. I had to buy everything myself, and I haven’t seen a dime of college.

                  Even the parents who helped their kids were so judgemental and assholic that nobody could stand being in the same room with them for ten minutes. I have friends who know about this from first hand experience, my parents being of the first category.

                  1. So you’re mad that your parents didn’t baby you?

                    The boomers have a lot to answer for, but you not being a pampered little bitch isn’t one of them.

                2. PHIL IS SO RIGHT!Unfortunately there “KIDS” out there that are waiting for the parents to”kick the bucket” so the can live off the parents accumelated wealth.

      5. So if medicare did not exist, what would you do about the sick and the elderly?

        As I noted, Medicare should be at most Medicaid for the elderly poor.

        One thing that needs to be remembered is that health insurance doesn’t insure your health as much as it insures your finances. Thus what Medicare as it now stands actually insures is the inheritance of the Medicare recipient’s children.

        Let’s hope we can agree that taxing some poor 20-year-old janitor who will never be more than a janitor so some wealthy 50-year-old can inherit more money from his parents is beyond unfair.

        1. I don’t think the word “unfair” means what you think it means.

          Do you honestly believe the human race — or even a subset of it — can make life “fair” to every person in that group?

          You’re talking “fair” with people like Pelosi and Reid in charge…lining their pockets with other peoples money while claiming to be for the “little guy?”

          Disgusting.

          1. Actually, I’m trying to talk “fair” with someone who believes that fairness is an important metric.

            Whether or not I believe that fairness is particularly important or whether or not I believe that government can bring about fair outcomes, I think I can persuade someone who does believe those things to reconsider her opinion of Medicare if I can show that it is patently unfair.

            Since it is pretty easy to show that Medicare is patently unfair and that its metaconstruction will guarantee that it becomes even more unfair, I thought this a good course of argument.

            I take it you disagree.

            1. Let’s hope we can agree that taxing some poor 20-year-old janitor who will never be more than a janitor so some wealthy 50-year-old can inherit more money from his parents is beyond unfair.

              1) Fairness is not a virtue. Perhaps you meant “unjust.”
              2) Taxing anybody, no matter how rich or poor, to insure the material of anybody, no matter how rich or poor, is unjust.
              3) It is also unconstitutional, tyrannical, and immoral. Taxation is for running the government, not for protecting or redistributing income.
              4) However, you can reassure yourself that the “unfair” scenario you envision will not occur. The Obama administration is making every effort to ensure that citizens making even 10% above the median income pay no taxes at all. That way, voters who pay no taxes will always outnumber taxpayers, and be able to force them to pay for whatever they choose. See how tyranny works?

              All that said, I do agree that Medicare is a bad idea, and should be repealed in favor of a plan to assist the poorest of the poor. But no true reform is possible before we learn to think properly about government, taxation, and justice.

      6. Does that mean that when you get old you have to sell everything and move into a retirement center or with your kids?

        If you need long term care, it sure does! Depending on the state, you’ll have to liquidate all your assets (minus your house-but you don’t get off that easy yet, keep reading) down to about $2-$3K! Then, after you die, whatever was spent on your care will be taken out of the value of your home before your heirs can inherit. Welcome to government run “care” for the elderly!

        (And that’s just how it is today, imagine what they’re going to do to you as Medicade get progressively more insolvent. Bend over, grab your ankles, and start chanting “death with dignity”, cuz that’s going to become policy.)

        Have a nice day! 🙂

    3. The discrepancies aren’t only worrisome, they are downright scary. The UK is still behind Australia and Canada as far as I’m concerned. Been to both, they’re great.

  3. The future just ain’t turning out the way it was supposed to.

    Mommy!

  4. But this time is going to be different.

    No, really.

    Why is everyone laughing?

    1. Obama is going to get on his unicorn and bend the cost curve.

  5. Memo to self:

    Short US$ Monday AM. Better still, check if Toyko open already.

    1. Indeed. If this passes, look for the stock market to take a big dive Monday.

      1. I don’t think so. The equity markets like “stability”. If markets do tank the dollar should rise from the usual inverse relationship.

        1. Why is a new entitlement and billions in new taxes “stability”?

          1. Because it is predictable to six months out(the horizon the market is usually concerned with).

            “Health care” stocks should do well at first

  6. And some people still think this isn’t socialism… hmmmmm?

    1. I hope the libertarians who voted Obama are happy now. Maybe this will be a wakeup call.

      1. …or the ones who just stayed home in the name of ideological purity instead of holding their noses and voting for the grumpy old white guy.

        1. I actually considered voting for McCain but changed my mind when he dropped everything and rode into Washington on his white horse to engineer the bank bailouts. Do you really think he would have been any better that Obama? So I voted for Barr.

          1. Bad beats terrible any day in my book.

            Besides, Barr wouldn’t be any better either — GIVEN HOW HE COULD NOT GET POSSIBLY ELECTED.

            Whereas McCain could have.

            1. Fuck McCain. Traitorous First Amendment-eviscerating bastard. His ONLY positive accomplishment was surviving the Viet Cong prison.

              Period.

            2. The only reason Barr or another Lib couldn’t get elected is because people keep voting for the lesser of two evils. I decided a few years ago I would never do that. Promised myself I would only vote for a candidate I really agreed with, and if there was none, I’d stay home. I’m doing my part, can’t help it if others aren’t.

              1. Except this time, they seem to have managed to vote for the -greater- evil.

                November will only be the beginning. There is much work to be done…on both wings.

            3. Compliments of the Electoral college, voting in MD for a republican was a fruitless endeavor for me from a practical standpoint. Moreover, it would have been violation of my principles. In other words, I used the unflinching democrat-ness of MD coupled with the disenfranchising power of the elctoral college to provide a practical justification for not voting for McCain. Plus, he was the turd sandwich.

      2. I hope the libertarians who voted Obama are happy now.

        I’m sure all kinds of mythical creatures are happy.

        -jcr

        1. Not the unicorns. They’re going to get force-fed Skittles and ridden hard.

        2. With all due respect, I imagine some did. Even so, why make a big deal about a stupid vote?

  7. Nope, just good old fashioned political corruption. Where were you when the Republicans were doing that.

    Don’t toss around words like they don’t mean anything.

    1. Get with the times; words don’t have to mean anything — they just need to sound like they do.

    2. Like political corruption?

      1. that’s not meaningless; it’s redundant

    3. It’s not socialism, just the government taking control of part of the economy! So, what’s the precise term for that?

      1. I believe the term you are searching for is fascism?

        1. Thank you. They are economic fascists, not socialists.

          This is the only reason that many deluded members of the far-left, say John Stewart, think that Obama is a “moderate.” Obama’s decision to continue the war in Afghanistan and Iraq resembles something that a “right-wing” authoritarian (let’s say, a fascist) would do. They forget that warmongering is a progressive pastime and the bleeding heart left anti-war movement was something of an anomaly.

          1. fascists, not socialists.

            Fascists are socialists. They’re just one particular franchise of misanthropes.

            -jcr

            1. Yep. I don’t know why its so hard to understand a)that they’re cousins not opposites, and that b)here it is crystal clear that motivation is essentially socialist for many, but that tactically the *means* they’re having to settle for are technically fascist.

            2. The American Form of Government

              This 10-minute video explains this perfectly. Watch it and guess who is running our country.

          2. They forget that warmongering is a progressive pastime and the bleeding heart left anti-war movement was something of an anomaly.

            The progressives are never above going to war to further humanitarian goals (see Bosnia-Kosovo, World War I, World War II, the calls for intervention in Darfur). Just as the as those masquerading as conservatives aren’t against government intervention when it furthers their moralistic fascism (see anti-abortion, Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell)

  8. Why do the Democrats yield floor time to people who can barely speak the language?

    1. Oh, I forgot, they always do that.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvRbO73vfXc

      1. The commments on that vid are classic.

        as a gator you should not be surprised that this woman graduated from the university of florida as this is? the typical product of “the swamp” all she is missing is a mullet, a pair of jorts and a case of natty light
        […]
        If you, too, were wowed by Corrine Brown’s eloquence & command of English, call now to receive her insider’s package on how to succeed by preying on the? sympathy of cowards!

        Act now! This limited time offer to abandon your child to the woeful inadequacies of public education won’t last forever! Call 1-800-G0-GATOR to claim your spot! Set your child on a path to incentive-earning underachievement!

        Call now, not later! And GO GATOR!

        (P.S: It’s all about the “U”. Can you spell “U”?)

        1. I liked this one.

          “as a gator you should not be surprised that this woman graduated from the university of florida as this is the typical product of “the swamp” all she is missing is a mullet, a pair? of jorts and a case of natty light”

  9. I was yelling at them for being fascists.

    What’s not socialistic about a government telling an entire section of the economy how to it can function? It’s not just a word, it’s a cultural philosophy, and it has never worked out well.

  10. Yes, Nick, we all know that Medicare and Medicaid all cost several times what they were projected to, but that was because we didn’t make the programs big enough or put enough power in the hands of the Central State. Obamacare doesn’t, either, so when costs invariably explode, threatening the solvency of the US, the obvious answer will be to nationalize the who kit and kaboodle.

    The answer is always to give the State more control. Did you not read it in the Times?

  11. I still hope she dies. And yes she is joking. Progressives are crying crocodile tears about this. They think it is the way to single payer

    Actually, if corporate interest is entrenched even further by this bill (which it will be), the possibility of universal health care through a single payer without intervening drastic action becomes even more implausible.

    Of course. Libertarians know that by experience. Welcome to the club.

    Libertarians, you say! That Noam Chomsky is one of my favorite writers.

    1. Universal healthcare is a nightmare pretty much wherever it is tried. The UK has third world level care. But, as bad as it is, it is at least equally bad for all and does provide some level of security.

      We are going to get the worst of both worlds. All of the insecurity of a free market system with none of the benefits and all of the draw backs of a single payer system. You are right about one thing, this bill is so bad that we would have been better off with Hillarycare. And that is very scary.

      1. is at least equally bad for all

        Actually, no. The rich Brits (and there are actually some left) simply hop on a plane or hire a private doctor.

        -jcr

        1. Well, where are they going to go now?

      2. Well John, I agree with you 100% except being better off with HillaryCare.

        But as for this physician, I have made the decision to phase out third party payers (been thinking about it for quite a while). When my exit date comes up, I am no longer going to accept CMS (Medicare/Caid) and will opt out as soon as I can.

        1. just wait until they pass a law requiring that you accept government plans. After all.. if the individual mandate holds up in court, that means the interstate commerce clause gives congress the power to force you into contracts. A doctor service mandate in not far behind.

          1. Then I will find another way to earn a living or expatriate.

            I have been investigating New Zealand for some time.

            1. I thought New Zealand already has socialized medicine? You have to have a certain BMI or lower to emigrate.

    2. No, this bill will of course fail hugely and expensively, and “progressives” will blame the failure on the “free market” and urge single payer to “fix” things. So just be patient.

      1. Exactly.

    3. Chomsky, eh? As a linguist or anarchist or both?

      1. As a Libertarian!

        1. There’s an extra word you’re leaving out. He called it Libertarian Socialist. His work with grammar and kitties was fun though. Nice try.

          1. You know who else called himself a Libertarian Socialist, at least before both words became squishy?

            Give up?

            F. A. Hayek!

            How is that? Better try, right!

            1. Hayek had real ideas on economy and the world. He’s nowhere near Chomsky in terms of an anarchistic state where any assumption of “power”, be it private, government, religious, etc., is to be dismantled because of it’s nature to cause some inequality.

            2. [citation needed]

            3. Mary, if i wasn’t gay i’d ask you to marry me.

              Rock on

            4. “Libertarian” and “socialist” go together as well as “bacon” and “nuclear waste-based sandwich spread”.

              1. “nuclear waste-based sandwich spread”

                Fat-free mayonnaise?

        2. And further I don’t buy for a moment you have read his lingquistic work. He is actually a really an important lingquist. But, his books on that subject are not exactly easy reads. And anything else he wrote is about like listening to the crazy old lady at the laundymat.

          1. What the fuck is a lingquist?

          2. Chomsky makes a good political theorist in much the same way that a gymnast makes a good bodyguard.

    4. “Libertarians, you say! That Noam Chomsky is one of my favorite writers.”

      You mean the guy who spent the entire 1970s and 80s denying that the Khmer Rouge killed anyone? That guy? Do you read Holocaust deniers to?

      Just a hint, but I really wouldn’t admit reading him to many people. It doesn’t reflect well on you.

      1. Joseph Sobran writing in the National Review recommended the Chomsky Reader as a means to challenge your own internal set of ideas, and Sobran was a friend of William F Buckley’s so you can’t get a more mainstream Conservative recommendation than that.

        1. so what? Just because they are conservatives doesn’t mean they are right. Chomsky is an idiot who said and did a lot of horrible and damaging things. They only thing he ever wrote of value was his linquistics work. And I am not a lingquist. And life is too short to read about how the Khmer Rouge really were misunderstood progressives. I might as well read Bruce Cummings and hear about how the Kims were really enlightened leaders. No thank you. Sorry to hear you wasted your time on him.

          1. My response was to this:

            Just a hint, but I really wouldn’t admit reading him to many people. It doesn’t reflect well on you.
            Which I showed you that you are incorrect.
            Now you are changing the criteria of the argument which is something Chomsky wrote extensively about. I argued in good faith. You said that reading Chomsky doesn’t reflect well on me, and I pointed out respectable people actually do read him.

            Why does Chomsky get all the blame for support of the Khmer Rouge when the Nixon administration did as well? Chomsky is a post hoc escape goat. Chomsky contributed rhetoric, Nixon and Kissinger contributed guns.

            1. Just in case the descending order of the replies was confusing, I was talking about you. You seem sharp, intelligent, and stuff. How about we get away from the peanut gallery here and have an actual conversation?

            2. Chomsky endorsed the sick ideology and him and all of his fellow travelers gave that to the Khamer Rouge. That was much more damaging and important than guns.

              And I stand behind no one in my dislike for Kissinger and Nixon and later Ford abadoning South East Asia to the Communists. But at least I can sleep at night knowing that I am old enough to have been an adult during the cold war and that I never made excuses or equivicated about the biggest evil of the 20th century. That is something Chomsky cannot say.

              And his denial of the obvious for so long, makes him a crank. It also makes him an awful person who insulted the memories of millions of victims of an ideology he still defends.

              1. Even if I agreed with the last few paragraphs that first one is a bugger. The guns made the genocide possible. Not Nietzsche with the Nazis, not Chomsky with the Khmer Rouge, but the guns which K supplied.

                Funny, well, not so funny, how the same thing happened in East Timor. There was no ideology at play. Just Realpolitikers playing brickmanship, supplying the blood thirsty with guns.

                So what do East Timor and Cambodia have in common? Genocide, massacres and Henry Kissinger.

                I see very little vehemence directed at those who made in happened but a lot aimed at a misdirected intellectual.

                Like I said, scape goat.

                1. You are moving the goal posts. I am not responsible for the Khmer Rouge. But if I go around telling people that they didn’t kill anyone, that makes me a crank.

                  Scapegoat? Are people trying to hang Chomsky for the Khmer Rouge’s crimes? No, they are just saying he is a fool who should be ignored. Only idiots defend him. And you are left with claiming “he is not as bad as Kissenger and Nixon”. so what? A lot of people aren’t. That fact doesn’t make him anything but a crank and someone you should be embarassed to claim to read.

                2. John is an Ollie North/Jerry Falwell type conservative.

                  Chomsky represents Satan to him.

                  1. I couldn’t agree more. Took the diss right out of my mouth.

                3. Not to defend Kissenger et al but the Kmher Rouge had very few guns. They killed masses of people with sharpened sticks and clubs to conserve their meagre ammo supply. If an ideology supplies motivation then tools can always be found.

                  1. My cambodian girlfriend tells me they beat babies against trees.

                    1. That’s not an exaggeration either. I’m not being sarcastic.

                4. This made me laugh out loud:

                  “The guns made the genocide possible. Not Nietzsche with the Nazis, not Chomsky with the Khmer Rouge, but the guns which K supplied.”

                  GUNS cause genocide! Who knew? Somebody call up the Israelis and the Swedes, where EVERY CITIZEN OF MILITARY AGE IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO OWN ASSAULT WEAPONS!! They’re going to experience a genocide soon, because they all own guns!

                  Funniest damn thing I’ve heard in two years.

                  1. Oops. Make that “Swiss,” not “Swedes.”

            3. Give me a break. Nixon never contributed anything directly for them, and he certainly never denied or made excuses for the holocaust, like Chomsky did. The most you can do is construct some indirect link like “Nixon supported Lon Nol which lead to…” blah blah blah.

              1. Assistance to Lon Nol was very off and on by the Nixon administration and not consistent. At one point they supplied a Cambodian general with arms and a mission only to abandon him and his men in the middle of a campaign where he and his men where slaughtered.

                1. Oops, I mean, damn reactionairies!

                  It’s late, beddy bye time. Now, where did I put that nightie? I simply will have nothing to wear without it . . .

                  1. Like the Khmer Rouge didn’t get guns from China or the USSR.

                    Leftists have a fetish for bloody revolution. Which is one reason liftist government inevitably end up murdering millions of people.

                    They dehumanize the “capitalists” and the “bourgeois” and label people “counter-revolutionary” in an effort to excuse mass-murder.

                    Go mow down some Fox news watching “tea baggers”. After all they are subhuman class enemies that deserve to die, right?

                    1. Actually, this is where she/he/it shows her hand and shows that she/he/it doesn’t have the proper self discipline to keep up a proper troll identity by showing sympathy for the 1970 coup leader.

                      Lon Nol was a hero to the same type of person who would write letters to their insufficiently right wing Senator (say, a Helms) complaining about the treatment of Fujimori by the Clinton Administration or even proclaim nostalgia for a Pinochet from time to time when leftist seem entirely out of hand. In other words likely an altogether terrible person. However, my speculation may be completely off and unfair. Perhaps in this matter of Cambodia it truly was the choice of the lesser of three or four evils, and would have been the one that lead to the least blood shed.

                      I would hazard to guess since we can only speculate, the original post was intended for a left wing blog as a spoof. The author, she or he or it, realized that leftist are so stupid they might actually try something like the idea expressed in the post, and people would wind of dead, so, though maybe this is sheer vanity on a Reason lurker’s part, given the commonsense levels are much higher, there would be much less likely chance someone would die over a joke.

                      Just my two cents.

        2. And also they said read him. They didn’t say list him as one of your favorite authors.

        3. You seem pretty smart; feel free to click my name and email me. I think we would both enjoy our discussions with one another.

        4. Joseph Sobran makes Pat Buchanan look like a Likud pundit.Some troll is really bored tonight.

          1. Before the flair up over the first intifada he was a member of the conservative mainstream in good standing, and so was Buchanan for that matter. That is why I mentioned he was still writing for the national Review when he recommended Chomsky.

            1. He reccomended Chomsky the same way someone reccomends Mein Kampf, as a way to understand a form of craziness not as a way to read anything of value.

              And no Chomsky is not Hitler. That is not the analogy I mean to draw. So don’t claim Godwin.

              1. Bad money chases out the good?

                1. That is Gresham’s Law

                  1. Kidding.

  12. LOL, it all kind of sounds insane to me dude.

    Lou
    http://www.web-invisibility.at.tc

  13. Damn, I love me some Big Brother! This is gonna be GREAT!

    1. I get to turn all of my health records over to the IRS!! Woopee!!

      1. Does the DEA get all our prescription records? Or is HHS moving onto narcotics enforcement turf?

    2. In Orwell’s 1984, we were introduced to Big Brother when Winston was not in front of the government’s camera during mandatory exercise time.

      Get ready.

  14. Let’s spread the word, fellow Progressives. To the Daily Kos, to MSNBC’s blogs, Huffington Post and everywhere! United In Ailment, we can force their hands!

    If I’m not there, go ahead and start without me.

    1. The Plan has to be done with all of those involved in it together sharing in the experience.

      1. LOL. Okay. You really had me there. I didn’t think you were performance art. But that comment is too good. Sorry, you blew your cover. But that was some first rate trolling.

        1. But just “Mary” became “Mary Mallon” along the way. I guess we weren’t getting the shtick quickly enough.

          1. And now the liberals want to marry. Little do they know it is probably Warty.

            1. I mean marry her.

        2. Leftist can’t have a sense of humor?

          1. Come Warty stop it. When the house liberals started proposing to you, you should have taken a bow and left it alone.

            Best trolling ever.

            1. Dude, I wish I was capable of trolling. Thanks for overestimating me, though, I guess.

          2. Can I catch the rest of your act at the Poconos next Friday?

      2. “The Plan”. We are heretofore instructed to use a proper name spelling for the Plan.

  15. Don’t we all know by now that the race never goes to the swift?

    “The race doesn’t always go to the swift, nor victory to the strong. But that’s how you bet.”

  16. In fairness, Massachusetts had the highest rates in the nation even before RomneyCare.

    1. thats because they already had comunity rating and guaranteed issuance… just like NY, the other top priced state.

      I just went on to ehealthinsurance.com and searched for individual plans for my age in virginia (where i live), and saved the html code. I will hold onto this for a few years and then coem back once all these “reforms” are in place and I’ll compare the prices. Guarantee they will be going up.

  17. I have a plan! For the Republicans if they win in November. Simply refuse to include any funding for this monstrosity in any of their budgets! When people are perplexed simply explain it is unconstitutional and therefore invalid and therefore they would be violating their oaths of office if they DID include any funding for this monstrosity in their budget. They may not be able to repeal it but they CAN defund it. All spending originates in Congress!!!

    1. Is this actually possible? Where do I find out more?

      1. The dems made this exact same argument in 2006 wrt the wars. Look where that got us.

        1. The Democrats did not have the backbone. They did not follow through. They COULD have though. The Republicans still made the case “Would you do that to our boys in a war zone ….” This would not be as troublesome I think.

      2. I think they can. All spending bill must originate in Congress.

        1. My job is government administrative law. I can tell you that a lot of parts of the US Code don’t ever get put into practice becuase the Congress just says “no funds shall be spent in performance of X”. And that is it, you can’t do it even though the law says you can or even should.

          1. My god John, another lawyer. Aren’t there enough of us around here? Where’s RC Dean

            1. You rang?

    2. If they want to, and I am not making any claim on their backbone to do it, they can totally fuck with Obama. They can put riders on IRS funding measures that say “no money appropriated in this bill shall be used to enforce any portion of the Obamacare Law”. They can refuse to fund all of the new positions in the bureacracy to run this thing. They can tell HHS they can’t spend a dime (and that includes labor) implimenting this thing.

      They don’t have to directly repeal it. They can make it meaningless.

      1. But too much of it doesn’t depend on direct funding. How can you make sure the IRS won’t collect the medical device tax and the Medicare tax on investments? How does defunding stop the banning of high-deductible policies? Etc.

        1. True. But you can stop a lot of it. Not all of it. But a good portion. And you can repeal the tax and make Obama veto it along with whatever vital program you stick the bill onto.

  18. simply explain it is unconstitutional and therefore invalid and therefore they would be violating their oaths of office

    There’s a first time for everything, I suppose.

  19. I am so sick of people excusing this bill because the “Republicans suck too”. What does that have to do with this suck-ass bill??

    The Republicans do indeed suck, however, they are correct on this piece of shit legislation.

    It’s NOT okay to just let the Democrats slide in November because the “Republicans are just as bad”. That’s utter bullshit. If Libertarians hate the Republicans so much, then why do they always run on the GOP platform?? Huh? Why don’t they run as Democrats if the Republicans are soooooo horrible, worse even than the Dems?

    It’s the same argument that says, “Well, the Republicans spent up the deficit so it’s okay if the Democrats quadruple it.”

    No, IT’S NOT OKAY!!!!

    IT’S NOT OKAY.

    OKAY??

    1. Exactly. Hoover sucked. But that doesn’t make FDR any better or in any way make Hoover responsible for FDR’s lunacy.

    2. “I seem to recall Bush signing SCHIP into law… the Republicans wanted Obamacare just without the abortions”

      No wait, I’m a cosmotarian dumbfuck.

    3. No, none of is okay. You’re right. For many of the libertarian persuasion, it may be tactfully beneficial to pull the lever for a straight GOP ticket. Although, the vote won’t be for the GOP per se, rather it would be gridlock that we are looking for. Gridlock between Congress and the president and gridlock between the states and Washington.

      1. It is too late for gridlock. The liberals just got the clusterfuck they have been dreaming of. Gridlock isn’t going to be good enough. We have to actually roll this back.

        1. Gridlock’s all we’re probably going to get, John, just realize that.

          1. That is what they want. Now it is going to be “we must do something about the deficit”. So when they try to roll back the taxes they can claim we can’t do that, the deficit is too high.

            The only thing to hope for is a blowout of historic proportions in November. Something really big. Something that will leave the Democrats angry bitter and divided in the aftermath and make them turn on Obama.

            1. I have a more modest hope for a ‘jumped the shark’ moment where the Dems get a smaller and smaller audience over several election cycles and Obamacare just stays on paper until it’s filed away and largely forgotten.

    4. Kind of reminds me of that old saying you heard from your parents, “If Johnny jumped off a bridge, does that mean you should, too?”

    5. Democrats’ proposals suck.

      When Republicans act like Democrats, their proposals suck.

      There’s a common theme here. Can you spot it?

  20. I know this is somewhat off topic, but have the dems been wearing purple all week? Also, is Andy stern still wearing that stupid pink sweater vest?

  21. Never to be ingracious in defeat, I must congratulate all those who voted to teach the Republicans a lesson November 2008. The cost of the lesson seems a bit steep to me, but apparently the market said otherwise.

    1. Can I get a congratulation for not voting for any of these clowns? Whatsoever?

      1. No I didn’t vote for any of them either.
        Excepting a loathsome pro-TARP RINO, yet pro-gun, GOP Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). Although only in a runoff forced by the third place libertarian candidate. I’m trying to break my voting habit but I always do primaries,bond referendums(NO!) and runoffs.

        1. SIV – I can’t wait to pull the lever against both Isakson (this year I believe) and Chambliss when next his head is on the block. Isakson particularly ticks me off with his wholly owned allegiance to the real estate industry.

          1. And Saxby to Centrally planned Agriculture.

      2. Congrats. Want one of my cyanide capsules?

        1. Can I have two?

      3. I voted for Barr. I didn’t teach anyone a lesson; I voted for a candidate who was still running on a platform of freedom.

  22. I’m a power-hungry dumbfuck politician that wants to destroy the medical industry, so I’m really getting a kick out of these replies!

    1. Well, okay. So long as you’re not rent-seeking public sector union leech, you can be forgiven.

      You’ll have to excuse my cynicism, I just think the dems ultimately want to commandeer 1/6th of the US economy and subsequently leave it in the stewardship of the SEIU. Seriously, picture that! Good God!

  23. Nick’s point about the cost of government programs makes perfect sense, but with all the stream-of-thought embellishment with references to characters from second-rate 80’s comedy films you wouldn’t know it. You’d might even think he’s just another counter-culture lefty moonbat. That would be unfair as Caddy Shack was mildly funny, but what in hell does it have to do with this shitty “health care” bill?

  24. John Boehner is bringing the hellfire right now to close out the debate. I doubt it will make a damn bit of difference, but he’s also once again demanding a roll call vote.

    1. ARGH! Now it’s The Nancy! It burns!

      1. Is being Nancy Pelosi a pre-existing medical condition?

    2. Pelosi just said this will lead to more liberty!!?? Praises Obama’s “unwavering commitment” to health care.

      1. “…this legislation will unleash tremendous entrepreneurial power…”

      2. Blah, lie, blah, lie, blah, lie….repeat

  25. Hmmm, where is Medicare Part D in your chart?

    Oh, you conveniently left out something that counters your thesis.

    http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/me…..unter=3240

    Why should I trust anything you say when you obviously have no qualms about cherry picking your data, Nick?

    1. 1/8 not too bad.

      That’s a chart from somewhere else. Ripping Nick for posting it is about as fucking retarded… Well we know where that’s goin’.

      1. It is also the newest, and therefore the most relevant to the modern situation.

        1. Clearly the short run is the best predictor of the long run.

        2. its also the one entitlment that had some kind of market mechanism to try to limit costs… thanks to walmart, and cosco and the like drugs came in cheaper than planned. The dems wanted a mandate and price cap mechanism. This new bill is far closer to past healthcare bills.

          The other difference is that Medicare D is only percriptions where the supply curve is pretty elastic. You can easily pump out more pills. You can’t pump out more doctors too easily when demand neccesarily goes up with this bill.

    2. Here’s an article talking about how great a success Medicare Part D is. But a passage within highlights the storm to come:

      Given the support shown by seniors, it would make sense for Congress to study the Medicare prescription drug program for lessons that can be applied to comprehensive health reform legislation. So it’s unfortunate–and confusing–that some in Congress are talking about making unnecessary changes to Part D, particularly to the way Medicare pays for and provides access to prescription drugs. What’s more, the proposals would re-institute payment procedures from earlier this decade, before the prescription drug program was passed, when seniors had serious difficulty paying for medicines.

      According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), these changes would result in the vast majority of seniors paying more for their coverage. Analysis of one such bill showed seniors would pay upward of 20% more in Part D premiums.

      Raising costs is the wrong way to address our health care challenges. Policymakers should focus on improving a good program, not raising prices for many beneficiaries by undermining the aspects of the program that make it successful. There are, in fact, several proposals under consideration that would save seniors money, including the drug manufacturers’ agreement with the Obama administration to spend $80 billion providing discounted medications to seniors affected by the much-discussed donut hole.

  26. First, congrats to the progressive movement behind this bill. I remember from all the sports in my youth that no matter how upset you are at losing, you shake hands, congratulate them on their effort, go home…and work to beat the piss out of them next time.

    More importantly though is that I doubt this can be defunded. The demagoguery guns will be set to stun if it is attempted. I can already see the old ladies and kids in wheelchairs rolled out to stop an effort. And heaven forbid one of the politicians has a cousin’s baby mama’s grandmother with some debilitating disease. Realistically, once it becomes clear how much of a tax it’s going to be on people just starting out in life, it’s going to be a biggie. Throw that in with the fact that, despite all the changes in getting rid of private student loan lenders, student loan debt is getting larger by the year, and you might have the roots of a repeal cause. Also, the fact that children will be staying at home deep into their 20s to avoid paying taxes for healthcare is definitely going to squick the boomer set. That said, there’s nothing we are going to be able to do until it actually takes effect.

    1. First, congrats to the progressive movement behind this bill. I remember from all the sports in my youth that no matter how upset you are at losing, you shake hands, congratulate them on their effort, go home…and work to beat the piss out of them next time.

      Except the stakes aren’t a cheap brass trophy adorned with a tiny football-player figurine. The stakes are the quality and cost and choice options of my healthcare.

      1. It’s not your healthcare anymore, Paul… it now belongs to The State.

  27. Banker Kwan: Like Hell it can’t be defunded.

    Banker Chin: Do you Americans really think you are the only game in town?

    Banker Kwan: You know who looks like a good investment now?

    Banker Chin: Anyone who is Not America?

    Banker Kwan: Yes!

    Banker Chin: Why do we keep their tab up and running?

    Banker Kwan: In the short term we would lose out, especially if it forces a default. Besides that they are really a lousy investment. I see little hope they’ll improve. Too comfortable and set in their ways, and they want to be even more comfortable and more set in their ways in the future.

    1. Banker Wun Hung Lo: Be patient Kwan and Chin. They sell us Reagan class aircraft carrier. We extend loan three months.

      1. Kwan & Chin: Nice!!!

  28. This once great experiment, the building of a nation where individual freedoms outweighed mob rule, has been sick for years. A large chunk of it’s body was destroyed today, an aggressive tumor piled on to the faded semblance of it’s former self. Passage has ensured a lasting illness that we may never cure. So sad, even for those who think they want this. Sorry folks, the gavel has dropped.

    1. Hit the road serf!

      1. Where we goin’?

          1. I thought we might be getting in line at the department of medical care of the people’s republic of america.

    2. This isn’t anything new, it’s only a continuation of things. This is hardly revolutionary. Government intrusion into healthcare has been going on for years, and this is just one more extension of that.

  29. Shorter response: Republicans will save us. Vote GOP in 20 and… 20 and… the FUTURE!

    1. No but in the short term they’ll help fuck things up in a good way.

  30. Well it was fun while it lasted. Will the last one out please turn off the lights?

  31. Passage of this bill makes me, once again, glad I never had kids.

  32. Well, folks… we’re fucked now.

    Fuckeder, I should say.

    1. Oh, boppety-boppety-bop…same shit, different day, man. If everybody who disagreed with all of this redistributionist BS would do what they could to get on the dole, we could break this thing in no time flat. Until you’re ready to do that, you better just learn to savor the incrementalism…’cause it won’t ever stop on its own.

      1. You’re encouraging people to get on the handout train?

        You’re sick.

        1. Maybe I am.

          If it was taken from you, by force, and against your will, would you characterize getting it back as a handout? In going further than recovering direct losses, I might consider such actions as a rather effective form of civil disobedience; entirely non-violent, and unlike outright tax protest, employing a completely legal strategy. Unlike some, I do not consider deliberate self-martyrdom to be a particularly effective form of protest; your mileage, of course, may vary, but I’d recommend asking that old ‘zero-return’ Schiff fellow (that would be Irwin, not Peter) how his confrontational tax protest strategy has worked out for him specifically, and for the cause of freedom in general.

          If a vote is worthless, and a tax protest ineffectual — not to mention, borderline suicidal — and if you do not support the concept of violent revolution, what other options remain? Blind hope, backed up by abject submission?

          How is it sick to consider using the only tools which are realistically available to you? That’s not a rhetorical question — what are your real arguments against doing so?

  33. It passed! Yay, no more speculation. I guess now all that’s left is to see what November brings and what other large industry gets a guaranteed customer.

    1. Mandated GM vehicles. Two per household. Fines for buying foreign.

      Then we can move on to what is really important: Mandated designer shoes.

  34. The people get the government they deserve.

    Boy, are the entitlement whores going to be pissed when they have to wait 7 months for a biopsy.

    1. Hope you were nice to all the brown people in your undergrad curriculum 😉 Medical tourism just became the next big thing.

    2. No they are going to be pissed when they discover that “Heath Care Reform” = “Forcing people to buy Health Insurance”.

      I’m certain most of them thought that it was going to be “free”.

  35. This is why India is going to outcompete everyone in this century. Lack of unfunded entitlement obligations.

    Just like General Motors went bankrupt because of the burdensome pension obligations it was carrying. Any nation or country that has unproductive overhead (i.e. money going out to support people not doing any work) is going to be at a competitive disadvantage relative to nations without these burdens.

    Toyota and Honda do not have huge numbers of pensioners sucking lifeblood from them. They were able to offer lower prices and not cut corners on quality. They beat GM out of the market.

    The US is soon going to be forced to raise taxes to pay for SS and Medicare’s unfunded liabilities. Countries like India will not. They can keep their taxes low because they won’t have a huge class of pensioners living off of the taxpayer dime.

    Lower taxes means higher profits, a more attractive investment climate, faster economic growth, and greater prosperity.

    1. Oh, that’s just crazy talk.

      Why are you so negative? I mean, think about it: 32 million uninsured vs. Health Care for All? — I think we can all agree that would be a good thing, can’t we? So why are you so invested in the cynicism and the fear? Didn’t you read the Declaration of Independence? You know what it says? Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. How can you have liberty if you get hurt and require expensive medical care? That’s right, you don’t have liberty anymore when that happens, and that’s truly an injustice.

      No American should be forced to settle for the weak, fraudulent, and passive version of ‘inalienable’ rights that some people espouse — yes, we need to protect people from other violent and greedy people, but that is not enough; no, we also need to secure their freedom from the most insidious oppression of all: the oppression of nature.

      Luckily we have a government that makes it possible for us to do this; it only requires that we act. So that’s what we choose to do. You think we can’t? What are you, a pessimist? This is America, and Americans deserve the best. Isn’t that proof enough for you that we are doing the right thing?

      By the way, this is America, not India; have you ever seen how they drive there? It’s just crazy, and not very safe. It’s practically like anarchy, and judging from what I saw on youtube, I bet that almost 80% of Indians die in car accidents. We’re lucky it’s not like that here, where we’re civilized, and where it is our birthright to be guaranteed freedom from injustices of all kinds.

      1. Of course, the greater injustice is watching the system explode and everyone suffering b/c of this mindless bleeding heart philosophy. But, we’ll just have to wait.

        1. You gotta love that road to hell. Paved with lollipops, baby farts, free hookers, and exemption from responsibility.

      2. How can you have life without food? So, where is my government-supplied food? Wait, are you saying I have to go to an evil, for profit company to buy food with my own money? Now, there’s an injustice. Grocery stores’ profits are killing this country. We need to nationalize them and provide food for everyone. Also, my idea of pursuing happiness is an all-you-can-eat buffet. Y’all will be OK paying for that, right?

        I mean, that’s what Josey is arguing: that the Declaration of Independence means that I get Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness on my own terms and everyone else has to kick in for it. Who’s on board? I’m gettin’ hungry.

        1. I could go for a sandwich… and josey’s gotta buy.

        2. Not really me, Odysseus — that’s roughly what the Speaker espoused from the podium of the House of Representatives of the United States of America last night.

          Frustration, in my case, tends to manifest itself in sarcasm. And only thinly-veiled, in the above parody. Sorry if I confused you.

    2. Thanks Hazel “Master of the Obvious” Meade!

      Just kidding. I always love your posts. Just the right amount of pessimism and cynicism to count me in as a fan.

  36. Register your determination to repeal this monstrosity. Become a fan of Project Repeal on facebook.

  37. Let’s call the Progressives and all other altruists and collectivists exactly what they are: Neo-Slavers. It does not matter whether I wear chains when they confiscate the time I spent earning my money, I am just as enslaved.
    Laissez-Faire Now!

  38. It is disgusting to read the vulgar trash talk which too often comprises the posts to Reason’s site. Little would be lost and a lot gained if there were no comments.

    1. So change the channel, Nicky.

    2. Oh mah!!!! You sirs offend mah delicate sensibilities. I am getting the airs just being here. Where are mah smelling salts!!! I always depended on the kindness of strangers, but here they want me to put out to!

  39. Ok Nick stop commenting.

  40. Here’s an update to that Medicare poster… http://www.missourah.com/2010/…..re-poster/

  41. Time to get out there and bend the cost curve. Now Premiums will be 5-10% higher than they would have otherwise.

    Oh, you wanted the Government to bend the cost curve “down”? You seem to have far more faith in government than was warranted; bending it up was much easier… just watch it go.

  42. Wow. I havn’t read so much neocon whining and disinformation since the last time I looked at a George Will column. Socialism? Guess what, we live in a social democracy. And you particapte in it too-unless, of course, you don’t take the mortgage interest deduction on your taxes, don’t paricipate in national holidays, don’t use the interstate highway system, etc etc.
    The best comment was about how the UK has a 3rd world medical system. I’ve been there, used it, and I can tell you it’s a whole lot cheaper than our current system per capita, and they have demonstrably better overall outcomes.
    Indeed, why should we change the US healthcare system when we pay much more per capita, for mediocre outcomes, than any other country in the civilized world?
    This was a kick. I’ll have to thank my friend for the link.

    1. You tend to get punched in the face a lot, don’t you?

    2. This is a Constitutional Republic you ignorant putz, not a ‘Socialist Democracy’. Ya know, the Constitution – that document you people ignore and have never read or understood. You have no idea what ill informed ideologues like you have foisted upon yourselves and your children. This is not a replica of any other deeply flawed socialized healthcare system – it is far worse. When was the last significant medical innovation or breakthrough miracle drug that came out of the UK or Canada or Cuba? Anyhoo – I cannot wait until the IRS is banging on your door. You think this is ‘whining’? Nobody whines louder than infantile liberals, who set towns on fire when their tuition goes up. You folks aren’t going to know what to do when you’re forced to live by your own absurd, sanctimonious standards. Hypocrites.

  43. To all you young folks condemning your elders — back before you were born, back when your elders were young — the Rock Group “The Who” sang a song containing the lyrics “I hope I die before I get old”. Have you seen The Who lately? They got old – and guess what? You will too. Better hope your kids aren’t saying the same things about you when they’re your age. I’m just saying….

  44. Mary, that’s what ‘progressives’ have been doing, ya dumb broad. Go leech off the Father that left you, you parasite. He probably never worked for anything either. Or he was a decent, hard working American, and you’re still rebelling like a damn spoiled eighth grader. My Father and Grandfathers didn’t fight for slugs like you to feed off the hard earned income of others. Soon, you’ll be required to make sacrifices – something leftists never do – and then you’ll be the crying victim. Read a freakin’ history book – learn the origins of the term ‘progressive’ and what that movement was all about. Little has changed, you entitled, bloated, class envy, middle class destroying, baby killing, ball bashing, traitorous, welfare sponging malignancy.

  45. That’s exactly what’s going to happen. It’s going to fold and the government will have to rescue it. So take heart, it will happen. Just not as quickly as you would like.

    In reality, if you love these systems so much and think they are God’s gift to human-kind, you and all your fellow “progressives” (euphemism for “Marxist”, for the uninitiated) ought to just pack up and go LIVE in one of those utopias that already has this stuff in place. Could I interest you in Greece? Portugal? France? Great Britain? Good luck and godspeed. Don’t let the door hit you on your way out.

  46. Wow! It’s amazing to come across a web-page where every single comment is by someone who has read and understood every single page of the bill.

    Bravo and kudos to you all for being able to make informed comment.

    I cannot claim such an accolade, so I don’t know whether it will be a good thing or a bad thing.

    However, it is easy to quote under-estimations of government cost. It is also easy to ignore the other side of the argument, where we see real net salaries eroded over time (so people are actually getting paid less year-on-year) by unexplained rises in health care premiums. Perhaps a balanced, “reason”ed argument would include both sides of the story.

    Oh well, I suppose it’s easy to preach to the choir.

    Good luck to all. I hope you get what you deserve.

  47. thanks for sharing with us

  48. learn some principles of cost benefit analysis, as well as read and critique some actual studeis in health economics using cost benefit principles (mental health, …. Gerd Gigerenzer Calculated Risks How to Know When Numbers Deceive you … Rationing is a dirtyword in health care, but it is not necessarily a bad
    http://destinationsoftwareinc.com

  49. The House and Senate are currently considering health care reform bills that would cost in the vicinity of $1 trillion over the first 10 years and $2.4 trillion over the first 10 years of full implementation.
    San Diego Podiatrist

  50. The House and Senate are currently considering health care reform bills that would cost in the vicinity of $1 trillion over the first 10 years and $2.4 trillion over the first 10 years of full implementation.
    Bankruptcy San Diego

  51. How the program is administered varies by state. Some states use a Medicaid expansion program, where SCHIP money is handed out according to the rules and regulations of Medicaid but with expanded coverage of older children and those that do not qualify for Medicaid. Other states create a separate plan for SCHIP that is administered more like private health insurance plans. SCHIP in Michigan, also known as MIChild, is ordered as a combination of the two. Regardless of the management system, inapt

  52. You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry

  53. Watching the horrific injuries to the soldiers in Iraq and the rehab they have to go through, I wonder how those prosthetic arms and hands turn and move an grasp.

  54. most libertarians have a great deal of disdain, or at least skepticism, for unions?? Why would Nick Gillespie care so much if Brown wants to make it harder for their employees to unionize? Why would most Reason tv viewers and reason? subscribers care either??
    Round Rock Window Company

  55. why do you write some words here, i think it maybe very interesting~~~67sd8gh

  56. this article give me so much things, i like this~~SCFCHU64

  57. something is great DT45DIFD

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.