Be careful what you ask for....
 

....you might get it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101104/...rp_health_plan

"AARP's endorsement helped secure passage of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. Now the seniors' lobby is telling its employees their insurance costs will rise partly as a result of the law."

so what we really have he is a story about big business blaming government for "having" to take more money from their employees.

Hasn't this been the theme since the 80's?

(you know the 80's when tax drops started)

This is a great example Whell of what we were discussing the other day.
You have to think for yourself or you will all follow the loudest piper into the fire.

Health insurance premiums have been going up similarly for years now. Without Obamacare, they would have also gone up. This time, the companies now have a convenient excuse.

OTOH, even if premiums go up slightly as a result of Obamacare (more than they would have anyway), it's worth it to not be shit-canned for preexisting conditions, have lifetime claims limits and being able to cover your kids until age 26.

Whell - In a previous thread, you indicated that you supported Romney in the last GOP primary. It seems a little odd for you to be posting every day about the gloom and doom of Obamacare when it is for all practical purposes identical to Romneycare. What gives?

Finn, noonreal, your responses both miss the mark. The law we're taking about is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - key word "affordable." That's how it was "sold" to the American public.

For example, I've been forced to address proactively with a number of my clients a potential employee relations concern: a huge disconnect with employees who've been lead to believe by our government and the media that health insurance costs will come down. There is nothing, NOTHING, in this bill that would prompt premiums to fall. In fact, quite the opposite. Those increased costs, which will be potentially greater for smaller business than large businesses (who can afford them least and whose budgets for contributing to health premiums are more fixed) will be more likely to have to pass those increases along.

Finn - I'm a bit surprised at your question. I'm sure you know that Romney has since attempted to distance himself a bit from the Mass system, which is currently inflating costs for those who elect coverage in that state. I'm not a fan of Ronmey for the Mass HC law, but I still thought he was our best candidate. Hey, I still think the Lions will win the Superbowl in my lifetime, too.

Not so. Mandatory coverage will do just that. That's the whole point of it - getting the young and healthy onboard.

As for disingenuous names for bills, the GOP has made an art form of it - Patriot Act, anyone? Freedom to Farm Act?

As for Romney trying to distance himself from his signature political achievement, it's part of his record. It's kinda like falsifying a resume, methinks - kinda like O'Donnell.

Oh well.

Dave

Mandatory coverage with no limits on coverage = free medical coverage. As noble as this concept may sound, it will more than likely distort the marketplace for delivery of medical services. The law of supply and demand will kick in as it always does, resulting in demand out-pacing supply, and an increase in costs for all. Medicare is a great example of this. PPACA appears ready to kick costs up several notches.

This also assumes that our government has the right to force individuals into the insurance marketplace, and buy a product that they might choose not to buy on their own. That issue has yet to be sorted out, and I suspect mandated coverage is ultimately on shaky legal ground.

As if the health care marketplace isn't distorted already. Just curious - were you on the barricades when Gov. Romney introduced Romneycare to MA? Being that the states are the laboratories of democracy, were you sounding the alarms then at this Republican governor's plan?

Well, I don't exactly draw much media attention when I disagree with something on the political landscape, but yes, I thought it was a bonehead idea.

Just because someone has an "R" after their name doesn't mean they're acting consistent with a conservative philosophy, just like not everyone on the left, including some in this forum, jumps up and down with joy at everything the Dems do.