Right......

The as you put it....."well-funded noisy campaign designed to confuse us..." is none other than the US Congress !!!!!

Pelosi, "We'll have to pass it so you can see what's in it." Remember that great line?... not to mention practically no one reading the damn thing. They don't have a clue about all the unintended consequences that will come of of this steaming pile of legislation.

With all due respect, your DNC / Organizing Against (for) America talking points are just plain silly.... always looking for someone to blame or point fingers at instead of reflecting in the mirror and the real problem..... CONGRESS & this administration !!!

The people should realize that anytime the federal government strongly favors anything, it's usually a bad thing for the rest of us american citizens (99.999% of the time).

The people should realize that anytime the federal government strongly favors anything, it's usually a bad thing for the rest of us american citizens (99.999% of the time).

Well, I sure hope you never drive on the interstate highway system, use the internet, take advantage of low-interest federal student loans for college, don't have to worry about basic retirement expenses and health care covered by Social Security and Medicare, and enjoy the safety provided you by law enforcement and military protection.

socialism, socialism, socialism- its a new word the GOP learned this year, but I would bet over 90% don't even know what it means.

what_the_81 - I suggest that you and all your friends who keep yelling "socialist government takeover" stand on your principles. Turn down medicare when you become eligible and get your own insurance, and then when you've collected exactly what you've contributed to SSI, send the rest back. You'd be doing the rest of us a favor.

You are correct Rugbymom, and the noisy campaign will continue until people learn otherwise.

It was no different when medicare started. Now medicare is appreciated by the elderly.

Health care for all Americans is not socialism.

Oh Goodie! ... Another Poll ...

Why are so many Americans "still confused"? ... Is there any wonder?

In one of the greatest comments to ever come out of Nancy Pelosi's mouth BEFORE the Healthcare Bill was even passed, the Speaker of The House said something akin to - We'll have a better understanding of all that's in it once it's passed. Plus, more than half of those who voted for passage - Hadn't even read the damn thing!

Is there any wonder why there are so many Americans "still confused"???

Then, in addition to that nonsense, those hard working public servants on Capitol Hill exclude themselves from it! - Since when did senators and congressmen become such self-proclaimed elitists that they do not fall under the same rules, laws and regulations that govern every other American citizen in these 'UNITED STATES'???

Is there any wonder why there are so many Americans "still confused"???

Want to lessen the confusion? - Let the American citizens demand a Constitutional Convention be called to instill a 28th Amendment to the Constitution wherein it states that all representatives, senators and congresspersons are not held above the citizens they are elected to serve. That they are equal partners in any and all laws, rules and/or regulations they pass. That at no time are they permitted to exempt themselves from any and all laws, rules, and/or regulations that every other American citizen is to be held accountable to.

Is there any wonder why there are so many Americans "still confused"??? - NO, NOT AT ALL!

I absolutely love, love, love the 28th Amendment! No way to get that one passed!

Gee all sounds great kool aid drinkers. Just wish I could keep my current policy like Obama claimed. Unfortunately it didn't have enough Gucci provisions that I will never use, so I'll get to pay thousands more per year to cover things like doctor visits that I now choose to pay myself should I need them, rather than insure. Just like millions of other people who buy their own insurance to cover hospital costs only. These people have yet to realize how badly they just got screwed. I can't emphasize this enough. Up yours Obama, Pelosi, Reid and all you liberal, nanny-state welfare babies.

I would have to agree about the noise machine trying to confuse everyone. In fact I believe there are a few paid noise makers right here on newsvine. You know who you are. Repeating the common banter of the machine. You are easy to spot because you defend the indefensible.

Carl,

You omitted one very key element, the cost to me and future generations!! But I would venture to say you are a democrat and cost is very unimportant to them.

Well of course we had to pass the bill to find out what was in it. And since no one but some the people protesting it ever read it, and they were ridiculed for questioning it, what do they expect?

I already know the CHANGE.

The largest US Marine Air Station on the EAST Coast does not have a ER after normal working hours. Due to Doctor and Nursing shortages.

The Retires and dependents have to use the civilian Doctors. Who are dropping Medicare and Tricare patents. The wife has been forced to change primary Care Doctors three times during the last year, because of Doctors dropping from Tricare/Medicare.

Confusion = people don't believe what we tell them. I wonder why.

"Health care for all Americans is not socialism"

That is without a doubt the stupidest statement I have ever read. Right out of 1984, up is not up, failure is not failure, and health care for all is not socialism.

The dumbing down of America continues unabated.

Rugbymom in RI

"One reason people are "still confused" is because there is a well-funded noisy campaign designed to confuse us. Example: all the insurance company claiming that their recent 5-10% premium increases were caused by the new law, even though the new law hasn't taken effect yet,"

Just like the credit card rates nearly tripled before that law took effect.

Am I the only one who noticed there is almost nothing in the "Health Care Reform Bill" that restricts what the insurance companies can charge?

Also, SS and Medicare are not socialism, they are forced insurance. Only an idiot would suggest that someone who was made to pay for something all his adult life should not try to get back every penny that was stolen from him.

I'll be glad to remove myself from both if you will pay me back all the money that was stolen from me, with interest.

In a nutshell, this Healthcare Bill creates more government control over your medical costs. In layman's terms the government will decide if it is cost effective to save your life and pay your bills.

The primary funding for this bill will come two ways.

(a) Funds allocated away from Medicare, to the intitial tune of about 500 Million. Not to mention, businesses with 50 or more employees or generating sales of $250,000.00 or more. Let me clarify something here, folks! Sales and profit are two different things!

Out of sales, a company pays its payroll, building lease, advertising, Utilities, taxes, Unemployent and Liability Insurance, Inventory purchases, etc, etc, etc. Companies are lucky to show any profit after all expenses are paid.

However, this bill is based on company sales not net profit. Therefore, companies generating annual sales of $250,000.00 will be forced to mandatory carry and pay for this insurance. I don't know about you, but Nevada has a 14.8 % unemployment rate now. Have you any idea how much the unemployment rates across the country will skyrocket. Companies will begin laying off employees to keep under the 50 employee mark. Especially if they are also generating sales of $250,000.00.

Plain and simple, this was a bad bill. Badly written, full of "earmark" payoffs; creates too much government control over our daily lives and medical conditions . What should anger many of you is the fact, there were several alternate health care bills before Congress, that were better written, offered less government control and controlled the cost better. However, these bills were squashed because our President wanted the "Win on this bill.

Well, you asked for "Change to believe in.," let's hope you can stomach the change you've created.....

Yes, amazing how the "change to believe in" got smashed by the other side of the aisle, and this is what we were left with.

"Most still confused about health care, poll says"

Small business and large corporations are still baffled by what may come out of ObamaCare. Even the administration is trying to figure out whats in the bill. Bureaucrats are still writing the details and we all know that the "devil is in the details". Watch the estimated cost of this sky-rocket with all the entitlements that will be mandated.

God help us all!

johnluci,

How did the 'other side of the aisle' smash anything? They were LOCKED-OUT during the writing of this bill and their votes were not needed to pass anything.

It was the DEMOCRATS that were demanding the CHANGES, so they would vote for it. Heck Pelosi even cut the one thing that BHO wanted in the bill.

I will never follow this law - never.

I am not a slave.
and am not a hypocrite.

cheers
:)

so i take it all of the insurance company enthusiasts here were perfectly content with a medical/insurance system that denies coverage to 30% of the population while costing our country a larger percentage of GNP than any other major industrialized country in the world. It's amazing to me that so-called freedom lovers can get so excited about defending the insurance industry, which is basically just a "protection" racket that drains our resources and adds little or no positive benefits.

I'll bet if you polled the members of Congress, you would find that a majority of them are just as confused and know even less. What is worse is that they are the ones that voted for it.

Any bill that takes more than 100 pages to write is too big and should be broken into smaller parts.

Scrap it all and start over.

The law that was passed is not socialism, it is bad law.

It is as simple as this for me - I live in CA. My premiums went up again, my income has decreased, and so as of Sept. 1 I am uninsured. Oh, I think I'll survive, as I have never spent in medical care anywhere near what I've paid in premiums in any year (and I'm 50, diabetic, and on 4 medications), but for my dollar, the less we "nationalize" anything, the better.

With the national debt increasing in Trillion dollar increments, a President that takes zero responsibility for anything, and a dimwitted congress that cannot read or understand the laws they pass, I'll take my local city council over these idiots any day of the week. I just wish we could opt-out of our state and federal government "systems" as many are so filled with good-for-nothing employees, rife with corruption and fraud, it's no wonder CA is teetering on bankruptcy with no budget 2 months after the state constitutional deadline, and the feds are not far behind.

How can you believe anything that comes from people who actually claimed that there were "Death panels" in the reform bill? Which of course forced them to REMOVE the end of life counseling seniors used to get, helping them set up wills and such. I think it's obscene.

And some of you are the same ones that will bash big business and corporate leaders about everything else, yet the people who run those great big insurance companies you all seem to be in love with are far better than "the government".

So what you are saying is that when someone is elected into "the government" they stop being a regular guy, and become a raving lunatic worse than any insurance company lackey.

Phooey. I was in the Navy for 10 years and guess what? I lived with government run healthcare. Not just for the payment, but for the whole end to end care from the doctor who gave me regular exams to the nurse at the government run hospital I stayed in. If Governemt run health care is so damned evil, why do we subject our entire military to it?

I WISH I could have that level of care back again.

The Democrats were so hellbent getting THEIR (or should I say ANY) health care package passed that they rammed it right through passage without even taking the time to study the 2,700 or so pages in this law. How many of you out there have faith with this group in congress that they could write up that many pages of new laws and not "mess" things up? Any wonder why businesses are leery of adding more employees when no one knows just what the affect this new law will have on all of us. AND most of this new law doesn't come into play for two years. Enough time for certain responsible politicians to get re-elected before the full consequences of the law hit. How convenient.

Carl W, you really think the internet, the interstate highway system and medicare was established with us in mind? the first was to ensure communication across the country if the soviets attacked, the second was to ensure troops, weapons and other war material can be moved anywhere in the country efficiently in case of war and the third is becoming so costly for our government, pretty soon it will be 50% of federal spending.

johnluci, you speak highly of social security as if there's going to be any left for you when you retire. You keep on paying into it if you want while the money goes to other people but people should have the option of putting money into it if they want. People should be responsible for their own retirement funds, the government should not be in charge of saving money for you.

"Confusion?

Wait until you all get hold of the new marriage penalty incorporated into the Health Care Bill.

The built-in "marriage penalty" in both House and Senate versions of the health care bill has received scant attention. But for scores of low- and middle-income couples, it could mean a hike of $2,000 or more in annual insurance premiums the moment they say "I do."

Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

Fortunately, for me, I don't make over $200,000 per year so the provision won't affect me.

BTW, if you want to know more about the mythical "marriage penalty", included in health care reform, you might want to look at this article -

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/01/15/marriage-penalty/

The people should realize that anytime the federal government strongly favors anything, it's usually a bad thing for the rest of us american citizens (99.999% of the time).

That's just downright irresponsible nonsense. Are you suggesting that we don't need a federal government? What's your alternative, anarchy or 50 small sovereign states?

It's SOCIALISM

Get a grip. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production. If the federal government were seizing both ownership and control of all hospitals, clinics, etc.; turning all doctors, nurses, etc. into government employees; and eliminating private service providers, THAT would be socialism.

people should not be FORCED to pay for coverage for their treatment

The only way to avoid paying for someone else's treatment is to require them to pay for it themselves. This bill does that, by requiring everyone to have insurance. We get it: you don't want to pay a health insurance premium; but the rest of us don't want to pick up the tab for your irresponsibility. That's why we need this law.

You omitted one very key element, the cost to me and future generations!!

Actually, that's one of the most important parts of the bill. It reduces the federal budget deficit by $163 Billion over 10 years. Not bad. Imagine, passing a law that not only provides benefits, but it's paid for. What a concept!

How can you believe anything that comes from people who actually claimed that there were "Death panels" in the reform bill? Which of course forced them to REMOVE the end of life counseling seniors used to get, helping them set up wills and such. I think it's obscene.

Good point. The only "death panels" that ever existed are the ones set up by the insurance companies posing as privatized Medicare providers, who pay for services until you get sick, then send out their ghouls to hospitals to convince doctors and hospitals to cease and desist providing expensive, but much needed, medical services.

My premiums went up again, my income has decreased, and so as of Sept. 1 I am uninsured.

Without this law, your premiums went up and you ended up losing coverage entirely; which makes a pretty convincing argument as to why we need this law!

Any bill that takes more than 100 pages to write is too big and should be broken into smaller parts.

And written in crayons using words of no more than one syllable so that people with no education can understand it, no doubt. But the rest of us understand that complicated matters can't be boiled down into sound bites, slogans, and platitudes, which is why the best comment of the day is:

One reason people are "still confused" is because there is a well-funded noisy campaign designed to confuse us.

And it's obvious from reading all the comments about socialism and the end to civilization as we know it, that many people are being suckered in by it.

I don't see why employer benefits should not be taxed.

Somebody making $40k + a $10k health plan only pays taxes on $40k of income

Somebody making $50k who does not have a health plan, has to pay taxes on all $50k of income before buying health insurance.

It doesn't seem fair to punish people who have to buy health care on their own because they don't have an employer-paid plan.

Turn off Glen Beck or whoever. This is from the IRS website: "

Employer-Provided Health Coverage — Not Taxable

Starting in tax year 2011, the Affordable Care Act requires employers to report the value of the health insurance coverage they provide employees on each employee's annual Form W-2. This reporting is for informational purposes only, to show employees the value of their health care benefits so they can be more informed consumers. The amount reported does not affect tax liability, as the value of the employer contribution to health coverage continues to be excludible from an employee's income and it is not taxable.

Here's the link: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=220809,00.html

If you need to hate on the president, at least use a fact.

For information only. More corporate welfare.

A few facts have never really bothered Beck and Company .... and his millions of devoted followers.

A few facts have never really bothered Obama and Company .... and his millions of devoted followers.

I am glad you tagged me to cancel out my post.... seems we disagree, both of us will live over it.

John -

Stronghorse is talking about those who have individual health insurance plans, not employer plans. Unless the person buying the insurance has a business (gets to deduct out the premiums on Schedule C), they are taxed on the income used to pay for the insurance. Although they put the premiums on Schedule A, they are taxed fully on the first 7.5% excluded, still pay Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and local taxes on all of the insurance premiums.

At some point everyone will be purchasing through the Insurance exchanges. The real reason to put that information on your W-2 is so you get used to seeing the real cost. This will prevent sticker shock people experience when going on the exchange to purchase insurance in 2014. Even so, the truth is that if they want to tax you on that income, then the first thing that would need done is to get it on the W-2.

Actually, allow me to quote: Stronghorse, #2: "If you have company provided health benefits they will now be considered income and taxed".

"Even so, the truth is that if they want to tax you on that income, then the first thing that would need done is to get it on the W-2"

Yep, it's called creeping socialism. First get the foot in the door then keep pushing. Even though the bill isn't set up as single payer. It will eventually bankrupt private insurance so the end result will be single payer. Socialism at it's best, or should I say worst.

I see the Glen Beck/Rush Limbaugh/Sarah Palin fear machine has been in full gear!

There is no "fear machine" by any private citizens who support conservatism except in the liberal mind. The truth pointed out by these vocal Conservatives comes from the mouths of the anti-conservatives who cannot help but stick their collective feet in their collective mouths. Nancy P. (We have to pass it BEFORE we can know what's in it?), Joe B. (the Summer of Recovery???), Barrack O. (Change you can believe in????????????????). These three have lied their way to power and are still lying to keep it. They want to tax the rich? No, they want to steal from the people who work and give to those who won't. After they take their cut first, of course.

"Yep, it's called creeping socialism."

YOU may call it that, but it doesn't make it so. You can also call the sky chartreuse, it won't make it so. The ridiculous claims of socialism are beyond foolish.

You want to know what socialism is? (probably not, since it won't help you) Go ask the 25 MILLION Russians who died from REAL socialism. Until your house is taken away, and you are sent to a work farm, quit bitching about what ain't real. To the educated, it quickly demonstrates your mass ignorance.

johnluci, if you want the facts game these came from speaker.gov, the CBO and the U.S. Senate.

1. Penalty for non-compliance $285-2085. They decide if you meet Minimum coverage, don't print it just let you know. At least car insurance I know what the minimum is.

2.With other health care industries already contributing to reform, the bill raises $20 billion over 10

years through imposing an excise tax on medical devices

Finance bill. The medical device industry will gain from there being more insured Americans

– only two-thirds of the tax in the Senate.

Section 1405 of the Reconciliation Package repeals and replaces the provision in Pub. L. 111-148 that would impose an annual fee on medical device manufacturers. Starting in 2013, a new section 4191 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1405 of the Reconciliation Package, establishes an excise tax on the sale of a "taxable medical device" equal to 2.3% ⁴ of the price of the device. This excise tax is deductible.⁵

Under the Reconciliation Package, a "taxable medical device" is any medical device as defined in section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).⁶ Certain types of devices, however, are exempt from the tax, including eyeglasses, contact lenses, hearing aids, and other devices that are "generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use" as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. Under the original version of the Reconciliation Package released on March 18, Class I medical devices were also exempt from the tax. The House Rules Committee amendments to the Reconciliation Package removed this exemption.

Our initial impression is that one major area of interest in the Reconciliation Package is the retail exemption. In order to be exempt from the tax, the Secretary of Treasury must determine that the device (a) is generally purchased by the general public; (b) at retail; (c) for individual use. We would note that with respect to the second prong of the test, purchased "at retail," the term "retail" relates more to the end purchaser than to the location of the sale. Black's Law Dictionary defines "retail" as "[t]he sale of goods or commodities to ultimate consumers, as opposed to the sale for further distribution or processing." (Emphasis added).

Who is actually paying that 2.3%? YOU

3. The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, imposes an excise tax on plans with an annual cost exceeding $10,200 for individuals or $27,500 for a family (not including vision and dental benefits).^[4]

^{I do not think the other side would have done much better, but this sucks and the majority agree.}

The following comes straight out of the HRA:

TITLE IX REVENUE PROVISIONS- SUBTITLE A: REVENUE OFFSET PROVISIONS,

Section 9002 states:

Requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from the employee's gross income (excluding the value of contributions to flexible spending arrangements).

You are going to being paying taxes on money you haven't seen. If you don't think that this is bad, add $15,000 to $20,000 to your gross income and see if it doesn't put you into a higher tax bracket. This is how the government is going to pay for insurance for the 15% of the population that don't have insurance.

Section 9003 states:

Restricts payments from health savings accounts, medical savings accounts, and health flexible spending arrangements for medications to prescription drugs or insulin.

Obamacare virtually eliminated Health Savings Accounts, which are used as a tax shelter to lower gross income. If you used it to pay co-payments, buy prescriptions, etc, you basically can't do that anymore.

Section 9005 states:

Limits annual salary reduction contributions by an employee to a health flexible spending arrangement under a cafeteria plan to $2,500. Allows an annual inflation adjustment to such amount after 2011.

I suggest to everyone on the Vine to go read the actual bill as I have done before posting "so what's" here. Any questions?

Oh and of course the "kind and fair" insurance companies would never dream of premium increases until they were were forced to by the "socialist" health care reform bill.

I'm pretty sure the premium increases and unfair coverage loopholes came first which caused the need for the reform in the first place.

I can't tell you how many anti-Obama comments on this site have been blaming the health care reform bill for the premium increases. Unbelievable!

Requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from the employee's gross income (excluding the value of contributions to flexible spending arrangements).

While the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) does require employers to include the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored group health coverage on employees' W-2 tax forms beginning in 2011 (see text of bill, page 735), it does not require employees to pay income tax on that amount. Note that the quoted excerpt from the Congressional Research Service summary of the bill describes the cost as "excludable from the employee's gross income."

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/Hr-3590-Income-Tax-On-Health-Insurance.htm

Restricts payments from health savings accounts, medical savings accounts, and health flexible spending arrangements for medications to prescription drugs or insulin.

"The Affordable Care Act, enacted in March, established a new uniform standard that, effective Jan. 1, 2011, applies to FSAs and health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs). Under the new standard, the cost of an over-the-counter medicine or drug cannot be reimbursed from the account unless a prescription is obtained. The change does not affect insulin, even if purchased without a prescription, or other health care expenses such as medical devices, eye glasses, contact lenses, co-pays and deductibles." (Internal Revenue Service)

http://benefitslink.com/framed/cafeteriaplans125flexiblespending.html

Excerpt: "Sec. 9005 of the Affordable Care Act concerns the limitations placed on health flexible spending arrangements (FSAs) offered in cafeteria plans. Effective for tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2012, a health FSA will not be a qualified benefit under a cafeteria plan unless the plan provides for a $2,500 maximum annual salary reduction contribution to the FSA. If the plan does not specifically prohibit salary reductions in excess of $2,500, the benefit under the health FSA will not be qualified."

Limits annual salary reduction contributions by an employee to a health flexible spending arrangement under a cafeteria plan to $2,500. Allows an annual inflation adjustment to such amount after 2011.

http://benefitslink.com/framed/cafeteriaplans125flexiblespending.html

Although it is admirable that you read the bill, it helps if you interpret it correctly. There will be no income tax applied based on the value of a group heath insurance plan.

HSAs and FSAs are not eliminated, it just places a cap on the amout that can be excluded from income if the group plan is to qualify as a Cafeteria Plan.

This is how HHS defines a cafeteria plan.

Flexible Benefits Plan:

A benefit program that offers employees a choice between various benefits including cash, life insurance, health insurance, vacations, retirement plans, and child care. Although a common core of benefits may be required, you can choose how your remaining benefit dollars are to be allocated for each type of benefit from the total amount promised by the employer. Sometimes you can contribute more for additional coverage. Also known as a Cafeteria plan or IRS 125 Plan.

http://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/f/flexible.html

Although it is admirable that you read the bill, it helps if you interpret it correctly. There will be no income tax applied based on the value of a group heath insurance plan.

Ok, stick your head in the sand and don't believe it, but when it happens I promise I won't say "I told you so." This IS NOT an urban myth. If the government isn't going to tax it, then why are they requiring your employer to report it on your W-2?

HSAs and FSAs are not eliminated, it just places a cap on the amout that can be excluded from income if the group plan is to qualify as a Cafeteria Plan.

I got the information straight out of the HRA. The HRA eliminates your HSA and cuts your FSA from $5000 to $2500 annually. So much for a tax shelter on your income. I make less than 60,000 a year, own a home and have two dependents. I barely break even each year and now with this HRA, my taxable income will go up 15 - 20,000 a year, which puts me in a higher tax bracket.

I will be paying more taxes because "the Liar-in-Chief" pushed this BS through by essentially using a loophole in the 'Congressional rulebook'.

But feel free to believe that "the great pretender" is all about helping us and wants everybody to have health insurance. This is just one of the many ways he is going to pay for it.

This IS NOT an urban myth. If the government isn't going to tax it, then why are they requiring your employer to report it on your W-2?

Perhaps they want data on how much you are paying for your group health insurance.

First you claim the law will do this to you (even though it is not what the law says), then you claim you can't believe the government. Which is it?

And lets not forget the free ride for the politicians!

Genit - the bonuses amount to 1.0 - 1.5% of premiums. On a $10,000 annual premium that would be $100 - $150.

I've seen people go to emergency rooms for mildly infected finger nails. Emergency room costs about $500 - instead of going to the Doctor in the next couple of days for $70. Heck Critical Care places cost maybe $150. Why did the go - they have insurance to pay for it. I bet they wouldn't do that if they had an HSA.

I know bigger wasters than that.

DB but what exactly are they getting bonuses for .... for thier ability to rationalize how they ration your healthcare. A for profit insurance company makes a profit by not paying for healthcare. They earn bonuses for recinding policies.

Health insurance should not be a for profit entity. human nature is by nature greedy. Greedy and healthcare do not mix well. And Wellpoint is GREEDY.

A man goes into the hospital for a vasectomy. Before the procedure a rather attractive nurse comes in and takes his vitals, then tells him to take all of his clothes off. When he is fully undressed she instructs him to lie down on the table. The man obeys.

The nurse then takes all of her clothes off and climbs on top and has her way with him. Upon the completion of the act the man catches his breath and asks what that was all about.

The nurse informs the patient that studies have shown that before a vasectomy if the man has an ejaculation, he will be more relaxed and that the vasectomy is easier for the surgeon to complete.

The nurse then wheels the patient to the operating room. While they are going down the hall the patient sees six men in a room masturbating. Curious, the man asks "What are they doing in there"?

The nurse responds, "They are getting vasectomies too, but you have BCBS PPO and they have Obama Care. ----

Obamacare or other insurance in the age of Obamacare, the result is the same, we'll all pay more out-of-pocket for fewer benefits and authorized procedures. Isn't this fantastic?

What seems to be missing here is the reality that the government already rations healthcare, and the future is even darker. More and more doctors are refusing Medicare patients. Look to other "systems" that "guarantee" coverage around the world - most have "private insurance" for the wealthy and well connected, as the "government plan" is horrible.

So while you think this is a panacea, bottom line is when fully executed, the government stooges will decline your child care because they will determine you have received "enough" for the year, or that your child is "too sick", or whatever reason they choose.

You have to look at available resources, cost of education, cost of delivery (labor costs in the US), factor in the incessant legal challenges to anything and everything and of course the reality that people who pay nothing receive services - legal or illegal, and we all have to pay for all of it.

Since our government is already running a trillion+ deficit every year, with these deficits running as far as the eye can see, exactly how will we pay for more services for more people without all of us spending more money? And if you say by cutting the bonuses and such, are you really that stupid? You think that government fraud, abuse and incompetence is less expensive than some corporate stooges?

If this was Obama's plan, you'd be complaining about single-payer health care right now. Not that you should let facts get in your way.

Actually, howyouseeit is through the distorted lens of fox news and the fear mongers that love nothing more that to manipulate the weak minded for there own personal gain.

In actual fact, you are actually wrong, as are all the other talk radio educated haters who post here. I know it's a futile suggestion, being that facts and "big words" overwhelm your sense of understanding and anything that requires you to add and subtract on your own is probably an unreasonable expectation, but the CBO report is posted online. You can read it. (or have someone read to to you.)

here's an excerpt :

"for employment-based coverage, which would account for about five-sixths of the total health insurance market. In the small group market, which is defined in this analysis as consisting of employers with 50 or fewer workers, CBO and JCT estimate that the change in the average premium per person resulting from the legislation could range from an increase of 1 percent to a reduction of 2 percent in 2016 (relative to current law).6 In the large group market, which is defined here as consisting of employers with more than 50 workers, the legislation would yield an average premium per person that is zero to 3 percent lower in 2016 (relative to current law).

Remember Obama's plan, as stated during the election, was that there would be no individual mandate. This one does. This one also requires you to purchase from those same private insurance companies that you complain about. Congratulate the likes of Nancy Pelosi for doing wonderful things for the insurance companies

I would bet that the price of stocks involved in health care plans are up considerably sine OB took office.

Single payer plans do have economies of scale that would make insurance cheaper but there are definite disadvantages. To begin with what do you do about doctors? Are you planning to make doctors employees of the state or are you leaving them as they are today? I would tend to believe that doctors would remain as they are and would set prices for their own services. I know that what would be argued is that the doctors would be required to accept the premium allowed by the plan but that assumes that doctors must take the insurance. An increasing number of doctors are refusing to accept medicare patients today because of low reimbursements. What makes you think that would change then?

The second problem is what are you planning to do with all those who currently work for insurance companies? Their jobs will be gone and if the government has no plans to hire them all they won't be back.

The 'single payer' died because the Democrats could not get their Own People to support it.

Pelosi killed the single payer, so she could get the health care bill through the House.

But somebody's got to pay for all the illegals free health care. That's not a Glen Beck fantasy just go to any emergency room on the weekend in Texas. ER's are overloaded with sniffles and things that should be taken care of by general practic Dr. So you're going to have to pay more to pay for theirs too.

I bet Nancy P still hasn't read the thing.

deniser - do you not understand how many Doctors refuse to take medicare patients? It's because the Medicare amounts are less then cost of service. There was another incident in Florida this year where doctors were billing for extra tests - within medicare guidelines to get enough money to cover cost.

BTW by federal law only 15% of health insurance premiums go to pay business costs. There are less than 10 states who permited more, and they weren't the big population states. Then at that, the highest rate permitted by those states were 25%.

If you are getting 40% for profit and operation costs you have to be looking outside the health insurance units and considering the Insurance divisions, such as life insurance, where they actually make large profits.

The non- profit health insurance companies in Massachusetts would also disagree with you. In 2009 they lost $100 to $150 Million. They were refused premium increases by the Massachusetts Health Insurance commissioner. The last I heard, they lost lawsuits against the state of Massachusetts and were appealing. Their courses of action left were to stop writing new policies, and get this, apply to become "for profit".

So the CBO, same group that got Medicare estimates wrong by a massive margin, this is your source for accurate information.

No wonder this idiot got elected President.

So the CBO, same group that got Medicare estimates wrong by a massive margin, this is your source for accurate information.

The CBO makes estimates of the results of current policy decisions on future events. It freely admits the estimates are both conservative and can be in error. There is no crystal ball. There are many variables that can affect results. It is the only way to plan for how a matter of policy will affect spending and revenue.

"Remember Obama's plan, as stated during the election, was that there would be no individual mandate. This one does. This one also requires you to purchase from those same private insurance companies that you complain about. Congratulate the likes of Nancy Pelosi for doing wonderful things for the insurance companies"

How soon we forgot that it was John McCain that was calling for the individual mandate and so were other GOP leaders.

All Obama did was incorporated another GOP idea in to the health care reform.

If you want to know the truth, read this -

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/23/90948/that-health-mandate-gop-is-suing.html

Obamacare? You have no one to thank but our legislative branch and their fierce protection of the people who bought them. This is no where near what Obama wanted and everyone knows it. Your "Obamacare" rhetoric is really boring.

what rhetoric , i'm just posting what your reich protector nancy pelosi and her goons are trying to shove down our throats. you give no argument , name calling with out facts is very liberal !!

Sorry. Thought you were looking for intelligent debate. Reich Protector Nancy Pelosi? Goons? Name-calling without facts? Who's the liberal now, Len?

thought that would get a response.... it's just very dangerous when gov't employees can make decisions like this...there is no recourse , they're decisions are final. gov't should be the last resort for something as personal as medical care.

I don't agree. I think insurance companies have been screwing people long enough. They have people by the short hairs and when it's time to pay, they weasel their way out as often as possible. Completely lost my respect for them after hearing the horror stories after Katrina. People had been paying for years and when it came time to pay, they were SOL. Health insurance companies did the same thing all the time. Do you really believe they should be able to do this when someone's life is on the line? I don't and never will. They should never be able to hold that kind of power over people. You think the government's decisions are final? How about "We are denying treatment for ........" Now imagine the child they're talking about is yours.

If it's such a great Health Care then why doesn't the President and Congress include themselves in it?

denissr - really? Are you so lacking in math skills that you think your medicare example would work for the nation?

False arguments are what got Obama elected - it is complete and utter foolishness.

If it's such a great Health Care then why doesn't the President and Congress include themselves in it?

They are. All federal employees are on standard commercial health insurance plans.

Yeah, let's go back to the good old days where we knew that insurance companies can deny you coverage for having sick kids, confuse you with thousands of pages of paperwork so you don't understand what policy you're buying until you have an expensive disease, and fewer and fewer Americans who have health insurance are paying for everybody else who can't afford or won't buy their own coverage.

Obviously the status quo was sustainable, right?

I mean, you can't do anything that's 2,000 pages, right? 2,000 is bad. numbers are bad. GOP 2010!!!

now we can have gov't deny coverage...lets allow the democrats to decide who gets to live and for how long.

Yeah, it was better when unelected insurance company bureaucrats rationed care away from the sick and the unemployed, I suppose.

Heaven forbid that Congress passes a law that insurance companies can't discriminate against sick families, while implementing subsidies to help people, based on their income, afford insurance, so that uninsured Americans' care isn't shifted onto somebody else's insurance premiums. That's just awful.

well if i had never bought house insurance and suddenly i bought it and my house caught on fire.that would be bad for the insurance company and a slap in the face to honest people.

please , spare the mother teresa .... this is about power and control... and of course bankrupting the country ... so, it's ok for elected officials to decide who gets treatment and what kind... if you don't like the current policy that you have , you have a choice to get another . with nanny state ins. what you get is garbage... ask the english and the canadians.

The USA pays 90% more than Canada per capita for health care.

The USA has only 9% more doctors per capita than the Canadians. Canada has lower infant mortality rates, far fewer (if any) families being bankrupted for medical expenses, cheaper medications, and nobody loses their care if they lose their jobs. The USA outperforms Canada in treatment of some illnesses (for Americans who are lucky to have insurance), while Canada outperforms the USA in other aspects...

...BUT WE PAY TWICE WHAT THEY DO

I know Euro-bashing sells well to the Fox News crowd, but when you actually compare what Americans are getting, and the fact that our system is way more expensive than any system in the world and it doesn't even cover everybody, their system is clearly outperforming ours on a dollar-for-dollar basis.

Carl, don't try to confuse with facts. My whole family is Canadian. They wouldn't come near the US border without buying insurance first. They don't understand why people here don't think that everyone should have access to health care no matter how much money they make. They wouldn't trade their system for ours - ever. All the "waiting in lines for months" stories, blah, blah, blah - like we don't have hospital horror stories here, too.

OK, len, it's pretty obvious you read the right wing hate sites and are a big fan of Hannity. But really, you and your ilk need to come up for air and breathe a little reality. First, I haven't seen you post a single fact, just regurgitated fox news dribble; name calling, insults.. and not even very creative or original ones.

Who bankrupt the country ?? that was george W bush and the GOP. Period

"elected officials to decide who gets treatment and what kind" .. are you serious ? or is the tin hat too tight ? IT's NOT a governemtn takeover" and NO government official, no government employee will decide anything. That is simply untrue.

In fact, insurance companies have and have had unmitigated control over who gets and who gets what treatment and thousands have DIED because of it already.

There are no "death panels". We are not a "nanny state". And jsut in case you didn't get it the first time, no one in governement gets "to decide who gets to live and for how long". That is a lie. That is false. You are incorrect. get it ?

The English and Canadians both have great systems. They are different. But, in either case, EVERYONE gets health care, no one dies for lack of it or because insurance wont pay for treatment, and no one goes bankrupt. But they are socialized health care and ours is NOT. Im sure you've only heard "bad scary" stories about those systems, but the actual fact is that they are far better than ours, far less expensive, and most (the vast majority) of people in those systems like it.

And if the "free market" system worked for healthcare, we wouldn't have a monopoly situation, where insurance companies run hospitals and doctors and determine in entirety the who, what, when, and where of EVERYONES healthcare. Insurance companies wouldn't spend billions on lobbyists and we'd have the best, most affordable health care in the world that covers everyone. But we don't.. and THAT's a fact.

"The people should realize that anytime the federal government strongly favors anything, it's usually a bad thing for the rest of us american citizens (99.999% of the time)."

Half of the federal government, it was strongly contested. But you're right, members of the federal government did strongly favor it. Like civil rights, and we all know what a terrible movement that was for our nation. I mean, it took away our freedom to be racist.

Recently my 20-year-old friend died of completely treatable kidney complications because him and his family could not afford the medications or regular doctor visits, and they couldn't afford his insurance with a pre-existing condition. His father was in a bad motorcycle accident a few years earlier so their family had been saddled with medical debt for a while now. Maybe his parents should have contributed 50% of their income to medical insurance all their lives (they're lower-middle-class living in Miami). I think a lot of people who say that we shouldn't have nationalized health care because if people can't afford insurance they don't deserve it forget that people who can't afford it have children who have just the same potential of being smart and successful as any other child. Our nation makes enough money, health should be a right, it shouldn't ruin families' lives when someone gets a health complication.

These liberal scare tactics are truly world class. Millions of Americans receive billions in medical care every day through insurance - yes, there are mistakes, there is corruption, and greed. Medicare is also rife with these same examples of refusing care, corruption without end, fraud, abuse, and yet the liberal answer is kill the greedy insurance companies.

Look around the world - take England - a great socialized healthcare system, with a private insurance system for anyone who can pay for it because the government system is so "great". Sorry, the failed financial system that is our federal government needs to stay the hell away from healthcare.

"now we can have gov't deny coverage...lets allow the democrats to decide who gets to live and for how long."

No, the "death panels" will be run by the insurance companies, as they are now.

Do yourself a favor, since you insist on spewing what Failin' Palin is telling you, and check your facts. I posted it above, but maybe you should go to the IRS website yourself. Then come back with whether or not you like it, based on factual information.

NOT TRUE.

Please see johnluci's post above

Turn off Glen Beck or whoever. This is from the IRS website: "

Employer-Provided Health Coverage — Not Taxable

Starting in tax year 2011, the Affordable Care Act requires employers to report the value of the health insurance coverage they provide employees on each employee's annual Form W-2. This reporting is for informational purposes only, to show employees the value of their health care benefits so they can be more informed consumers. The amount reported does not affect tax liability, as the value of the employer contribution to health coverage continues to be excludible from an employee's income and it is not taxable.

Here's the link: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=220809,00.html

If you need to hate on the president, at least use a fact.

Wow... people still believe we will be taxed on insurance premiums?

"Stronghorse has the comment that most people don't know about.

Just think, next year I get to pay taxes on the extra $5,500.00 my insurance premiums are going to add to my wages. I got a raise and a tax increase all in one big bill!!

How's that for "let's just pass the bill and make the public like it later!!"

I DON'T LIKE IT!!!!"

Come back and let us know, after you've done your taxes, if you had to pay taxes on the insurance premium that your employer pays on your behalf.

According to the IRS, you won't be paying taxes on those premiums.

You might want to read the new IRS rules, prior to your next rant.

DEATH PANELS!!!

RATIONING!!!

SOCIALISM!!!

PUPPY SHREDDERS!!!

We need to burn Qu'rans every day until Obama stops shoving mosques and socialist health care bs down our throats!!

Wake up America! Republicans 2010!! WOOOO!!!

DEATH PANELS!!! Not True "Beck and Palin Fantasy"

RATIONING!!! There is no need for rationing unless the 40,000 people now are able to buy health care start using up medical supplies.

SOCIALISM!!! Health care provided through private insurance companies! the VA is the only true example of a socialist healthcare system in this country. 100% owned and operated by the federal government. You idiots need to look up the meaning of socialism.

PUPPY SHREDDERS!!! This just shows how brainwashed you are.

We need to burn Qu'rans every day until Obama stops shoving mosques and socialist health care bs down our throats!!

#1. It is not a mosque, and it is not on holy ground. #2 Obama is just shoving the Constitution and the freedom of religion down our throats and it's amazing that anybody even has to. #3. look up the definition of socialist. True socialism in this country is the fire department, the police department, state and national parks and even your local library.

Wake up America! Republicans are idiots who kowtow to rich corporations over the freedoms of the common man.!! WOOOO!!

Oh Americans are awake, and we will be up late on election night and be celebrating the huge defeat of socialism. So much for transparency and accountability.

Good. By the time all you "anti-socialists" are done withdrawing from Medicare and SSI, there'll be plenty of money for me! You anti-Americans make me sick. Would you tell a veteran that Tri-care should be abolished because it's socialist? Come out of the cellar and take off the tinfoil Glen-Beck-receiver.

Well said johnluci.

"DEATH PANELS!!!

RATIONING!!!

SOCIALISM!!!

PUPPY SHREDDERS!!!

We need to burn Qu'rans every day until Obama stops shoving mosques and socialist health care bs down our throats!!

Wake up America! Republicans 2010!! WOOOO!!!"

And the Fox News viewers take it all in, as if it was reality.

Shouldn't Fox News be using their pulpit, given to them by freedom of the press, to inform rather than misinform their viewers?

When did misinforming Americans about the world around them become patriotic?

While Fox News' low information viewers could do a simple fact check to verify what is said is mostly half-truths and downright lies, their viewers are just to lazy to check the facts for themselves.

Well, under the new health care law, you'll get federal subsidies, based on your income, to help you pay for it.

That's a big step in the right direction.

You will get subsidies if you fall below a specific income level. The problem you don't take into account for are those who fall above that level and still cannot afford to pay for the insurance. It does not just fall only on the very rich of this country but also on what most of you would consider middle class. How many of our us are having a difficult time paying for our home mortgage. Where do you suggest we get that money?

Subsidies are great, for the subsidized, not so great for the people being forced to provide for not just their own families, but other peoples' families, many of whom don't even try to provide for themselves.

so give us your views, or are you afraid that they're ingnorant.

I agree. I pay for my own healthcare, I am glad it passed, maybe something good will come out of it, I'll be able to buy insurance through pools, and that may be cheaper than what I am currently paying. I don't go to the doctor unless I am half-dead, its the people that go with the sniffles that drive costs up.

One problem that this insurance plan doesn't address, and could never address, is the finite number of doctors in this countries. While you may not go to the doctor unless you are very sick the same can not be said about everybody. How many will be willing to see a nurse practitioner instead of "their" doctor? What amuses me is that this is going to increase the number of patients attempting to go to the doctors office. What is going to happen when you become very sick and there is no time available to see your doctor. Are you going to go to the emergency room? I thought one of the things this was going to stop was the number of those going to emergency rooms for treatment.

"One problem that this insurance plan doesn't address, and could never address, is the finite number of doctors in this countries. While you may not go to the doctor unless you are very sick the same can not be said about everybody. How many will be willing to see a nurse practitioner instead of "their" doctor? What amuses me is that this is going to increase the number of patients attempting to go to the doctors office. What is going to happen when you become very sick and there is no time available to see your doctor. Are you going to go to the emergency room? I thought one of the things this was going to stop was the number of those going to emergency rooms for treatment."

Good point. Would you go along with a plan to give more federal money for scholarships for people who want to get a medical degree?

It would take a few years for those new doctors to finish medical school, be we need to start now, if we are going to meet the demand for more doctors.

I might. It would depend on how the plan is laid out and how it will be funded. The aim of this scholarship should be encourage general practitioners. We have plenty of doctors in the speciality fields.

The Affordable Healthcare Act has funding to both increase the number of GP, RNs and PA's and to make the training more affordable to students. It also contains tax incentives for GP education of choosing to specialize and to encourage them to move to rural locations in the early part of their careers.

Actually, the IRS website I listed above has a lot of information on the Affordable Care Act for small businesses.

www.healthcare.gov

Click "Understand the New Law" (the bright yellow button at the top)

Scroll down to "Information for you". Click "Employers"

Click "Small Employers" or "Large Employers" based on your business size.

All the info is right there. Probably some reading, but not too much.

I beg to disagree. People are confused because they refuse to take the initiative to do their own research and instead depend on fruit-loops like Death-panel Palin for their facts. If you choose to get your information in two sentence sound bites from someone who's "cute", you deserve what you get.

really,i think the media is doing a good job of promoting what they thought was right when they left the liberal arts university that daddy paid for.be liberal when your young cause it is a certain that you will get smarter.

playing without a mask and helmet, eh?

america doesn`t have a good health care system cause you missed your chance,could have been done in the fifties or sixties.not now,every man for himself.

Oh, no! Death panels!!! Go back to staring at your Sarah Palin poster.

hockey puck @!$%#, I think it has been every man for himself forever. A sudden change now would prove that the elders @!$%#ed over their offspring.

"You suckers who fell for this, just wait till you have to use it and then go through a half dozen new medical bureaucrats to finally get anything done, you'll probably die first! Anytime the fed. gov't gets it hands on anything it ends up FUBAR and so will anyone who partakes in this joke of a forced medical plan."

The government isn't the bureaucracy that you will be dealing with.

If you encounter a medical bureaucracy with your medical plan, switch medical plans.

Unfortunately, we will not be getting a government sponsored health plan (public option), as the Republicans wouldn't want the federal government competing with some of their biggest campaign contributors.

Veterans seem to be happy with their government sponsored medical plan, as are most people on Medicare.

I say "government sponsored", instead of "government run", because it is private insurance companies that actually "run" these government insurance programs including Veterans, Medicare, Medicaid and the Federal Employee Program.

These all seem to be working pretty well, so why would you expect a new plan, modeled off of one of these plans to be FUBAR?

the problem now is that the americans that can add value are not in the process.and i don`t blame them one bit.i don`t feed rats.

You conveniently forgot to mention that this was Mitt Romney's (R) brainchild. It's the GOP's contribution to the fact that Obama believed that everyone should be entitled to health care and not be held hostage to insurance companies. Blame Reid, Pelosi and Obama if you must. But to me your irritation with the Massachusetts plan is Republican policy (having been bought and paid for by the insurance companies), and your anti-Obama opinion has no basis in fact in your post.

I don't quite understand what you are talking about. Yes this plan was created during Romney administration but that has not been the case since then. Massachusetts has not been what one would consider a hot bed of conservative thinking. Their state government is decidedly liberal. Who do you think has been administrating their health plan since Romney left office?

It should be noted that under the current plan as passed by congress would require you to purchase through private insurance companies.

I live in massachusetts and my blue cross plan went up 40% this past year alone. Good luck america. If you pay for your own insurance you are in for a rude awakening as you will now be subsidising everyone else.

ssmike you already subsidize everyone including your "lovely" masshealth (medicaid) receipients who seem to always have enough money totravel out of state and stay at 200.00 a night hotels and ski at expensive resorts. You subsidize those that dont have insurance and dont pay thier healthcare bills and you pay taxes so the joe down the street who doesnt marry the mother of his kids can get medicaid for all of their healthcare because they just dont list dad and his income as a member of the household. Look to your neighbors as the reason for the healthcare increases.

john - you forgot to mention that Mass Healthcare was a deal Romney had to make with the Dems and Tedd Kennedy who run this state. The plan Governor Romney wanted had all MA residents havingto pay for insurance based on their income. Everyone would have had to pay something but the Dems wouldn't go for that had to make sure their voters got a free ride. Governor Romney comprised and we ended up with the mess we have now and the state is broke due to mandatory health insurance with a shortage of primary care doctors. The ERs are still filled with non emergency health problems. Romneycare did nothing. Finally as MA taxpayer I get to pay for the freeloaders in Massachusetts and now on a national level. When will government stop taking my money to support others. I have a family of my own I'm tried of supporting someone else.

What?

and get rid of health care for huge profits.

I agree. If you watched, you know exactly who the health insurance companies have on the payroll.

The Dems. The insurance companies have a wind fall profit coming with 30 million new client all paying(either them or fed). Its a can't lose for them. Only problem is the Fed can't make buy Health Care and will lose in Court.

Calif_guy,

Your state requires you to buy car insurance.... the govt can make you buy health ins. Same rational.

The Dems. The insurance companies have a wind fall profit coming with 30 million new client all paying(either them or fed). Its a can't lose for them.

sure no lose for insurance but big lose for the people.

have not seen any one account for the simple fact that 30million "new clients" will not happen, those people will not get insurance - the fine is cheaper yanno

now add in the people who have insurance now but know as stated above - the fine is cheaper

my bet is near 1/3 of the country chooses the irs fine over maintaining a policy. how many will choose to not work at all? free health care if ya have no job

I closed my business "retired" when ObamaCare passed and will never make another dollar unless that crap gets flushed - if people really insist on forcing me into free healthcare at their expense - let the law live.

want to put me back to work?
force me to create jobs again?
and pay for my insurance coverage?

Make my day - kill obamacare and I will be hiring the very next day.

cheers
:)

Genenut

"Your state requires you to buy car insurance.... the govt can make you buy health ins. Same rational."

No one is required to purchase auto insurance unless you register a vehicle. How do I opt out of health insurance?

"Your state requires you to buy car insurance.... the govt can make you buy health ins. Same rational."

actually state powers are greater than federal powers when it comes to power over the people. "by design"

thinking state powers and federal powers "are the same" is what is destroying our country.

the idiocracy prophecy is being fulfilled at an alarming rate.

Not even if you paid me.

I'd take a yellow dog over a Republican any day, and I don't ever really expect to change that attitude.

Amnesty for illegals was first granted by Ronald Reagan (R) and has nothing to do with Obama. And I suggest that if you don't like it here ("What a great country") you find some third world country that will have you. The rest of us want a fight for what is best for our country and it's people. Wiping out the middle class. Sheesh. Glen and Rush are not apostles of the Almighty, I promise you. Try thinking on your own.

I voted with my feet. Because US health care is great if you have the MONEY & Insurance.

Come to Thailand where their Universal Health Care cost $1.00 per Doctor visit. The Doctors are trained by the Thai Government in Western Countries. The Doctors then have to work in the Thai Health Care System before they can go into private practice.

Foreigners have to pay higher rates. Examples are; $30.00 a hour for the Dentist, Complete physical $150.00 w/x-ray sonogram, blood work, & extra vaccines - FREE, and a clinic Doctor visit $10.00.

Or you can go to Spain, one of the Best in the World according to the WHO. Where patient care & feeding has to be done by your family, because the Nurses do not do it. And bring your interpreter because many of the Doctors & staff do not speak English.

As opposed to the inexperienced doctors that graduate here every year, you mean?

at leist they speak english!!

One of the reasons that there are too few GP's in this country is because of the lack of reimbursement for their services. The largest offender is by far Medicare. Doctors are no longer taking Medicare patients as is, what do you think will happen under government plans? I guess to fill the gap we might need to look overseas for help.

sure David1159 - i feel so so sorry for the poor underpaid MDs - LOL! One of the reasons for the lack of GPs has been the greed of the medical profession that limits the number of doctors. who says all MDs must be millionaires anyway?

Tom you are confusing speacialists with GP's and Internists. Specialist in the medical field do make large sums of money but the same cannot be said for your average family doctor. Insurance coverage barely covers costs and medicare comes nowhere near. That is why many doctors refuse medicare patients. Quit drawing conclusions from what you see on television and get into the real world. A little research on the subject might be useful.