TexasCHLforum.com

^^ I wish I could claim it, I stole it from someone else

From what I can tell, there is little in Obamacare that actually reduces the cost of providing healthcare except to reduce reimbursements. Instead, costs will necessarily rise dramatically, and new taxation will damage the economy. Leave out the Medicare reduction nonsense for a moment - Obamacare removes a half trillion dollars from the economy in the form of new taxations, most of which (I assume) goes to pay for something like 158 new federal agencies and to provide subsidies to those who think they have more of a right to my property than I do. So sure, Nancy was right, it will create jobs - government jobs, which do nothing for economic growth. Some of the taxes are on medical devices, and those costs will get passed to consumers. I can't keep track of what's passed and what hasn't at this point, but there will be new capital gains taxes, which reduce investment, new income taxes on the "wealthy" (since when was $250K/year wealthy?) and businesses which will inhibit economic growth, and (at least at one point - did this pass?) capital gains taxes on the sale of your home.

From an economic sense, it's foolish to raise taxes during a recession. The unemployment rate is not coming down, the underemployment rate was rising slightly at last check, and now this Obamacare thing will provide further downward pressure on growth.

That's not even talking about the problems with the actual healthcare delivery!

A free market solution would look to the things that are driving up the cost of health care and attempt to mitigate them, instead of raising the cost but spreading the cost over more people. Texas has demonstrated that tort reform will lower health care costs. I read today that a huge percentage of health care cost, I think it was something like 40%, is simply administrative. Medical professionals and insurance companies both have a mountain of regulations to deal with - simplify that and costs come down. (Outsourcing companies in India will experience real growth as this thing takes effect.) I learned long ago that if you want to reduce costs, you first have to understand why the costs are where they are. I do not believe that the authors of Obamacare did that. Kevin Brady, my congressional rep, spent months working on a plan in conjunction with the Texas Medial Center. How much of what he found is in Obamacare? Nothing.

There has been a lot of demonization of the insurance industry during this process. My view is this: Profit is good. I don't own any stock in insurance companies, so I have no right to complain about how they operate their businesses. If I think their profit margins are too high, or they pay their executives too much, my responsibility is to take ownership - literally, by purchasing stock - and bring the issue to a shareholder meeting. If I don't do that, I have no right to complain. There are individual problems, just as there are in any industry, and the legal system is there to take care of them. But of course, those problems give Obama an excuse to bring out little Johnny who is being mistreated by the insurance companies as part of his incessant sales job - which we taxpayers are funding, of course. The fallacy is that with more government control, there will be more, not fewer, sob stories like little Johnny's.

Obamacare: Combining the efficiency of the DMV with the compassion of the IRS.

Ah, that's enough of a rant, I think I'll go read 'Atlas Shrugged'.