What Are the Consequences of Obama Failing?
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
They are questioning his figures about how many people are uninsured. (Newsmax, I know a Conservative group)
"President Barack Obama claimed during his Wednesday night press conference that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance.
A simple check with the U.S. Census Bureau would have told him otherwise.
Obama said: "This is not just about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance."
That assertion conflicts with data in the Census Bureau report "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007." The report was issued in August 2008 and contains the most up-to-date official data on the number of uninsured in the U.S.
The report discloses that there were 45.65 million people in the U.S. who did not have health insurance in 2007.
However, it also reveals that there were 9.73 million foreigners — foreign-born non-citizens who were in the country in 2007 — included in that number. So the number of uninsured Americans was actually 35.92 million.
And of those, "there were also 9.1 million people making more than $75,000 per year who did not choose to purchase health insurance," CNSNews stated in a report based on the Census Bureau data.
That brings the number of Americans who lack health insurance presumably for financial reasons down less than 27 million.
The Census Bureau report also shows that the number of people without insurance actually went down in 2007 compared to the previous year — from 47 million to 45.65 million — while the number with insurance rose from 249.8 million to 253.4 million.
The next Census Bureau report disclosing health insurance data, with 2008 numbers, is scheduled to be released in August, and could figure in the healthcare reform debate."
"President Barack Obama claimed during his Wednesday night press conference that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance.
A simple check with the U.S. Census Bureau would have told him otherwise.
Obama said: "This is not just about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance."
That assertion conflicts with data in the Census Bureau report "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007." The report was issued in August 2008 and contains the most up-to-date official data on the number of uninsured in the U.S.
The report discloses that there were 45.65 million people in the U.S. who did not have health insurance in 2007.
However, it also reveals that there were 9.73 million foreigners — foreign-born non-citizens who were in the country in 2007 — included in that number. So the number of uninsured Americans was actually 35.92 million.
And of those, "there were also 9.1 million people making more than $75,000 per year who did not choose to purchase health insurance," CNSNews stated in a report based on the Census Bureau data.
That brings the number of Americans who lack health insurance presumably for financial reasons down less than 27 million.
The Census Bureau report also shows that the number of people without insurance actually went down in 2007 compared to the previous year — from 47 million to 45.65 million — while the number with insurance rose from 249.8 million to 253.4 million.
The next Census Bureau report disclosing health insurance data, with 2008 numbers, is scheduled to be released in August, and could figure in the healthcare reform debate."
With the price of gold being sky high it sure makes me wonder how these jewellers manage during a recession.
That indeed is the problem in USA. One hears from time to time stories of middle class families having to declare bankruptcy because of unforeseen medical costs, because they were not adequately insured.
I think any health care reform must force all the citizens to enroll in some insurance plan. Because even those earning more than 75,000 $ per year that don’t have insurance (as claimed by ironsides), if they fall ill, have an accident and need emergency treatment, the taxpayer will be on the hook for that.
Anybody who does not enroll in a health insurance plan should have to pay a tax equal to the cost of the premiums.
So to let them off the hook because they can afford health instance, not to count them among the uninsured is nonsense. Any non insured person is a potential risk to the taxpayer. If that uninsured person has an accident, is admitted to the hospital and incurs 100,000 $ in medical bills, government has to pay for it, since the person has no insurance.
Anyway, personally I don’t think health care reform is happening, the votes just are not there. So the whole discussion is moot anyway.
''One hears from time to time stories of middle class families having to declare bankruptcy because of unforeseen medical costs, because they were not adequately insured.''
In the many years that I worked as an IRS agent and tax accountant I saw more cases of bankruptcy arising from the lack of medical insurance than for any other reason. It is a great tragedy that this has been allowed to happen in the USA for all these years.
In the many years that I worked as an IRS agent and tax accountant I saw more cases of bankruptcy arising from the lack of medical insurance than for any other reason. It is a great tragedy that this has been allowed to happen in the USA for all these years.
Ever thought about experiencing true freedom and turning off the TV show called America?
Politics is a scripted fiction program just like Ugly Betty. Wake up.
Politics is a scripted fiction program just like Ugly Betty. Wake up.
And who's fault is that? Middle class families are not poor. Maybe they should have bought health insurance instead of a back yard pool. It is a choice some people make, they gamble on their good health not to pay for insurance, no one allowed them to do it.
That is probably one of the oldest phenomena in the world- purchasing "wants" before "needs". I wonder if those are the same people who whine about Gov't. intervention. :lol:
Sure it is a choice that some people make, but ultimately taxpayer has to foot the bill. Any uninsured person is a potential liability to the government.
Health care is not like any other commodity, like buying a car. If a person decides not to buy a car, decides to do without, that is his right. He will have to live with the inconvenience, delays in getting places etc.
However, suppose that if he doesn’t have a car, but when he really needs it, government will give him a free car. He will be a substantial burden to the taxpayer. And that really is a big difference between health care and any other commodity. In health care, if the person really needs it, government gives him a free car, even a Cadillac, if necessary.
So it is incumbent upon the government to demand that everybody have a medical insurance.
So sure it may be the fault of the middle class family, but government is also at fault for not demanding that the family have adequate insurance.
American system can work only if it is run on true private enterprise principles, if health care is truly treated like any other commodity, like a car or a vacation.
That means that if a person cannot afford to pay for the health care (through insurance or private means etc.), he doesn’t get it. If that results in his death (or his child’s death), so be it. Only then the totally private system that they have in USA will work.
However, when government provides catastrophic health care for free, then health care ceases to be like any other commodity, government must get involved. And government is involved, heavily in all the developed countries except USA (and the results are obvious, low life expectancy, high infant mortality in USA).
That means that if a person cannot afford to pay for the health care (through insurance or private means etc.), he doesn’t get it. If that results in his death (or his child’s death), so be it. Only then the totally private system that they have in USA will work.
However, when government provides catastrophic health care for free, then health care ceases to be like any other commodity, government must get involved. And government is involved, heavily in all the developed countries except USA (and the results are obvious, low life expectancy, high infant mortality in USA).
Gopher, i remember seeing on a television show a while ago that health care is the biggest reason for bankruptcies among the middle class. Your anecdotal evidence is supported by statistics.
"So sure it may be the fault of the middle class family, but government is also at fault for not demanding that the family have adequate insurance."
I agree totally with what you said, but not at goverment expense. I think everyone with exceptions of course should be find $1,000 or more if the show up at a hospital for treatment without insurance. I do agree with that part only of Obama's health plan.
I agree totally with what you said, but not at goverment expense. I think everyone with exceptions of course should be find $1,000 or more if the show up at a hospital for treatment without insurance. I do agree with that part only of Obama's health plan.
This is a American shame, it doesn't seem possible with all the modern hospitals, great doctors we have. I am not sure if national healthcare is the answer or is it something else. Children up to the age of 18 have goverment healthcare now. As for the low life expectancy, wonder if it is related to work related stress and poor diet. No one is left to die on purpose for not having healthcare. Taxpayers pay for it.
I agree ironsides, nobody is left to die on purpose (though there maybe isolated cases). I think it has to do with regular check ups, regular visits to Family Physician, preventive care etc.
Thus if mother does not get proper pre and post natal care (visit to the doctor may have user copay), if baby does not get well baby care, that increases the chances of infant mortality.
Or let us say the patient does not get regular annual check ups. In Canada one check up per year is free. In that check up doctor may discover early signs of cancer, high blood pressure etc. Then preventive measures can be taken.
But if patient does not get checkups regularly, the chances that heart attack, cancer etc. of being detected at an early stage diminish. That also may contribute to lower life expectancy.
No doubt some of that is due to lifestyle choice and nothing to do with health care system. However, I think health care system is part of the problem.
That does not solve the problem, ironsides. Suppose he shows up for emergency treatment and doesn’t have 1000 dollars, are you going to turn him away, leave him to die?
If so then it may work (that is what I said before, it must be totally private enterprise, you must be brutal about it). But chances are that if he doesn’t have the 1000 dollars, he will get treatment anyway. Then what is the point?
No one right now is turned away, they are treated and sent either home or admitted. Point according to Obama is to make sure that everyone is covered either with their own or goverment healthcare, if none they are fined.
Annual checkups are important, were you aware that people on welfare are eligible for free healthcare, but not low income. But the addition of this to our healthcare does not have to cost 12+ trillion dollars. Balanced against those who have and those who do not have insurance.
Annual checkups are important, were you aware that people on welfare are eligible for free healthcare, but not low income. But the addition of this to our healthcare does not have to cost 12+ trillion dollars. Balanced against those who have and those who do not have insurance.
Oh they gert turned away. Most hospitals will refuse an ambulance if they know the person is indigent or has no health care. It can take up to an hour for EMS to find one that will.
People die in the hundreds of thousands every year in the United States because they can't pay. Lazy bastards.