Quantcast

Donald Trump Explains O'Dumbo Care

Ken 2011/10/25 23:29:36
What can go wrong?  The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
Other (please leave comment)
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Trump Explains Dumbo Care



No one can sum it up better than Trump --



Let me get this straight . . .

We're going to be "gifted" with a health care

plan we are forced to purchase and

fined if we don't,


Which purportedly covers at least

ten million more people,

without adding a single new doctor,

but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,


written by a committee whose chairman

says he doesn't understand it,


passed by a Congress that didn't read it but

exempted themselves from it,


and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes,

with funding administered by a treasury chief who

didn't pay his taxes,


for which we'll be taxed for four years before any

benefits take effect
,


by a government which has

already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,


all to be overseen by a surgeon general

who is obese,


and financed by a country that's broke!!!!!



'What the hell could possibly go wrong?'





Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • kimvmeadows 2012/09/01 03:26:12
    What can go wrong? The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
    kimvmeadows
    +1
    Our Mr. DUMBO president is as fake as a 2 dollar bill!
  • Charu ∞ijm♥∞ 2011/10/26 15:09:25
    Other (please leave comment)
    Charu ∞ijm♥∞
    +1
    That says it all!
  • jmc07806-PWCM-JLA 2011/10/26 10:47:32
    Other (please leave comment)
    jmc07806-PWCM-JLA
    +2
    What else is new, the majority of the country didn't want it to begin with and the eletists in DC voted it in without reading it or knowing what was in it. It seem like there is a pattern of this and we need to change all of them.
  • Charles R. Anderson 2011/10/26 08:51:20
    What can go wrong? The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
    Charles R. Anderson
    +2
    And these are nothing but a few of the practical problems. The plan is to force healthy, young people to heavily subsidize the older and less healthy, to reduce the purchase of more capable health equipment, to reduce drug research and development, to increase taxes on medical care itself, and reduce the number of health care insurers. Still just a few practical problems.

    The worst problem is that ObamaCare asserts that there is nothing that the government cannot do, if it so wishes to assert its control over the People, their value choices, and the management of their lives. ObamaCare flat out assumes that the government owns each and every individual body and mind. We are denied the personal protection of our lives. Government will tell us how much pain and suffering we will endure, clearly depriving us of the pursuit of our happiness. We are told that government can tax us for any purpose whatsoever, require us to do anything, and there is no limit on either. We are told that government will do this whether most of the People oppose this or not. ObamaCare is the final statement that the People are peasants to be summarily ruled by progressive elitist central planners and their cronies well connected to the socialist government power-brokers. We are no longer Americans, if this stands!
  • Ken Charles... 2011/10/26 16:17:05
    Ken
    ". . .ObamaCare asserts that there is nothing that the government cannot do,"

    That is the point made by one of the appellate justices who heard one of the state lawsuits against Obamacare: "If congress can do this, force people to buy an expensive product, and then pay for it monthly for the rest of their lives, there is no limit to what they can do."

    Despite the ever-expanding reach of the federal government I still find that liberals/progressives will not give up the mantra that the Constitution is a "living document", which allows the federal government to expand to meet changing conditions.
  • Charles... Ken 2011/10/27 04:22:08
    Charles R. Anderson
    +1
    We do have a few good justices left. I hope there are enough of them.

    There are few changing circumstances which individuals exercising their equal, sovereign individual rights to life, liberty, property, the ownership of their own minds and bodies, and the pursuit of their own happiness cannot handle very well themselves. The People do live and with their rights they are very adaptable. Government, on the other hand, can almost always be counted on to lust for more power and control even when the problems we face were mostly created by too much government. Government is the problem, not the solution. That is an everliving truth, which was well understood by the Founders and is obscured by our government-run education system.
  • Ken Charles... 2011/10/27 04:38:21
    Ken
    +1
    We do have a few good justices, five, on the Supreme Court. The only one I'm a little worried about is Kennedy, the ""swing" vote, though I believe this one is so clear that he will vote to find at least the "individual mandate" to be unconstitutional.

    The big question will be whether they will strike down the entire act or sever the individual mandate and let the rest stand. Two things, the Obamacare bill, as I understand it, does not have a "severability clause," a clause which essentially says that if any part of the law is found unconstitutional that portion can be severed and the rest should stand.

    Also, the Obama administration has been arguing that the mandate is essential to the funding of the law - as I believe you mentioned - forcing young, healthy individuals to buy insurance to help support the older individuals who need it. That fact favors striking down the entire law if the mandate is found to be unconstitutional.
  • Charles... Ken 2011/10/27 04:59:04
    Charles R. Anderson
    +1
    Yes Ken, I also understand that it does not have a severability clause, but nonetheless we have now had a couple of federal court rulings that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, but the rest of the law will stand.

    Without the individual mandate, ObamaCare is much further beyond sustainability and should lead very quickly to the bankruptcy of numerous states and to the total destruction of the health insurance industry. Some health insurance companies are already pulling out of the business.

    The obvious alternative will be to repeal the law with the votes of a few Democrats in the Senate after the 2012 election almost certainly being required. Unfortunately, ObamaCare was structured to add tax revenue which is already being spent on general government purposes and its repeal will significantly decrease revenues in the short run. Politicians lack the farsightedness to write that near-term income off even when faced with an avalanche of future debt from ObamaCare. It will be interesting, and probably a sad story, to see how the politicians get us our of this morass.
  • Ken Charles... 2011/10/27 22:28:06
    Ken
    +1
    I know that despite the success to date of some court challenges the Obama administration is going ahead and spending money that may well end up having gone down a rat hole - his actions in that regard are unconscionable.

    Having practiced law as a second career I can tell anyone who will listen that tort litigation is the least efficient way to correct civil wrongs, especially in the area of alleged medical malpractice. The firm I was initially with did a lot of malpractice defense and I often assisted the senior partner who litigated the claims.

    I can say for a fact that well over 50% of all medmal claims I saw were bogus, yet tens of thousands of dollars were spent litigating each of them. If a claim was valid, we would tell the carrier and the doctor our opinion and they would usually settle the claim early. Of the medmal cases that went to trial, we obtained defense verdicts on close to 80%.

    I have always thought that medmal should be treated the way that worker's comp treats on-the-job injuries - a no-fault system with recovery limited to what it takes to make the patient whole, physically and monetarily. That type of tort reform, coupled with an interstate insurance regulation allowing insurance companies to write policies with limited coverage, e.g. limited to catas...
    I know that despite the success to date of some court challenges the Obama administration is going ahead and spending money that may well end up having gone down a rat hole - his actions in that regard are unconscionable.

    Having practiced law as a second career I can tell anyone who will listen that tort litigation is the least efficient way to correct civil wrongs, especially in the area of alleged medical malpractice. The firm I was initially with did a lot of malpractice defense and I often assisted the senior partner who litigated the claims.

    I can say for a fact that well over 50% of all medmal claims I saw were bogus, yet tens of thousands of dollars were spent litigating each of them. If a claim was valid, we would tell the carrier and the doctor our opinion and they would usually settle the claim early. Of the medmal cases that went to trial, we obtained defense verdicts on close to 80%.

    I have always thought that medmal should be treated the way that worker's comp treats on-the-job injuries - a no-fault system with recovery limited to what it takes to make the patient whole, physically and monetarily. That type of tort reform, coupled with an interstate insurance regulation allowing insurance companies to write policies with limited coverage, e.g. limited to catastrophic illnesses, with large co-pays and/or deductibles, would go a long way toward dropping the cost of health insurance. Who wants to be paying for health insurance that is often forced by law to cover such things as sex-change operations?
    (more)
  • Charles... Ken 2011/11/17 08:19:52
    Charles R. Anderson
    +1
    I am not surprised that more than half are bogus. That is about the case with Workman's Compensation also, which does not work very well either.

    Catastrophic medical insurance with a high deductible is great, but ObamaCare will not allow it. That is very harmful. In general, ObamaCare will be economically very hard on young, healthy people.
  • Ken Charles... 2011/11/27 04:03:25
    Ken
    True, fraud is rife in Worker's Comp claims. One lady in the San Diego area drawing Workers Comp for a alleged permanent disability, was filmed bowling at her weekly bowling lead.

    You've put your finger on the major problem with health insurance. Not the just the proposed federal regs, but most state regs, require companies to cover all eventualities, from a sex-change operation on up. If they were allowed to cover true "catastrophic conditions", such as heart trouble, cancer, etc., with a large deductible and co-pay that would discourage seeing a doctor unless it was necessary, health care coverage would be much more affordable.

    When I was a kid we didn't have any medical coverage - if we went to the doctor we paid for the visit. I had a knee injury playing H.S. football and the school did have an insurance policy that covered my treatment.

    I'm a firm believer that the availability of comprehensive medical coverage is one of the reasons that "health care" is so expensive and the reason that its growth outpaces inflation.
  • Charles... Ken 2011/12/01 06:28:44
    Charles R. Anderson
    +1
    When I started my laboratory company in 1995 and 1996, I depleted my savings to buy equipment and start the business. I paid myself $10,000 in my first full year, while living in expensive Montgomery County, MD with three children and a wife just starting a new career also. We would not have been able to have health insurance, but for the reasonable cost of a high deductible plan. We kept that plan for about three years. Such a plan is great for most young people, especially. Indeed, it is great for anyone who enjoys basic good health.

    We recently stopped offering health care in my company. It turned out that our older workers were costing a fortune in the group plan, which was going up rapidly also due to ObamaCare, but all of the older workers are actually in good health and could get individual insurance for so much less on their own that it made much more sense to give them a pay increase above what they needed to buy their own insurance, including more than enough to compensate them for the tax disadvantage of buying your own insurance. This also frees me of having to handle the paperwork and the payments on the plan we had. We all won out. Fortunately, high intelligence professional employees tend to have better health than the average person, so it is good not to be lumped with them in a common insurance pool.
  • Ken Charles... 2011/12/01 22:40:56
    Ken
    Despite all of this, if Obamacare is fully implemented you will have to pay a surcharge on your payroll, if I am not mistaken. During the debate over Obamacare I read of a situation in upstate New York. where the cost of health insurance in a town right across the border in Pennsylvania had health care insurance at half the cost that it was in N.Y. That has to be totally due to regulatory differences in the two states.
  • bronx 2011/10/26 00:15:15
    What can go wrong? The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
    bronx
    +3
    bomb blowing up This is what needs to be done with Obama Care!
  • ~ The Rebel ~ 2011/10/26 00:14:02
    What can go wrong? The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
    ~ The Rebel ~
    +3
    The paper to write this bill would have been better used for toilet paper because the whole thing needs to be flushed!
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2011/10/26 00:00:19
  • Ken ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2011/10/26 03:12:18
    Ken
    +1
    So which of the facts in the post do you disagree with?
    That congress didn't even read it before passing it?
    That it would add ten million insureds without adding a single doctor?
    That it adds 16,000 new IRS agents?
    That we'll be taxed on it for four years before it even takes effect?
    That the government has bankrupted Medicare and Social Security?

    So just where did Trump go wrong?
  • Murph 65 2011/10/25 23:57:42
    What can go wrong? The better question would be "What can't go wrong!"
    Murph 65
    +3
    I saw this earlier somewhere and sent it to everyone I could think of. Makes it very clear that "nothing could possibly go wrong"! Not. Sure makes it clear why I don't like Obamacare.
  • Marie/M2M2K™-#1Conservative... 2011/10/25 23:51:00

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/24 14:38:34

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals