Quoted Text

VIEWPOINT
Obama’s health care proposal threatens free enterprise
BY JONATHAN J. MARKOWICZ For The Sunday Gazette
Jonathan J. Markowicz lives in Niskayuna. The Gazette encourages readers to submit material on local issues for the Sunday Opinion section.

    ANew York Times article from October 1993 described the legal victory of one small pharmacy in Arkansas that sued the corporate behemoth Wal-Mart for selling merchandise below cost. According to the article, many states have antitrust laws that forbid this practice if “for the purposes of injuring competitors and destroying competition.”
    There is no doubt that the health care costs in the United States are high and that health insurance is an unaffordable luxury for 46 million Americans. But President Obama’s proposed health care solution, that is, introducing a public health insurance plan regulated at the federal level to compete with private insurers, doesn’t seem quite legit. The president’s plan would reduce the cost of health insurance for consumers, but at a significant cost to free enterprise.
    Imagine Sam Walton standing in front of the U.S. Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee stating, “If you are happy with your local businesses, then you don’t need to buy your goods at Wal-Marts.”
    True, but American consumers aren’t stupid and will go with the cheapest or most convenient option. Wal-Mart is acutely aware of consumer economics and knows that its lower prices will draw in the majority of the market.
SAME PRINCIPLE
    Is there a difference, then, between this fictitious example and the rhetoric the president is using to sell his new idea to the public and to organizations like the American Medical Association? “If you like what you’ve got, we’re not going to make you change.” Although the actual prices for this public option have not been revealed, it has been implied that they will be less expensive; therefore, smart Americans will, and should, look to this option.
    Will competitors be “injured” if this plan is passed? .............>>>>.............>>>>...........http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar02901

Quoted Text

Taxing Employee Benefits to Pay for Obama Health Care Plan Still an Option
Taxing employer-provided health insurance to pay for the president's $1 trillion universal health care plan would violate Obama's campaign pledge to not raise taxes on middle-class families.

FOXNews.com
Sunday, June 28, 2009


The White House left open the possibility Sunday that President Obama could tax employer-provided health insurance to pay for his $1 trillion universal health care plan, a violation of the president's campaign pledge to not raise taxes on middle-class families.

White House adviser David Axelrod said the administration wouldn't rule out taxing some employees' benefits to fund a health care agenda that has yet to take final form. The move would be a compromise with fellow Democrats, who are pushing the proposal as a way to pay for the massive undertaking without ballooning the federal deficit.

"There are a number of formulations and we'll wait and see. The important thing at this point is to keep the process moving, to keep people at the table, to the keep the discussions going," Axelrod said. "We've gotten a long way down the road and we want to finish that journey."............>>>>............>>>>...........http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....ion/?test=latestnews

This should be no surprise a politician saying what ever it takes to get elected even though they know it's not necessarily true. It's time we start holding politicians to their word.

So all of us who work and pay for all or part of our health care, we must also pay a tax on it for the people who DON'T have health care?
First, I though obama campaigned on the promise of no new taxes for the middle class.
Second, aren't we already being taxed for those people who don't have health coverage? Ya know....medicaid, medicare and let's not forget all of the non-profits that get our tax dollar too.

The only reason for a Universal healthcare....is for control over the new technology from one side of the planet to the other....
who will read our x-rays?....an MD in India,,,,or anyother digital test that can travel the internet.....nano technology isn't just
for flying machines/cars etc......there are all kinds of applications to the human body.....and someone/thing
wants that info stockpiled......

Quoted Text

     
Universal health care not perfect
As U.S. considers changes to its system, Europe offers an example
BY MARIA CHENG The Associated Press

    LONDON — As President Barack Obama pushes to overhaul the American health care system, the role of government is at the heart of the debate. In Europe, free, state-run health care is a given.
    The concept has been enshrined in Europe for generations. Health systems are built so inclusive that even illegal immigrants are entitled to free treatment beyond just emergency care. Europeans have some of the world’s best hospitals and have made great strides in fighting problems like obesity and heart disease.
    But the system is far from perfect.
    In Britain, France, Switzerland and elsewhere, public health systems have become political punching bags for opposition parties, costs have skyrocketed and in some cases, patients have needlessly suffered and died.
    Obama has pointedly said he does not want to bring European-style health care to the U.S. and that he intends to introduce a governmentrun plan to compete with private insurance, not replace it.
    Critics fear Obama’s reforms will lead to more government control over health care and cite problems faced by European health systems as ............>>>>...........>>>>>............http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....2&Continuation=1

Dont you DARE tax my health care benefits that ARE PART OF MY WAGE PACKAGE......I am an hourly worker just like most
of us mules......tax government officials and their stipends.....

KISS MY A@#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DISSIDENTS = ANARCHY AND CHAOS

Quoted Text

     
Let’s get all the facts before health care vote

    The trillion-dollar health care bill proposed by President Obama and being drafted in Congress is of such revolutionary importance that it begs for a thorough, detailed, careful public airing before either House or Senate vote.
    The proposed legislation totally restructures health care for every man, woman, child and organization in the nation. It would be a tragedy if this legislation was voted before each of us had an opportunity to consider how it will impact our interests. Then we will know if our representatives are truly representing us.
    Certainly time must be provided for the public to study the bill’s provisions and their implications. Hard copies of the legislation must be available to any person or organization wanting a copy. Accurate cost estimates should be provided. There should be a series of public hearings in which the public can ask questions about how the bill affects their concerns. An extensive time period — say, six months — should be set aside for these vetting activities.
    Why give the public its input before the vote? Health care takes 18 percent of the nation’s expenditures and reaches into every corner of American life. The lobbyists have already had their input. Now it’s time for the people to provide theirs.

    RICHARD W. WEBER
    Niskayuna     

http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar00906

Some details in the health-care bill were released today and like every other bill that congress has passed it's full of pork.

you have nerve! HAVE YOU EVER HAD A SICK PERSON YOU LOVE? THE SYSTEM IS BROKE AND WE NEED TO FIX IT LIKE OVER TEHRE WHERE EVERYONE GETS THE HEALTHCARE !

Quoted from 191

you have nerve! HAVE YOU EVER HAD A SICK PERSON YOU LOVE? THE SYSTEM IS BROKE AND WE NEED TO FIX IT LIKE OVER TEHRE WHERE EVERYONE GETS THE HEALTHCARE !

Maybe on Mars EVERYONE GETS EVERYTHING.......while I agree it is a tragedy that some people dont have some things
it is also a tragedy that government plays Robin Hood with the country,,,there by dividing, dividing, cutting, dividing
and making us look like fools.......

our government should not be out to 'conquer' the masses of Americans......

does it need to be fixed-----SURE,,,,,,,,THEN GET THE DAMN MONKEY/S OFF OUR BACKS......

everyone has had a sick person in their family......AND even with 'healthcare' there still isn't the 200 year old man

here's a question we must ask ourselves: WHY DO WE GO TO THE DOCTOR/HOSPITAL/PRACTITIONER ETC???????

here are some examples of answers:
-to live longer
-to have better sex
-to see
-to not feel depressed
-to look better
-to 'prevent' poor health
-to manage poor lifestyle choices
-to have abortions
-to have prenatal observance

etc etc..........

If rated what does everyone think is the top reason???  Not the 'atleast I.......' answer......I mean the REAL top reason....
we all know what it is......so where is society in promoting it(WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT)

Quoted Text

Why should health-care execs make millions?

In the June 28 Viewpoint, Jonathan Markowicz expressed concern that President Obama’s public health insurance option would threaten free enterprise because it would compete with the health insurance industry.
Isn’t there something not quite right about our health care being a profit-making industry?
Imagine paying insurance company CEOs millions of dollars in compensation — not for any care they provide, but often for denying health-care coverage.

BERTHA KRIEGLER
Schenectady     

http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar03008

Quoted Text

Isn’t there something not quite right about our health care being a profit-making industry?

Bertha, Bertha, Bertha........if you are a socialist and believe in a socialist government/society, than 'yes', it doesn't seem quite right. However, if you are a capitalist and believe in a capitalist government/society than it is just the way it should be! Geezzzz!

Quoted Text

Retail industry group lashes out at Wal-Mart
BY ANNE D’INNOCENZIO The Associated Press

    NEW YORK — The retail industry’s largest trade group is rallying its members against the world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., for supporting a federal mandate for employer-funded health insurance.
    The Washington-based National Retail Federation sent a letter Monday to 2,500 members, which range from mom and pop stores to big chains, to fight Wal-Mart’s stance, publicized in a letter sent to President Barack Obama late last month.
    Wal-Mart, long a poster child for bad corporate behavior, has been improving the health benefits it offers workers and pushing for a voice in the health care debate. But its support for mandated coverage surprised the industry since the proposal is in lockstep with unions.
    “The retail sector isn’t ready to fit into a box that Wal-Mart has made,” said Neil Trautwein, vice president at NRF.
    The nation’s current health care plan needs to be fixed, he said, but NRF has adamantly opposed an employer mandate.
    “Although the move may provide a short-term public relations boost to Wal-Mart, it could have longlasting, devastating consequences to retailers through the country,” Tracy Mullin, NRF’s president and CEO, said in the letter. “We could stand idly by and allow Wal-Mart to tip the scales on the health care debate, cower and release an innocuous statement that would neither support nor condemn their decision or stand up for all retailers and come out swinging.”
    NRF says an employer mandate would burden retailers with more costs during the most challenging time the industry has faced in decades and lead many stores to cut their payrolls or close. Another possibility would be that stores would have to raise prices to offset costs, but Trautwein believes that will not happen given the consumer spending funk.
    NRF is the primary voice for the retail industry, which includes about 1.6 million businesses.
    Wal-Mart — which is not a member of NRF — has been one of the industry’s few bright spots, benefi ting from financially squeezed shoppers switching to cheaper shopping options in the recession.
    Greg Rossiter, a Wal-Mart spokesman, called the retailer’s stance “a pro-business position” and “the right thing to do for the company.” ............>>>>...........>>>>..........http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar00303