WHAT CURRENT HEALTHCARE REFORM MEANS TO THE WORKING POOR

Still think healthcare reform was a good idea for the working poor?  Let's go over a few of the highlights:

1.  Starting this month, Americans can no longer use pre-tax health savings accounts to purchase over the counter medications.  Also, withdrawals from HSA's and FSA's will now be taxed at 20%, twice the original 10% amount.

2.  Starting in 2013, Americans will no longer be able to deduct prescription drug coverage as part of Medicare part D.

3.  The biggest tax hikes for healthcare reform go into effect in 2014, starting with employers.  If they employ at least 50 people, they will be mandated by law to provide insurance coverage or be fined $2,000 per employee.  Should they make the employees wait, they will be fined an additional $400 per employee.  This cost could be catastrophic to some small employers.  If they go out of business, who covers the unemployed?

4.  The  absolute worst part of this reform for the working poor is the mandate that requires the employee to purchase this coverage.  If you choose not to, you will be hit with a penalty of your own, to the tune of 1% of your income in 2014.  If you do not have coverage by 2016, the penalty is increased to 2.5% of your income. 

Does any of this sound good to you?  If it does, I can only surmise that you are not a small business owner and you are not part of the working poor.  I personally know people who could not squeeze another $10 a month out of their current budgets to purchase insurance, so how can anyone with half a brain think these people can afford to give up 1 to 2.5% of their income?  The people I'm talking about are not lazy, they work all the hours they can get, rarely miss work and use their hard earned income to pay for food, housing and transportation, not drugs or alcohol.  So why should they be beaten down by a government that is claiming to do them a favor in the guise of providing health care coverage?  For that matter, if the Democratics, who were so proud of themselves for passing this "coverage",  are going to force the poor to pay for it, they aren't "providing" anything.  Their only real accomplishment, as far as I can see, is that they've managed to put a spin on raising taxes for the poorest of the poor, while creating an atmosphere in the small business community that makes it even harder to do business and provide jobs for many of these same people. 

The real beneficiary here is the federal government.  Under the guise of health care reform and helping the poor, they've manage to pass one of the most outlandish tax hikes in history. 

ARROGANCE AND STUPIDITY PASSES HEALTH CARE REFORM

While it comes as no surprise the Democrats pushed through healt care reform, I have to say I am shocked by the arrogant and downright stupid attitudes of the politicians involved in the passage of the bill. Just the day before the bill passed I saw yet another poll showing 75% of respondents opposed to the health care reform package and yet it still passed? Protesters were surrounding the steps of the Capital building, shouting, "Kill the Bill," as Nancy Pelosi, carrying her oversize gavel and grinning like the Cheshire cat, paraded up the steps with a crowd of Democratic leaders. While I'm sure they intended to create an air of a historical moment, they really gave me the impression of thumbing their noses at the American people.

Now that they have passed the bill, I expect to see a lot of changes come the November elections. Any politician losing re-election in November has only themselves to blame. Obama claimed to be an admirer of Benjamin Franklin, one of the country's wisest founding fathers. Perhaps he should go back and read what Franklin had to say about arrogant kings who felt no need to listen to the wishes of their subjects. It bears a striking resemblance to the performance of his administration thus far.

I believe what got me the most, when I was watching yesterdays news reports about the vote in Washington, was one Democratic spin Dr. who said that most people just don't "understand" and you have to "explain it to them in the right way." I can't recall the guys name, but if he happens to read this, I want to assure him, I understand perfectly what the government is saying and what it wants to do. I simply don't believe them when they say it will reduce the deficit. I believe it will increase the national debt and increase personal income taxes to unsustainable levels. It will seriously affect businesses and their profitability and reduce jobs. Increased taxes will lead to more money fleeing the country for investments in lower tax havens. In the end, it is a self defeating bill, since the government will end up collecting less taxes than it does now and be even less able to fund health care.

Public Option Insurance Plan, or Slush Fund for Politicians?

I watched Obama's speech about health care reform and I'm still amazed that the politicians don't get that the majority of taxpayers are against new programs that would increase the tax burden. So I'm watching the speech, wondering what their motivation is for passing a bill that is so obviously unpopular to so many people.

Then it occurred to me to think along business lines, instead of from a political point of view. A public health care bill, that included a public option insurance program, would essentially create a government run insurance company. I've written about insurance companies before and about how they practically print money, since they have tremendous inflows of cash. Normal insurance companies invest this money to produce even more profits, before having to cover any payouts to policy holders or investors. What do you suppose a government bureaucracy would do with such a tremendous amount of cash?

In the case of Social Security, they raided the Social Security fund to pay for pork barrel projects and garner support from special interest groups. They replaced the money in the Social Security Trust Fund with government IOU's, in the form of Treasury notes, which are paid off by taxpayers. So, they subtract money from our paychecks to fund Social Security, borrow that money to fund other projects, then increase taxes to pay off the IOU's, for the money they borrowed from taxpayers in the first place. I'm sure this helps them raise a lot of contributions for their re-election campaigns, but are they looking out for the interests of the average taxpayer? I don't think so.

So now they're trying to pass a public option insurance plan and create a huge bureaucracy with tremendous cash inflows. Does anybody really believe that this money will be used only for health care for the poor? I don't. I think it's more likely to be seen by politicians as one great big slush fund, which will undoubtedly lead to even more runaway spending at the taxpayers expense.

If this bill is passed, which it looks as though it will be, then at the very least, safeguards should be put in to place to prevent politicians from raiding the money taken in for health care. I doubt that this will happen. I think the best that we can hope for is, taxpayers will see through the slick talking politicians and vote them out of office.

Health Care Reform

I saw the report on the local news about Claire McCaskill's town hall meetings on health care reform. What amazes me about Senator McCaskill and the Democratic party as a whole is that they just don't get it. It's not that the people who are protesting don't want health care reform and reduced costs for health care, it's that the taxpayers are tired of governments runaway spending. If Ms. McCaskill and her party truly want to help with health care, they should concentrate their efforts on preventing wasted taxpayer dollars by reforming medicare and medicaid. It is no secret that both programs are rife with fraud and waste and have been for years. How many more people could be covered under these programs if our politicians concentrated their efforts on improving the programs that are already in place?

I am against the proposed health care reform, because of the abuses of medicare and medicaid. If they are unable to monitor these programs effectively, then how do they expect to administer a new program? I believe Senator McCaskill, and most elected officials, are relatively intelligent people, so I can't imagine they truly believe a new bureaucracy is the answer to our nations' health care problems. So we have to ask ourselves, what is the motivation for passing such a program, that Warren Buffett, one of the worlds greatest investors says could lead to "banana republic type inflation?" Is it possibly a political move? Perhaps they think it will make the Democratic party appear to be champions of the poor? Well the poor have been speaking at the town hall meetings and no one seems to be listening. We didn't want government health care when Hilary Clinton was promoting it and we don't want it now. Not at the cost of higher taxes and inflation.

So, Senator McCaskill, as a citizen of the great State of Missouri and of the United States of America, let me spell it out for you and the rest of the people who are promoting the Obama administrations health care reform. Stop the madness of unbridled spending! NO NEW TAXES! NO MORE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS THAT INVOLVE INCREASED SPENDING! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND WE'RE WAY PAST THAT POINT! Let's concentrate on fixing the health care programs we have and paying down government debt!

Senator McCaskill, on the subject of credit card reform, you yourself said that you thought consumers should be responsible when it came to managing their spending and debt, shouldn't your constituents expect the same from their elected officials?

Healthcare Reform a Move Towards Socialism?

The town hall meeting this past week in St. Louis MO got a little ugly. On the one hand you had people who were pushing for health care reform and on the other side were people protesting government spending, higher taxes and the present U.S. governments' increasing drift towards a socialistic society.

I think it is ridiculous to think that the government should solve all our problems. Yes we have a definite problem with health care in the U.S., but it is wishful thinking to believe that increased government involvement is the answer. As someone who has worked in health care, I can attest to the fact that current government programs are ineffective. I have personally seen cases of government programs being billed for services that were not performed. So why would anyone think that more government involvement would lead to better care? I believe it would only lead to more corruption and fraud and bigger burdens on the American taxpayer.

This is the point so many politicians and mainstream media seem to be missing about the "tea party" protests. This grassroots movement is an expressions of the average taxpayers disgust over ever increasing taxes. At some point we have to draw the line and say no more taxes! Obama is now backpedaling on his campaign promise of not increasing taxes for the poor and middle class. If they continue to pass spending bills, including health care reform, tax increases are inevitable. Some experts are projecting top tax rates as high as 55 to 60%. I don't know about anybody else, but I don't think I'd be too motivated to go out and work hard only to hand over 50 to 60% of my paycheck to the government.

I believe the government needs to manage the current health care programs more effectively and leave the rest to the private sector and charitable organizations. Over taxation is NOT the answer. The Soviets had to give up on a socialistic society because it did not work. Why our political leaders think it would work here is beyond me. Even Jesus said "The poor will always be with you."