Well let's see.

I am one of the only ones in a family of 9 siblings who even have a computer. In fact, most all my friends and relatives don't. If you ever bothered to check, Id bet you'd find most people over 35 don't.

If you'd be honest, instead of Republican, you'd have to admit that the Heath-Care plan most likely to be, won't even have a public option included, and it won't be free. That in itself should tell you that what you read on a Republican blog is a lie.

And oh yeah, the poll you're referring to was paid to produce exactly what you read. It was paid for and influenced by, yes, you guessed, the insurance companies.

Oh yeah!
The fact that not every Democrat is for the Health-Care bill speaks volumns.
It says, unlike the Anti-American Republican Party, the in the pocket Republican Party, the vote all alike Republican Party. Democrats can think for themselves.

Uh huh. Except for the fact that Ms. Pelosi is vilifying those Democrats who say they won't vote for it as is

Oh...and I am not a Republican.

Nor am I a Democrat.

pay attention to things that I post and you will plainly see that I look at issues from both sides of the aisle.

Something that our current crop of politicians, and the people who follow them, can't seem to manage.

Anti American Republican party?? Is that anything like the Pro Socialist/Communist Democratic Party??

Come on. Is that the best you can do?

Where, oh where, have I ever posted anything to the contrary???

I KNOW that my taxes are going to get raised, even though I make just under 30k a year, when/if that bill passes. Therefore, I know it won't be free. But I have seen lots of Libs here saying that it will " pay for itself " which is a complete and utter crock of shite.

By the way, I don't actually read blogs. Not from one side or the other.

I don't rely on other people to give me my opinions. I form them all by myself. Wanna know how I can do that??? I pay attention.

Evidently not!
Or else you would see, at least be suspicious, as to why the Anti-American Republican Party continues to vote as a block and oppose everything being done to bring America back from the precipice that they took it to.

Ya know...you accuse me of reading Republican blogs...but yet, everything you say sounds like it comes straight from a Liberal blog.

The Dems bought just enough Rep votes to get that bill passed in the House.

The reps are against it because there are much simpler ways to bring the costs of health care down. The Dems, at this point, just don't want to hear them.

LMAO
The Republicans are against it because they are in the pockets of the Insurance Companies.
They vote as a block because they are not individuals controlled by individuality. They are controlled by a force bigger than themselves.

The same could be said for the Dems.

It's nothing but semantics. The Dems are just as indebted to big business as the Reps are. How do you think they get elected??

You think someone could come up with tens of millions of dollars for a campaign if they weren't in someone's pocket??

It's not the same thing.

Republicans= all vote the same. How they are told.

Democrats and Independents=Still think and vote as Individuals.

There have already been a few Republican Senators that have said they would vote for the bill on the same basis that some of the Democrats have said THEY would vote for it.

No public option
No additions to the deficit
Government doesn't try to " compete " with insurers

Sure looks like at least SOME of the republicans are thinking for themselves.

Oh...and did you forget that when the House voted on the Health Care bill...the Dems, almost every one of them, voted straight down the party line?? There wasn't much " individual " in that vote.

He he he he he he...

Get a clue.

Repubs got spanked by americans in the last year or so... They are now trying to desperately get on the crests of the wave of people that normaly stay out of politics...

But everyone seems to be missing the point.

When average non-political people get this hard into politics... Politics will change.

Both the Dems and the Republicans are on their way out.

Theives can only rule from the shadows and in this day shadows are hard to find.

IT is interesting that I dont hear great political angst about mandating the insurance, just the public 'OPTION'. So politicians tend to be against giving people another CHOICE(definition of option). Along with all the other insurance choices out there, someone adds one that people can afford and out come the critics claiming insurance companies cant compete? Interesting to note, since we have not yet seen what the price of the option is or are the insurance companies scared of having to set reasonable prices.

Americans are all about free market,, global economy, keeping up with our trade partners with the best products and prices, but the same doesnt seem to apply for keeping up with government prices.....

it just baffles me on times, free market is for competition or it isnt, and if it is,, why are people scared to make the insurance companies COMPETE with the public option.?

Because there is no way the insurance companies COULD compete against the government.

Let them compete among themselves. Right now, they are limited to regions. Let them compete nationwide and watch the prices come down.

YOU WISH...LOL

They have always seemed that way to me.

I know, not to hear them tell it though.

The public option is what the whole health care reform was suppose to be for.

We cannot get the uninsured insured otherwise.

So it will have failed yet again after all this work if they leave out the meat of the effort.

I just dont understand, I guess, why they couldnt compete. As far as competition with other insurance companies bringing down the price, didnt seem to work with car insurance rates. The insurance companies just will agree to a certain range, possibly, and none will go below that because their bottom line is their pockets well before the consumers actual health coverage.

Ok, here's my breakdown of how I see this plan:

VIOLATIONS OF PRINCIPLE
Essentially, the fact that insurance companies cannot turn away people with pre-existing conditions and at the same time, cannot charge them more because of their risk violates every principle of the definition of insurance. I agree that turning them away is wrong, but the government is forcing them to accept risk that is guaranteed to lose them money. That is going to have two effects: (1) The rates of everyone necessarily have to go up; and (2) Those who need major surgeries but only pay $10k a year even will be at least a 400% loss for the company with those that require major cancer treatments and multiple surgeries up to the range of even a 5000% loss. This ultimately will kill off many insurance companies leaving the public option with a larger market share.

THE PUBLIC OPTION
There will be no competition with the public option. The private sector can't because, unlike government, the public sector can run in the red for centuries and still be around. we have had a budget deficit for well over 100 years and there is no reason to expect this program to do otherwise.
The other downside is that the public option (which, for obvious reasons, must be cheaper than every other offering on the market today) is essentially a price ceiling. This will clip a lot of smaller companies out of competition and close their doors. Sure, the Kaisers and Blue Crosses of the world will likely stay afloat at first, but you will lose most of the small companies within a few years.

THE REQUIREMENT FOR INSURANCE
I don't think I've seen it mentioned at all here and it kind of surprises me. There is only one reason for requiring everyone to have insurance: cost. There is no way to pay for this program unless everyone pays for insurance. This is due to the first section above: the whole idea of the program violates the definition of "insurance." You are going to have a lot of middle aged and older people on this plan that are going to cost a lot of money. There are three kinds of people that are uninsured: those that can't afford it, those that can't get it, and those that think they don't need it. Guess which group is largest.
By requiring all the healthy individuals to get insurance, you offset the costs. if you have 8 million people (a random number for example only) paying $2,000 a year but going in for nothing but doctor's visits and physicals, you just made yourself $16 billion. That is partly how they plan to pay for this: by forcing the healthy to pay for the sick like any other insurance plan, only this time, you cannot opt out by not buying insurance.

TAXATION OF EMPLOYEES/EMPLOYERS
This is another simple one. I don't know about you guys, but I think the government has taken enough from me. When I had a job, my plan cost $350 a month. That's $4000 a year that I would be taxed on or another $1,000 a year from my paycheck (as that would have been in the 25% bracket). The great part is, I'm by no means wealthy ($40k gross) but that would represent a 20% increase in my federal taxes. Tell me that won't have an impact on my weekly budget.
As for businesses and this "fee" for not providing coverage; any fee is going to cut into profits. It has been some hard times and businesses are squeezing as hard as they can right now. If there is nowhere else to cut, guess where the cuts are going to be made. If you have 20 workers and fire two of them, the other 18 are going to work a lot harder.



I know there's more, but I just woke up and can't think of them right now. I'll add more as I remember.

More like,
because they can't compete and continue to reap outrageous profits.