"Hidden costs" and "restrictions of freedoms" sound scary, but don't make sense. Americans are offered more with the Affordable Care Act, not less like in the private market. The government has not control, just a base plan, with the private sector hospitals and doctors in charge...insurers too. Hidden costs? What are they? Paranoid much. Yeah, there aren't any hidden costs in the private sector health care market? Having bought insurance for my business for 15 years, I know what I'm talking about. Health savings accounts are the solution either, had them for 8 years.

Make sense, the CBO report is more accurate the ranting in the article above, and commentary here.

Just curious John. If by buying insurance for your business you mean providing insurance for your employees, would you continue to do so if the penalty for not doing so was less than the cost of providing coverage?

@John Peterson
You forgot rationing.
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/July/25/medicaid-cuts-sidebar.aspx

But is just more fear mongering.

@John

Not true. Previously, if you had a child that required special ed, you could deduct 10k from your taxes to cover expenses of educating and treating your child. Now you are restricted to 2.5k. In addition, the government is not only concerned that we have insurance coverage, but is now, ironically, taxing those that have coverage that is "too good."

In addition, the government instituted new regulations on drug companies, and it won't stop there.

Those are just a few examples.

There is no rationing. Please offer some examples of rationing. I know of no rationing, none, zilch. Rationing in the U.S., yes. Costs prevent people from getting treatment. Insurers cut people off, include huge deductibles, drop insurance and limit it, and exclude pre-existing conditions. That's rationing, no? Self rationing is probably the cruelest aspect of the U.S system of them all. Oh, and we pay twice as much. But we're free....

@John Peterson
Did you read the link? States are rationing the medication to people on state offered medicine because of cost constraints. Why will AHA be different. Take the blinder off.

@John Peterson,

So you don't think that restricting your/my health savings account to a mere 2.5k is a restriction on my freedom? How about the fact that the law will require OTC drugs to require a prescription from a doctor? Do you seriously think that requiring me to get a prescription for Tylenol or OTC cold medicine is not a restriction of my freedom?

@John Peterson

Time to get up to speed.

http://www.savingtoinvest.com/2010/11/2011-flexible-spending-accounts-fsa-changes-and-limits-from-2010.html

@Luke, I have had health savings accounts, tax deductible for fed and state (recently). All you have to do is fill that account once, and spend it down over unlimited years. But with FSA's, they were a bad idea, because you had to use the money up, or lose it. Wasted? Sure. After reading the new rules per your link, very little has changed for me, and what is changing for FSA's is reasonable. In fact, FSA's should go away, and everyone moved to the HSA's. But with HSA's and FSA's, research proved that people again, self ration to the point of putting themselves and family members in danger of waiting too long. Any kind of rationing is inhumane and not what I would call an American value.

Rate increases are just as bad with HSA's. Mine went up $1400 a year. After 5 years...who can afford it? You? That's not reform, or lowering the cost curve. Single payer is best, half the cost of our system.

@John Peterson,

Ummmm, you're not paying attention. The issue what not whether or not you liked FSA's, nor what it would take to get you to like them; the issue was about what freedoms Obamacare was taking away. You said it was not taking any away.

Ironically, you say that any type of rationing is inhumane, while defending Obama's right to ration OTC medication. The fact is that Obama's policy is BOTH a tax increase AND an attempt to ration. By reducing the amount of tax-free money people can use on medication, and also restricting people's ability to get the medication they desire, Obama is targeting the two values you just claimed to embrace.

Yes, John, Obama HAS threatened my freedom. You made my argument by walking backwards into it.

@John Peterson,

I forgot to mention your comments regarding rate increases.

Yes, I also dislike rate increases. However, the Obama administration openly admits on a regular basis that if Obamacare had already been the law of the land the rates would also have risen given the aging boomers and the increased cost of advances in technology.

The the mistake the Obama administration makes is that it actually believes that technology would have advanced this far it it had always been the law of the land.

@Luke, I didn't think you lost any freedoms. Losing the money in the FSA is a waste, not a freedom. That's why conservatives are bad managers of money, run up debt, and then blame Democrats for not paying off their tab fast enough. Nice.

Typical conservative freeloader as well, since you're complaining about over the counter medicine. Last I looked, it wasn't very expensive. Looks like you haven't had to purchase $20 to $300 tablets. OTC stuff is cheap, and sometimes effective. Again, I've had a HSA. The money in an HSA is tax deductible for one thing, and as I mentioned, these plans don't bring the cost curve down. You're whining about the fact that it was tax free money, instead of being a tax deduction, give me a break. Do you even know what freedom means, or is it an excuse to freeload and not pay your fair share?

You're frightening over-use of freedom, and it's misapplication, essentially makes the word meaningless. I prefer saving money, saving lives. You want to save a tax free account few people have. What a petty loser.

@J. Peterson,

First off, I never said that I was supporting FSA's as a replacement for insurance, so I don't know why you brought it up. Rather, I am talking about FSA's on general, which can be used in addition to insurance.

That said, as usual your posts are filled with quite a bit of irony. After accusing me of being a bad manager of money, you imply that FSA's involve risk because the money won't be used and will therefore be forfeited, suggesting that using FHA's are too difficult for you to manage. But in actuality you say so because you are a bad manager of your own money. At a bare minimum, I know the number of scheduled visits that all my family members will have with their doctors and dentists, and most of the long-term medications involved. There is no way around the deductibles and copays unless someone dies and we thereby avoid the scheduled visits. In the end, if there is any money left over, we will go to the drug store and buy a good amount of OTC supplies a year in advance.

Apparently you have few medical expenses in your family, but with mine there will be plenty, even under Obamacare. Perhaps you don't have teeth, for example. Or perhaps you are blind, and in no need of prescription eyewear.
So, contrary to what you have said (until you unwittingly made my point), Obamacare does take away my freedom. It does so in a most extreme and absurd way, by requiring me to go to a doctor to get what the law allows me to get without a doctor's permission. DUH!

Yeah, all the other industrialized countries around the world have suffered the consequences and are now socialist commies dependent on government, waiting to be told how to eat and save energy. The horror.

Look at the France, look at Europe, they're all victims of the Wall Street Banks, who seem to be doing just fine right now, all the while demanding austerity for the people these countries are supposed to serve. It's funny, no rules for the banks, no restraint, but go after the people effected by their corruption.

Taxing the rich should have been done when we went a war spree...but war is free isn't it? Slight of hand tricks by the CBO? Yea, what do they know.

@John Peterson
Oh, its Wall Street. Of course, do you maybe want to through Bush in their as well.

The progressive EU has demanded these austerity measures be taken, not some conservative group. It is the government spending that has doomed those governments. Greece currently has a debt that 142% of GDP, yet you want to blame Wall Street. What you are seeing in Europe is the that eventually you run out of rich people to tax and then you are screwed. All the austerity measures in Europe also included hefty tax increases and they still flounder. Your ignorance is the reason people are actually voting for Obama.

@ Lyle Ruble--- Lyle, you amaze me. I see Obamacare being REPEALED for it is super flawed. If it's so good, why did it take bribes to get it thru Congress? If it's so good, then why did Pelosi grant so many waivers? If it's so good, then why doesn't Congress use it?

@Keith Best....Flawed or not, to repeal it will take the votes and that's not happening anytime soon. So learn to live with it.

@Lyle
"Learn to live with it and work to make it receive its full positive potential" the ends justify the means. It doesn't matter the short term harm as long as government gets control of health care.

@J.B. Schmidt...Now you have the right idea.

That's right Bryant. learn to live with it like George Washington learned to live with The Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, and The Quatering Act.

@The Anti-Alinsky...Such a profound statement. You sure you don't have anything to add to the conversation, I know you are such a scholar. Please enlighten us, oh wise one.

I suppose that we should have just learned to live with the the British Empire taxing us without any representation.

Just think of where we'd be today if our founding fathers had adopted such an attitude as 'learn to live with.'

Is Lyle learning to live with Walker?

Hoffa, dead on.
Lyle, if that's the best you can respond with I guess I won this debate.

236 years ago Washington, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, the Adamses and many other reached their limit with intolerable government intervention. Not only did they declare humanities right to rebel against such intolerant actions, they gave us a non-violent means to do it through elections.

Making the Federal government listen to the majority of American's wishes will require a concerted effort. Lyle is right, we will need a filibuster proof number of seats, but it can be done. Conservatives need to overcome their minor differences in order to get the job done. But if things work out they way they have been going the last couple of years, I have faith that enough voters will do the right thing and put enough conservatives in office to overturn this disastrous piece of legislation.

Lyle you are likely correct that it can not be stopped now that the Supreme Court refused to honor the Constitution. The only hope is getting to 55+ GOP senators and finding 5 Democrats to support a far less destructive plan in place of it and that is long shot. It will ensure a fiscal collapse if we fail to stop it.

First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend's eye.

@Nick -

Your perverted image of conservatives and the Tea Party derive from your own personal extreme partisanship. Try looking upon the world with unbiased eyes, and maybe you'll actually start to learn something valuable instead of the crap that you constantly perpetuate on these boards.

Conservatives and the Tea Party have no problem what-so-ever with helping those who are truly incapable of helping themselves. It's the help that the government is providing to those who are capable of helping themselves, but refuse to do so for whatever reason, that we are opposed to. And any person with a dose of common sense would be of the same position.

Please answer this question:

Why should the government assist those who are fully capable of helping themselves, but won't for whatever reason?

America is about freedom of choice. Those who are capable, but refuse to help themselves, are obviously choosing the life that they want for themselves. So let them have it! Don't take my hard earned tax dollars, or anyone else's, simply to redistribute to such people through social welfare programs! That's all around wrong as you're taking from the righteous who made the choice to help themselves only to give to those that already made a choice of their own, thus directly interfering with the sovereign choice that such individuals have made for themselves!

That's what America is about!

@JRH..."For whatever reason"? Tell that to kids who are born into poverty, they didn't chose it. You're going off the rails today.

@Lyle -

Just like Nick, your extreme partisanship prevents you from seeing the reality of the situation.

Children are obviously incapable of helping themselves. I'm more than willing to assist the children, but not the parents. Instead of giving the parents money to spend on the children, which is more than often abused by the parents, we should give them the necessities that the children actually require.

I'm more than willing to help, but I want fairness and justice as well. Why don't you?

@JRH...Are you suggesting that we take over parenting of children of poverty?

@Lyle -

No, I"m not suggesting that at all. What I am suggesting is that the aid government provide should be targeted specifically at meeting the necessities required by the children, as opposed to giving the parents money and allowing them to spend it however they see fit, as that system is obviously too prone to abuse. Why do we trust parents who have obviously made bad decisions in their lives, the least of which is choosing to have children that they can't afford to raise, to wisely spend the monetary aid that we provide them? Where's the logic in that? It's absolutely insane!

@JRH...Following your logic then we should create a whole new agency to directly feed, clothe, house, provide medical care, etc. Probably should just open up poor farms and take the children away from their indigent parents and institutionally raise this new livestock.

@Lyle -

I'm not saying that those people are necessarily inept at raising children. Only that they're inept at spending money and making financially sound and responsible decisions. But if you want to take it to an extreme, be my guest. I'm just looking for a little logic to be instilled in how we help those children. Is that honestly too much to ask for from a liberal?

@JRH....Two points: First, if we accept that we will not punish children for the sins of their fathers, then we as a society must take care of them in spite of their parentage. The constant problem is how do we provide for them and not create either a long term dependency in them or perpetuate the dependency of the parents.

Second; What happens to cultural diversity and the uniqueness of their history? Are we attempting to create an artificial melting pot and produce cookie cutter people?

@Lyle: "...Probably should just open up poor farms and take the children away..."

We actually did that at one time. The tecnical name for a "poor farm" was an orphanage. Where otherwise cast-off children would be fed, clothed, educated on the taxpayer dime, and expected to be polite and othewise accountable to themselves in return. That raised self-reliant responsible folks. Worked great for generations. Until guys such as yourself came along and told us how demeaning it was to be an orphan, and we had to close all of the orphanages. Thanks for nothing.

Your social experimentation has created a death-spiral in the USA. Learn to live with ObamaCare? Why not just say learn to live with constantly dimishing liberty? Not on your life!

@Lyle
"produce cookie cutter people", Isn't that what is trying to be produced through legislation from a centralized government that assumes it can impose a one size fits all health system?

AHA goes well beyond taking care of kids. In fact, parents who have opted to save money and pay for doctor visits outright are going to be punished for not purchasing a full boat health plan. All the while Obama is removing Clinton's welfare initiative that forces recipients to work. Those that can work, must. If still unable to find healthcare anywhere, then the government can subsidize for short 1yr intervals. Each person must then prove need and desire to get out of the subsidy prior to renewal.

No conservative wants kids on the streets, regardless of the radical views of Mr. Poulos. However, DC cannot take of kids in inner city Appleton with the same legislation that they care for poverty stricken kids in backwoods Mississippi. The states are best suited to care for the poor as they can tailor plans based on true need. Instead the central government has done nothing but create a system destined for bloated misuse and perversion.

@Nick

How often do you say something that is more than mere posturing?

@Lyle -

As to your first point - we can't force success. All we can do is provide the opportunity. We help with necessaries and in providing that opportunity through the public education system. It's up to the individual student to embrace those opportunities and make the most of them. But if those children reject such opportunities, they've no one to blame but themselves. You can't force success, you can't legislate morality - it NEVER works. But we can incentivize the parents to do right by their children by either assessing special taxes on them if their child is a detriment to the public education system or by taking away some of their government benefits. We'd do this in stages, whereby the parent would first receive a warning and then a probationary period to get their children whipped into shape. The only time people really tend to positively react is when it effects their wallet.

"Second; What happens to cultural diversity and the uniqueness of their history? Are we attempting to create an artificial melting pot and produce cookie cutter people?"

Are you trying to say that some cultures are just inherently financially/fiscally irresponsible and that we need to 'learn to live with' such a situation merely to preserve the 'uniqueness' of those cultures?

That's absolutely the most outrageous line of crap that Hoffa has heard this entire year so for - congratulations!

What was so wrong with the way Hoffa was handling his health care? Hoffa NEVER stiffed anyone on a bill. But now Obama wants to penalize Hoffa, calling him a 'freerider' and a burden on the system??? Really??? Sorry, Mr. Obama, but that's what a majority of those who are currently claiming SSI disability, medicaid, and other welfare programs are, but most certainly not Hoffa! You have no idea how much that pisses off Hoffa! And for that, Hoffa HATES President Obama with a deeply rooted passion. His arrogance in supposing that he knows better than Hoffa as to how to take care of Hoffa is the epitome of an egotistical madman running amuck and unchecked!

Just because some people make the CHOICE to be financially and personally IRRESPONSIBLE, Obama decides to punish the righteous to kowtow to the morons. This is NOT what America is about! I'm getting sick of losing my freedoms just to appease the IDIOTS of our society. If people choose to be assholes, that is not Hoffa's fault and Hoffa should not have to pay for their bad choices/decisions!

America is all about being able to choose one's own destiny! If people choose to be STUPID, then they must want the life that they've chosen for themselves. Government needs to get out of the way and allow them to fail, as it is what they apparently want!

Obama needs to be stopped and the Obamination that is Obamacare MUST be repealed IMMEDIATELY!

JRH --- Please tell us your secret !! When I was temporarily without insurance, I continued to see my usual doctors --- all at Frodtert --- I asked that I be billed the rate that my insurance carrier which I had was billed at and they said NO --- the Docs said that they had no control over the Froedtert system, and I had to pay MORE than the rates my insurance company was paying !!

Kind of seems backwards that I as a Cash Paying individual had to pay more for the same service as was being provided to me when it went through an insurance company and the Medical Card Provider had to go through much more paperwork and wait for their money ---- Huh ?????

I also found out that I could not find out the charges ahead of time from the Doc;s -- they didn't have a clue .....

Interestingly, I read yesterday that insurance companies have now refunded about $1.1 Billion to the people they insure, because they spent less than 80% of the premiums they collected on actual care ...... this is part of Obamacare.

JRH --- as for your catastrophic coverage, almost all such policies had a lifetime limit of $1 million --- and nowadays, that is chump change if you have a major event --- but with Obamacare, there is no longer a limit --- also, if you are on Medicare, you use to have to pay for testing --- mammograms, colonoscopies, etc ..... with Obama care Preventive Procedures and Tests are no longer charge for -- makes sense, catch it while it is still treatable, and at a much lower cost.

David, welcome to U&C (Usual and Customary)! U&C is what the insurance carrier tells you the insured is the regional and/or national average for the cost of the service you need. They won't provide the data that drives their U&C rates, of course. The medical clinic adds overhead costs to what they charge you/the insurance company, the insurance company pays what they like, and you end up paying a high monthly premium, office co-pay, and the portion the insurance company won't pay (after the deductible and 20% out of pocket is paid)! A good deal for the insurance company, not so much for the insured.

@David and Bren
How much of that BS has to do with the government sticking it nose in? If 70 years ago you could easily pay your doctor with cash, what has changed? We have ever more present insurance spurred on by ever more present government intervention. To blame one with out the other is like holding the rain drop responsible for a flood and not the storm system.

The medical procedures that people do outside of insurance (cosmetic surgery, lasic), while still can be considered costly; their costly have either gone down or have not increased nearly at the same rate as the rest of the medical world. This is because of competition. Obviously the insurance companies would hate it if you could shop your health insurance like car insurance, at the same time, liberals hate the free market system. Working together, they are destroying the best medicine this planet has known.

Hoffa appears to be someone that has been fortunate to not have a debilitating illness, a child with a severe birth defect, a pre-existing illness, etc. Even a catastrophic policy is not going to save someone from financial distress, and policies can be cancelled and policyholders put out in the cold. So Hoffa's constant harping about how he was clever and smart enough to get into the catbird seat seems tenuous and maybe, lucky, We all know ironic stories where someone was "on top", then fortunes took a dive, and bad things happened to good people. Confidence like Hoffa expresses is self-deception, but not deception for those that endure his bully hotshot comments.

First off, Hoffa has a severe distrust of doctors in general. He usually webMD's his problems first. If that fails, only then does Hoffa actually see a doctor. Second, Hoffa will only deal with a doctor that is willing to be upfront, honest, and is willing to negotiate a cash and carry price for their services - usually this is done by a pre-negotiated hourly rate system, broken down by 1/4 hour increments.

In Hoffa's experience, it's difficult to find someone who's unwilling to take cash - and when Hoffa says 'cash,' he means $100 bills. In fact, if Hoffa's happy with the service he receives, he'll usually offer the doctor a gratuity payment, as it should be! Tests, cultures, lab work, etc. are all negotiated if the charged price seems a bit steep. Meds, when necessary are paid for at market rate, however, if the market rate in the US is high, Hoffa will independently order the prescription from a Canadian pharmacy, and have the meds FedEx'd to him.

As Hoffa said before, this has worked great for Hoffa and has saved him tens of thousands of dollars in needless premium payments over the years.

And Hoffa's catastrophic policy is IRON CLAD - it was specifically drafted by Hoffa and the insurance company together, and specially underwritten at Hoffa's request. Hoffa only signed on the dotted line when the language of the policy was satisfactory to Hoffa's demands. It covers all care relating to any situation that would be considered contingent or unexpected up to $8M. If the company tries to break the policy upon a valid claim being made, there's a contractual punitive damages element that would reimburse Hoffa, or his survivors in interest, at 5 times actual damages incurred.

People just need to be smart and know how to play the game! It's not difficult - it just requires a little bit of work and effort on the part of the patient/insured. But just because a majority of the people out there are brain-dead half-wits, Obama is going to penalize Hoffa.

Obama is a piece of sh.....

Hoffa - Suggest you write a book about how you get customized services from doctors and insurance companies. That kind of service is generally for the very rich or famous, and you are not. Most reputable doctors are busy and would not endure a pain in the arse like you, negotiating and dealing like over a used car. And that can take an incredible amount of time and energy on the part of the patient, particularly if ill. And a big ego walking into a reputabe doctor's office with his pockets bulging with $100 bills wanting to negotiate a hemorrhoidectomy he read about on WebMD is a laughable image.
Not sure what insurance company would write out a custom health insurance policy, underwrite it, and guarantee it ironclad, with severe penalties if THEY back out. That seems like a big effort and risk to go through for one measly health policy, and any agent or insurance company I know would not bother or even be set up to do so. These days, one is lucky to get a standard policy and keep it.

@Dirk
Have you ever attempted what Hoffa is suggesting or do you just wave the flag claiming the rich are preventing you from flexing any testicular fortitude?

Hoffa has rejected the notion that our society is based on privilege that only favors the rich and instead is grabbing the system by the short hairs and making it work for himself. In other words he is attempting to be successful. Everyone born in this country has that same opportunity. It is on the individual to take advantage of it. It is not up to the government to provide it.

As for, "one is lucky to get a standard policy and keep it" (sniff, sniff, wipe a tear), please don't bring your Pity Dirk Party to patch. It makes you look weak.

@Dirk -

Are you calling Hoffa a liar just because he's smarter than you and is able to make the system work for him as opposed to vice versa? Hoffa is a legend is his own right - if you only knew!

It required A LOT of leg work on Hoffa's behalf, but it was well worth it.

You're probably one of those people who actually believe that the increase in those going on SSI disability recently are actually, honestly, and truly disabled - what a a crock of you know what!

Hoffa - Pretty sure you are in conflict with most people most of the time. The legacy you leave is that you are/were an a-hole, such as with all the sandwich shop zoning arguments and hate for anyone not totally conservative. I do not respect that kind of in-your-face yelling and griping all the time, and I would enjoy personally throwing you out of my office if you started that crap with me. And I do not believe most of what you state as to your big negotiating skills and business successes, or you would not be on Patch constantly telling everyone how smart you are. Yes, if you go totally rude and obnoxious, you can get some people to give you a deal just to get you out of their hair. You are more blowhard than intelligent. Those things start to catch up to you later, and maybe that explains why you are constantly on Patch extolling your gangsta persona, and not out there working.

@Dirk -

All you've proven with this comment is that you really know how to misjudge people and can name call as well as those who regularly post on the Daily Kos.

Hoffa feels sorry for you.

Hoffa - Don't need your sympathy.
I am a self-made man, successful, and a liberal. Never had to go out and dig up an independent healthcare policy, private employers were glad to make a very good one available for myself and my family. But I can see how difficult your situation must be as an independent business owner, out there fighting and searching to avoid financial distress due to medical costs.

@Bren
Wrong again. It has created an expensive, greedy middleman in the government. If you don't think our politicians won't use pandering health care an election tactic; you're ill informed. Obama is already doing it with food stamps, taking work requirements away from welfare and extending the unemployment benefit.

If regulation was the latch on the pet food bin, then AHA tore the top off. We are already seeing rationing and increased healthcare costs.

J.B., I worked in the health insurance industry for a number of years, have you? I've also experienced national healthcare first-hand, have you? It works.

You are one of those who believe that ACA will bring "death panels" and I can tell you they have existed for many years, death by bottom line. Most insurance appeals fail or are under-addressed, because the cost of getting that person healthy is more than the insurance company is willing to pay. That's rationing of care. Increased healthcare costs? When do rates not go up? That's been going on long before ACA, and since companies started offering health insurance to employees as a job benefit.

@Bren
Please provide an instance (not your first had account) where policy of a single insurance company allowed numerous people who would have lived to die because of the bottom line.

I have a post above that has a link to proof the state government are rationing which prescriptions can be purchased. This will only be the beginning.

McBride makes a good point about vulture capitalists not truly caring about their employees. Bain Capital is a good example.
His point about Massachusetts being so different than the rest of the country is ludicruous, particularly that they can easily commute to another job. Has anyone tried to drive around Boston and its many suburbs during rush hour? The main road across Mass. (I-90) is all tollway. Western Mass. is rural like much of Wisconsin, and there are truly geographically isolated areas, like Cap Cod, and big islands like Martha's Vineyard, and Nantucket. There is not that much nearby to commute to from Mass. to another state. Has McBride ever been there, or even closely looked at a map? And the people there are not so different from Wisconsin, they even elect Republicans, albeit briefly.

McBride's views of the rest to the U.S., always seem so provincial and untraveled, yet he writes these boorish and awkward comments for a wider audience than his narrow experiences can possibly justify.

Yes, Dirk, I've been there. Obviously more recently than you have. If you don't think companies are taking into consideration that the people they wish to retain because of their value to the business itself could commute (either physically or via the internet) to other organizations that don't operate in MA, you're being silly.

While we're on the topic of critiquing other posters, I've noticed a distinct trend on your part not to read most things completely, not to comprehend what little you read and to be overwhelmed and/or mystified by anything that's occurred anywhere past your front porch since about the dawn of this century. And I always take that into account when you offer up one of your own.

McBride - If you are truthful about having been in Massachusetts recently, tell us again how it is really really different than the rest of the country again. They are not Americans, or they are somehow alien or weird? It seems you are denigrating people from Massachusetts, which would include the Romney clan. Tell us about your personal experiences and observations, and how Massachusetts can live well under Romneycare, and it does not apply to us? The commuting angle you came up with does not work there, tell me where Bostonians would commute to for jobs outside Mass. Check travel times to the nearest small burg in New Hampshire. Successfully working from home via telecommuting has been proven to work for only a small percentage of workers.
I just cannot get any sense out of your attempts to spout the Tea party line. You should just copy the party line you apparently receive from HQ each day into your comments so as to avoid confusion on your part and others that try to endure your strained and laborious attempts to justify weak and even fallacious points.

Dirk, once again, reading comprehension...or just plain reading...whatever it is, you fail.

Did I say it was different from the rest of the country? No. Is it different from some areas of the country in terms of business and population density? Yes. As a result, are there aspects of the area that might make it easier for someone who is considered a valuable asset to a particular company to find another company not out of reasonable commuting distance for whom to work than there are in other areas? Yes. In fact, if you want to draw a comparison right near home here, there are people who choose to live in Wisconsin and who chose to work in Illinois. Do they live Steven's Point? Most likely not. Is the situation the same in, say, South Dakota or North Dakota? No, it's not. Your dated observation on telecommuting, aside.

As for the usual tired Tea Party references, duly noted. Go run through the sprinkler. You're overheating.

McGuire - Really, about the weakest and incorrect points for why Romneycare or Obamacare would not work in the rest of the country. You better get ahold of Koch HQ and ask for a better argument on this. A twisted, minor, attempt to play up the minor differences of Massachusetts and the rest of the country re health care rules, and how Massachusetts is SOOO unusual and Romneycare was a one state solution.
Give Wisconsin and the other states Romneycare, if not the ACA!

Dirk, how long have you been on the public dole? Doesn't it bother you that you are advocating welfare for all, maybe welfare is a part of your family culture, but most of us would like choice and the ability to pay for our healthcare.

Who's McGuire?

Dirk, I'm all about helping and I've really tried with you, but, aside from appearing hopeless, you're a bit of a prickly old fart. So I'm not inclined to waste anymore time on you.

However, if you find this issue of confusion creeping into other areas of your life, I'd suggest you call your local senior outreach center to see if they can arrange to have someone swing by and check up on you periodically.

Back to the topic itself, trying to draw any parallels between a one-state program and what might occur with whatever you want to call it...Rombamacare, maybe (and doesn't it just gripe you libs that you have to acknowledge that Feckless Leader glommed most of it from a guy you hate with a passion?)...on a nationwide basis is bad brainwork, particularly when you don't provide any links supporting the supposition and tell people to "google it" when they suggest you do (no, that wasn't for you, Dirk)

Nobody really knows what's going to happen. All we know is that those on the left view this as a stepping stone to NHC and don't really care if, in fact, millions of people are actually paying more for their health care or, how that effects the overall economy - even though much wailing a gnashing of teeth went on in that regard when the state employees were made to contribute to their health insurance. The ends justify the means. Obama made his deal with the Devil - and it's the same one you guys blame for our problems in the first place.

kate - Never been on the public dole kate. Never had a government job. Inherited very little from my parents. Worked my way through college and grad school, essentially without a scholarship. Paid my college loans back, early. Worked at Wal-Mart for years as a manager and accumulated lots of salary and compensation in stock options that really paid off. Yet I have empathy for others. Try it sometime. It is statements like yours about caring people that show a certain ignorance for who progressives really are, and where they come from.

McBride - What you lack in so many categories, you try to make up for in persistence. You are one of those commenters that say you are giving up, then go on and on and on as in your last comment. You are really not adding anything, just repeating. And by the way, age discrimination is akin to racial, gender, etc. discrimination. Bullying is also a no-no in the real world. There is so much difference between progressives and the common Tea Party types in being civil, mannered, and understanding. It must be frustrating for you not being a match for a prickly old fart. By the way, I just beat two young PhDs in a five hour board game.

I apologize for calling you McGuire, had just finished reading a column by Ashley McGuire, and it was a laugh riot. Ashley has done fellowships with the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation. Somehow, in my aged feebleness, I connected her views with you.

Dirk, I'd buy the name excuse if you hadn't done the same thing repeatedly in the past.

Seriously, I've wasted enough time with you. You either can't read or can't comprehend what you read and you insist on telling people what they mean when they comment here and you're always wrong in that regard.

Go back to your board games. You don't shine here.

McBride - I thought you were done with your comments. I guess you want to play Patch like a computer game, as usual. I do not appreciate your efforts to shout me down in your vulgar and bullying manner, and keep on with your cold, inhumane Tea Party rantings even when you say you are going to stop reacting to my dead-on comments.
Are your addicted to always trying to get the last word?

At least hank managed to spell moron correctly.
Let's always encourage more frank comments from the Tea Party core supporters like this.

Thank you Dirk for proving that your IQ is below 80. And you are welcome for all of the free government things I pay for that you use.

"Republicans, we work hard so you don't have to"

@hank rearden...You've got to be kidding about the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It was faulty to begin with and for anyone serious about raising those out of poverty know its shortcomings. I know that Glen Beck gets off on placing the blame on the economic woes on Cloward-Piven. Cloward-Piven has had nothing to do with the current economic crisis and it is far from a communist plot. Our current problems can be traced directly to a failure of our financial system. The increased demand on safety net programs is a result of the economy. The ACA is a program that is needed until we can have a genuine NHS. Whether we are in financial crisis or not, NHS will ultimately save this nation from collapse due to out of control inflationary healthcare costs.

Thank you for your knee jerk response Lyle. I see that you parrot the liberal line well and that you are in good company with Dirk. you obviously know nothing about the 'financial system' to place blame at the feet of an entire industry. Good day sir, you cannot be helped.

"Republicans, we work hard so you don't have to"

@hank rearden...Other than ad hominem attacks are you claiming that it is Cloward-Piven that caused the financial collapse? You seem to be off the rails on this.