In the president’s SOTU last night, he said regarding health care:

But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.

Here is a simple approach that will work:

  • A. ELIMINATE ALL EMPLOYER PAID HEALTH INSURANCE and group rates
  • B. ELIMINATE ALL INTERSTATE OBSTRUCTIONS TO SALE OF HEALTH INSURANCE
  • C. CAP MALPRACTICE LAWSUITS
  • D. INCREASE THE SUPPLY OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS.

Part A. will:

  • because all workers will be required to pay for 100% of their insurance out of their own pocket, they will have shop and negotiate for the lowest insurance rates.
  • remove the disparity between what the self employed pay for insurance and what regular, previously employer-subsidized workers pay.
  • Just as self-employed workers presently do, to keep their insurance premiums low, all workers will negotiate larger deductibles, giving them a strong incentive to question and negotiate the charges of their healthcare providers…driving down costs.

Part B. will:

  • remove in-state and regional  monoplies of insurance companies … increasing competition and driving down rates.

Part C. will:

  • drive down the cost of insurance since legal fees that need to be paid by that insurance will be less.

Part D. will:

This 4 point approach will accomplish the goals the president outlined, but it requires real change, the kind of change that Mr. Obama’s special interest backers (like unions and banksters) will not support.  McCain had a proposal in his campaign to tax the employer paid part of health insurance, but the special interests and Mr. Obama shouted it down.  McCain ran a poor campaign and deserved to lose, but this proposal was on the right track.  Too bad,  Obama’s offer for real change is a farce

More on this topic (What's this?)
More Obama Ukraine Fail Posters (Humor)
Irony thy name is Jimmy Obama!
Obama’s Secret Russian “Buy” Signal
Read more on Pharma & Healthcare, Insurance, Obama's Presidential Policy at Wikinvest

Bill Freeza suggests now is the time for a new third party to focus the anger of the American people into the really needed action – voting bums from both parties out of office. We agree.  As a practical matter the new party platform must be created in such a way that new membership in the new party is drawn equally from both republicans and dems.  In this way the new party does not serve to cause one of the old parties to win – but, rather causes both old parities to loose!  We posted on this previously… Lincoln was one of the first to join the new Republican party in the 1840s. Membership in the new Republican party consisted first of disaffected and demoralized Whigs.  But soon the ranks swelled equally from democrats who also hated what their old party had become.  It’s an ideal time to relegate both parties to the bone yard since their leaderships are equally owned by the banksters.  It’s all in the platform, that we agree on…If we craft the right platform the existing parties’ corruption will be given their walking papers.

A female Democratic lawmaker in footage released Sunday said Congress could pass healthcare if female lawmakers “sent the men home.”

“We go to the ladies room and the Republican women and the Democratic women and we just roll our eyes,” she said. “And the Republican women said when we were fighting over the healthcare bill, if we sent the men home…” at which point she was interrupted by loud applause.

“You know why? I’m not trying to diss the men but I’m telling you it’s the truth that every single woman there has been responsible for taking care of a [relatives] and so we think we can find a common ground there,” she said.

Boy, they sure are getting desperate.

Simon Jonson has suggested that (ultra liberal inflationist and debt multiplier) Paul Krugman be made Fed Chairman – instead of the bankster Bernanke.  Bernanke definitely needs to go …but to replace him with Krugman?  Simon Johnson has gone nuts and his sidekick Kwak has such a liberal political bias that it gets in the way of economic common sense.  Even Krugman says it’s a crazy idea. The guy just fell several notches in credibility advocating that sort of dribble…

Much cyber ink has been used lately predicting significant house and senate seat losses for the Democrats in the 2010 elections.  But a piece in American Thinker points out that Dems can’t be voted out if they control the election process through vote buying and other corruption.  Giving the vote to millions of illegal aliens in return for keeping them in power is a very real and sinister plan that explains why the Dems are not so worried…

More on this topic (What's this?) Read more on Chun Yuan Steel at Wikinvest

From  firedoglake.com

For almost the entirety of the health care debate, the Obama Administration has relied on economist Jonathan Gruber to make the public case for its idea of reform – even the most unpopular parts. But as Firedoglake revealed on Friday, the Obama Administration has failed to disclose that it paid the same economist more than $780,000. Jonathan Gruber’s work has been cited by the White House, Members of Congress, and countless media outlets, but not once did the Obama Administration disclose it was paying him more than $780,000 in tax dollars.  This is a huge ethical violation that undermines the entirety of health care reform.

Once we broke this scandal, The New York Times, Washington Post, Time Magazine, and other publications all said they should have disclosed Gruber’s lucrative contracts if they were aware of the conflict of interest. Dozens of Members of Congress cited Gruber’s work in their floor speeches. The White House pushed Gruber hundreds of times to the press and on its website.  While Gruber’s ethical lapses are his own personal and professional issue, the true problem here is that the White House used Gruber and his research as a seemingly unbiased source in support of its unpopular reforms. When Obama wanted to tax middle class health care plans, Gruber defended the tax. When Obama wanted to force people to buy private insurance, Gruber defended the individual mandate. When Obama did not want a public option, Gruber said a public option was not important. When Obama needed to pretend the bill had cost controls, Gruber said it had the greatest cost controls ever. It is simply not right for the White House to cite Gruber’s analysis to illustrate the benefits of the bill they support without disclosing that Gruber is on the government payroll. A biased insider can’t be an unbiased outside observer. But that’s exactly the approach of the Obama Administration, to the tune of $780,000 in tax dollars.

The Obama Administation’s $780,000 “buy-an-economist” scandal threatens to shake the foundation of health care reform. We need to get to the bottom of this.

Sign our petition to Obama: come clean on tax dollars used to pay any other undisclosed contracts.

http://action.firedoglake.com/gruber

More on this topic (What's this?)
Do we take Putin at his word or Obama's?
Politically incorrect humor featuring Barack Obama and Chris Christie!
Obama’s Secret Russian “Buy” Signal
Obama’s New War on Investors, Part II
Read more on Obama's Presidential Policy, Pharma & Healthcare at Wikinvest

Dylan makes the case against Timid Tim.  The TBTF’s own the Treasury Secretary- it’s definitely where the evidence points. We are surprised the MSNBC network lets Radigan say stuff like this…

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Where there is smoke- there’s fire. Where there is obfuscation – there is something to hide.  Bloomberg’s effort to make the FED disclose firms benefiting from the bailouts is being dragged out by the guilty FED and its chief, Ben Bernanke.   This is why we need to pass Paul’s Audit the FED bill post haste.  We need to know what’s going on with the FED.

TPC has a good post from Comstock, as summarized below:

So let’s sum this up.  Even in this big “recovery” that is being spun so heavily on financial TV, employment is still down 5.2%, retail spending 8.4%, new single-family home sales 73.3%, core new durable goods orders 19.6% and industrial production 11.5%.  Since the numbers have moved up slightly we suppose that by definition it’s technically a “recovery” rather than a recession, but it does seem like a distinction without a difference.  And remember this is all we’ve gotten from the stimulus plans, the first-time home-buyer credit, cash for clunkers, the foreclosure moratoriums, zero interest rates, unprecedented quantitative easing, mortgage-backed security purchases, Treasury bond purchases, virtual government takeover of the housing market  massive aid to the GSEs and record deficits.  As we have previously pointed out all we have done is shift private debt burdens to the Federal government.  With all that, it is still doubtful that the economy can stand on its own once these artificial supports are removed.  Nevertheless the debts will remain, eventually to be resolved either by future inflation or default.

The last sentence is intriguing… When an obligor’s income (ability to repay) goes up as a result of newly printed money making its way to them, then monetary inflation can make that obligor’s debt easier to be paid back.  But the newly printed money MUST make its way to the obligors.  Suppose the new money goes to the stock or commodities markets to bid those prices up, but the obligors don’t own any of those types of assets – rather they own real estate (i.e. houses).  Then the obligors are no better off despite the inflation.  This is the case for the average consumer.  On the other hand, the banksters benefit handsomely from the government inflation handout.  They will be able to easily pay off their debts…once they sell off their stock and commodity assets…  The one thing that remains to be seen is what that liquidation by the banks will do to stock and commodity prices.

Some dire predictions for private health insurance are here.

WHAT WILL REALLY HAPPEN
A) Oh yes, please look at the 2014 stipulations as well. Employers will ultimately drop their coverage and stop offering it if they employ more than 50 employees. Think about it, they will cut costs significantly in the form of premiums (they will have to pay a $750 fee per employee fee when not offering a plan) and will be able to tell their employees that they have health care available through the government exchange plan. — You don’t think they’ll do it? Right now, most employers pay 1/2 of the health plan costs per employee, just assume that that is $200 a month of a total of $400 a month. The break-even is just at 4 months. Cash strapped employers will absolutely push their employees off into the new plan.

B) Over the course of the next 3 years, people will sue the federal government and it WILL be declared unconstitutional to require a person to enter into a contract with a third party to obtain insurance.B) In that 3 year period, private insurers will have had their business margins slashed and profitability will have been destroyed. With the high court ruling that the health reform act is unconstitutional, we will see a final destruction of these firms as the trend to buy insurance will be broken and good healthy clients will drop policies, while sick folks will retain them.

C) As a result of the court action, the federal government will step in with the only solution – a national health plan that is a one payer system (GOVERNMENT HEALTH PLAN). This will be the only fix as the collapse of private insurance plans will be complete.

It sounds ominous and sounds like a conspiracy doesn’t it? The answer is clearly “YES” it does and guess what, it is all planned. Remember, the administration says they don’t care what gets passed, just as long as it is passed. This is the gateway for the end goal of national health care.

Bottom line? If these predictions are correct, one thing stands out: Stock prices of private health insurers in the US will be toast — it’s a question of exactly when. Long term puts on health insurance providers may be a good bet…

More on this topic (What's this?)
End the Mandate
We Were NOT Jacked Up By Obamacare
Double Digit Health Insurance Hikes Crush Small Businesses
Read more on Health Insurance at Wikinvest
Next Page »