Thanks for doing such a good job of breaking down the inconsistencies in the email. And thanks also for engaging with people who have different ideological views, even if a rational debate with documented sources seems to be something that most of your commentators avoid at all costs.

I share your frustration that there seem to be a lot of folks out their that are upset with our government, which is an opinion they are certainly entitled to, but lack the initiative and/or ability to support their opinions with actual facts.

I’m not trying to be trite, but thank you for being a great citizen and patriot of the US.

Multiple times you’ve come by, said there’s no point in engaging in a conversation on this topic with me, made vague claims and continually failed to ever provide a single shred of evidence to back up your claims. Usually you’ve ignored my request for you to back your claims up but now you appear to view those requests as “niggling nitpicking”. Now you’re adding straw man and red herrings arguments and this is what you call attempting to “engage”?

As much as I might be tempted, I’m trying to avoid doing the same sort of thing to you and will only respond to the few bits of your comment that look even vaguely reasonable.
* “No drinking, no smoking, no aberrant sex, no overeating, no drugs.” I don’t do any of those and never have.
* “I had a menu of insurance to select at my employer” Good for you, I didn’t and many people I know didn’t either. Not every employer gives everybody the same options.
* “You can also go to the market and get private health insurance” If you have enough money you can do that. Getting health insurance outside of an employer is extremely expensive, as you don’t have the collective bargaining power of your company’s employer behind you.
* “Thinking that government of someone else should provide it” As a US citizen, it’s my government too. While having the government provide health care services might not be an ideal solution; given the evidence, it looks like a better solution than what we’ve got.

BTW, you get emails about new comments on this thread because you subscribed to it. I don’t recall if those emails include a link to unsubscribe or not; so if I don’t hear anything further from you by the end of today, I’ll unsubscribe you manually.

You and others in your advocacy group will be in favor of this government takeover, when you are not getting any healthcare and the country is in slavery to debt and people actually are sick in the streets. This issue is just a foil for your real advocacy of a socialist fascist world. If you get your way, the USA will be begging the Islamists to liberate us.

The best health insurance in the world is lifestyle. No drinking, no smoking, no aberrant sex, no overeating, no drugs. I don’t feel like paying for the all profligate people out there. My most patriotic act is to take care of myself and my own family. And I had a menu of insurance to select at my employer. I selected Health Savings Account with a big deductible. You can also go to the market and get private health insurance. There are many many exchanges for different groups besides your employer.

When you have a desire for something (say big health isurance) why don’t you just make more money to get what you want? Always worked for me. Thinking that government of someone else should provide it is looking at the problem from the wrong end. If a lot of doctor visits and a bunch of drugs is your idea of healthcare, I consider you to be wasting your time and taking poison. This country is overmedicated.

And by the way all the niggling nitpicking is just a way of diverting from the subject. Tiresome, tiresome.

Do you have any articles or reports that you can link to back up your claims that we have “a vast incursion from third world countries with poor health and hygiene conditions”? I’d be curious to see them if you have them, especially any that can show a link between this “incursion” and any affect our health care system.

I’m curious as to how you’re defining middle class and health care when you say: “It will limit the abil­ity of the mid­dle class to select and pay for their own health care”. I don’t know anybody who gets to selects their health insurance. Instead they take whatever plan their employer offers (which is nearly guaranteed to cost more and cover less every year) and then they go to whatever doctor their insurance says they are allowed to go to. Not that they go in with any regularity, as even with insurance it just costs too much.

I think you meant Daniel Webster, not Noah. And in reply to your quote: “This country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless we make it a good place for all of us to live in.” — Theodore Roosevelt.

Lastly while there are other reasons that people go bankrupt, when more than 60% of bankruptcies are attributable to health care issues then your health care system is broken and something must be done.

“There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.” Noah Webster

Additionally, people go bankrupt for all kinds of reasons, business failure, drug addiction, divorce, profligate living, and yes expensive medical treatments. THERE IS LIFE AFTER BANKRUPTCY. Life is dangerous and ultimately ends, what will this bill do about that?

Hat tip to Jim for posting these links (amoung others).

CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenues.
…
CBO estimates that the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would be to reduce federal budget deficits during the 2020s relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP).

I also noticed the director made the following remark in the post titled: CBO’s Preliminary Analysis of H.R. 2, the Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act:

under H.R. 2 than under current law, many people would end up paying more for health insurance