The Health-Care Backlash

Originally Posted by Paslode

Honest to God it might end up being more affordable to live the remainder of your life sitting on your nuts instead of working.

It is all completely back asswards.

Not so quick, head 500 miles west, I need help building firing positions.

[Defender968]

Originally Posted by FCWood

I agree with you the situation must not worsen for the dems to keep a majority. However, on the point of health care itself, it will not deteriorate any time soon. I say this because the bill has a time delay. More than likely it will not go into effect until 2014. It will then take several years for it to actually deteriorate to the point of the public becoming aware/outraged. So, IMHO, health care reform will not be the downfall of the dems in 2010. That's not to say other controversial bills won't cause it though, and like you stated if it does get worse by November then the public very well may remember the health care bill.

I agree with you that healthcare itself may not deteriorate right away, because as you say there is a delay, however, the taxes will start immediately as will the administrative changes which will begin to hurt things in healthcare, and in the current economic environment the increased taxes will have a very negative impact that coupled with all the other taxes that are coming down the pike to pay for all of this ridiculous spending will crush our already fragile and ailing economy, also as soon as this bill goes into effect the healthcare deteriorate will begin IMO, as it adds many restrictions and rules but gives no ways to cut cost, so the costs have to go up.

Originally Posted by FCWood

We seem to be of a similar mindset, and I think you've got several interesting points. The key as you stated is that things can't get worse otherwise we might just see a repub majority. But IMHO that won't happen with only the dems making enemies, but also requires the repubs to pull it together and offer something worth taking an interest in.

I don't necessarily think the Dims think things will get worse, it appears to me that they believe they can spend unlimited amounts of money and things will just keep going as is, I personally don't agree, if they do not stop spending and if they continue to raise taxes our economy will deteriorate further and we may well fall into a depression, just my .02.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by wet dog

Not so quick, head 500 miles west, I need help building firing positions.

Hmmmmm....what tools should I bring

[nmap]

I think the real backlash - the one that will compel change - is coming from China. Or, more accurately, from the people that buy our treasury bonds. Keep in mind that as interest rates go up, the cost of paying the debt goes up. An extra 1% on $12 trillion is no small thing - it adds up to $120 billion per year, or (ahem) $1.2 trillion over a decade.

Our national spending contributes to this. Given the structure of the tax provisions, I suppose the supporters of the bill assume that we will cut the deficit, then crank in health care expenses, and that growth will cover the difference. I don't believe that will work.

First, as Kgoerz points out, taxes are already high. As they increase, there is less incentive to earn more money. A pleasant afternoon digging in firing positions might be more attractive than doing something that produces income, and hence more taxes.

Second, the bond market seems to be sending some signals. The potential buyers may be raising eyebrows. (The following charts are the 30 year treasury bond)

Take a look HERE. If the price keeps going down, we will face a need to either raise taxes even more (a lot more), cut spending somewhere, or a combination of the two.

For context, a 20 year history of the 30 year treasury bond is HERE

Notice we've had 20 years of declining interest rates. We've added debt and other commitments to the point that increased interest rates will create some challenges.

By the way - don't expect mortgage rates to remain static. They will tend to go up, too. Which implies that home prices will be under pressure...which puts the value of houses beneath the mortgage value...which puts the banks and pension funds back into trouble...

It's one thing to tell the voters to run along. And quite another to tell the bond market to do so.

[TF Kilo]

So, it passed the house.

What straw breaks the camels back, and what do we do then?

[lindy]

Originally Posted by nmap

I think the real backlash - the one that will compel change - is coming from China. Or, more accurately, from the people that buy our treasury bonds. Keep in mind that as interest rates go up, the cost of paying the debt goes up. An extra 1% on $12 trillion is no small thing - it adds up to $120 billion per year, or (ahem) $1.2 trillion over a decade.

First, as Kgoerz points out, taxes are already high. As they increase, there is less incentive to earn more money. A pleasant afternoon digging in firing positions might be more attractive than doing something that produces income, and hence more taxes.

Second, the bond market seems to be sending some signals. The potential buyers may be raising eyebrows. (The following charts are the 30 year treasury bond)

It's one thing to tell the voters to run along. And quite another to tell the bond market to do so.

So if China won't buy our bonds (a crappy investment) issued by the Treasury, who will?

THE FED!!!

Where does the FED get it's money? From the Treasury! Uh...

Buy gold and store it in Wet Dog's AOR. Eventually private gold ownership will be illegal...once again.

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by lindy

Eventually private gold ownership will be illegal...once again.

Here's a tip from an anti-alchemist...eventually lead will be worth more than gold.

[LongWire]

Thought I'd share this.........

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by LongWire

Thought I'd share this.........

That is good!

[Snaquebite]

Here's a take from a constitutional law professor...Interesting points.

http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/en...lth-care-bills

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...ranscript.html

And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...ranscript.html

There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly

Retired attorney,

Constitutional Law Instructor

Carrollton, Texas

mrobertc@hotmail.com

[ACE844]

Originally Posted by Snaquebite

Here's a take from a constitutional law professor...Interesting points.

http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/en...lth-care-bills

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

If I recall correctly this was one of the many inciting reasons for the first American Revolution say circa 1776... Something about 'Taxation without representation', oppression, and a host of other greivances.