Let's Talk About This Obamacare Thing Nicely

[g5000]

Personally, I hate the ACA, it's a step in the right direction, not what I want though. It makes insurance companies an important part of our healthcare system, which they should be abolished.

As long as we have a fractured capitalist healthcare system without any form of centralized "best price" contract bidding for prescriptions and biotech we will continue to lead the free world in cost of care.

Example: Rather than 10 businesses/hospitals buying 100 replacement knee joints each separately, it should be the government putting out a bid for 1000 replacement to the top manufacturers. Best price wins.

Is this the same government that designed Healthcare.gov, or some other government?

Maybe we could get the Swiss to do it.

Focusing on temporary glitches is a tactical mistake. ObamaCare is going to be very popular five years from now. And the reason is because the GOP chose not to do anything about healthcare costs outpacing inflation for decades. When the GOP held all the reins of power, they did nothing about the problem. The GOP continues to not offer any alternatives to ObamaCare to solve this problem. No one knows what the GOP alternative is. The Democratic party telegraphed its intentions about the problem for years, and still the GOP sat with its thumb up its ass when it had the power to do something helpful. That is the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the GOP.

Obama succeeded because the GOP stood by and did nothing, and continues to do nothing, about the problem.

Getting joy out of the startup problems of the one and only solution on the table is a huge tactical mistake. When ObamaCare reaches supermajority approval, the people are going to remember who vindictively obstructed and gleefully celebrated its setbacks.

The GOP is way behind the power curve now. I really don't see any way the party can ever beat ObamaCare back into the box.

 

[Nyvin]

Uh, what - only the 1% can afford Healthcare in today’s market? I can afford Healthcare, my parents can afford healthcare, my wife’s parents can afford healthcare, my brother can afford healthcare, my friends can afford healthcare and none of us are in the 1% of US earners. Please elaborate here.

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

Assumptions are made that those who are voluntarily uninsured who are not one percenters are waiting until they get catastrophically ill before they buy insurance. No evidence has ever been presented this assumption is true. In fact, ObamaCare depends on it not being true. And yet ObamaCare proponents use this false assumption in their rhetoric.

Justifying the mandate by articulating this assumption, while at the same time saying we need the extra money the mandate generates from the young and healthy is to be positively schizophrenic.

You should try not using needlessly big words, it kinda looks...smug.

You cannot "Wait until catastrohically ill" to buy insurance currently because if you did it would be qualified as a pre-existing condition. If you do buy it and not tell them about the condition I guarentee you the insurance company has MANY MANY MANY ways to drop you like a stone at a moments notice.

It's undeniable that right now health care cost are "already" skyrocketing. Mandatory ER care is not a viable healthcare system for the lower income people. A mandate on personal insurance and medicaid and subsidies for lower income people isn't going to solve everything, it will drastically improve certain things.

 

[KevinWestern]

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

No problem, but to play devil's advocate - think about this. One of the reasons healthcare costs are so unaffordable is because of insurance. No one cares about prices, and doctors/pharma companies really have no incentive to charge $25 vs $100.

Perhaps if we were to do away with some elements of the insurance system, and make it so that people had to pay out of pocket (perhaps through programs such as those tax free healthcare accounts), doctors/pharma companies will be forced to charge lower prices due to the increased transparency and competition that would arise. The doctor who charges $250/visit would be driven out of business by the similar quality MD charging only $75/visit.

Same idea goes with college loans; if students didn't have access to $100k at a whim (like they do today), and couldn't afford to go to college, perhaps colleges would be forced to bring down their insane costs in order to keep a steady customer base.

 

[g5000]

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

Assumptions are made that those who are voluntarily uninsured who are not one percenters are waiting until they get catastrophically ill before they buy insurance. No evidence has ever been presented this assumption is true. In fact, ObamaCare depends on it not being true. And yet ObamaCare proponents use this false assumption in their rhetoric.

Justifying the mandate by articulating this assumption, while at the same time saying we need the extra money the mandate generates from the young and healthy is to be positively schizophrenic.

You should try not using needlessly big words, it kinda looks...smug.

Does objective news reporting look smug to you? I did not use any "big words". Do you realize you are asking for things to be dumbed down for you?

That's a huge part of the problem. Too many people avoid critical thinking at all costs. They want a nice neat slogan they can chant that fits inside their tiny intellectual bandwidth.

"FREELOADERS!" "DEATH PANELS!" "YES WE CAN!"

Time to grow up.

How's that for smug?

 

[Liberal]

Personally, I hate the ACA, it's a step in the right direction...

It's only a step in the right direction if you believe the right direction is single payer healthcare. And that is what ObamaCare is; a stepping stone toward single payer.

Perhaps you did not read the rest of my post?

I clearly believe in a single payer system.

 

[RDD_1210]

Uh, what - only the 1% can afford Healthcare in today’s market? I can afford Healthcare, my parents can afford healthcare, my wife’s parents can afford healthcare, my brother can afford healthcare, my friends can afford healthcare and none of us are in the 1% of US earners. Please elaborate here.

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

Assumptions are made that those who are voluntarily uninsured who are not one percenters are waiting until they get catastrophically ill before they buy insurance. No evidence has ever been presented this assumption is true. In fact, ObamaCare depends on it not being true. And yet ObamaCare proponents use this false assumption in their rhetoric.

Justifying the mandate by articulating this assumption, while at the same time saying we need the extra money the mandate generates from the young and healthy is to be positively schizophrenic.

I didn't make any of those claims in what I said. Just that complaining about a mandate is pointless.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

No problem, but to play devil's advocate - think about this. One of the reasons healthcare costs are so unaffordable is because of insurance. No one cares about prices, and doctors/pharma companies really have no incentive to charge $25 vs $100.

Perhaps if we were to do away with some elements of the insurance system, and make it so that people to pay out of pocket (perhaps through programs such as those tax free healthcare accounts), doctors/pharma companies will be forced to charge lower prices due to the increased transparency and competition that would arise. The doctor who charges $250/visit would be driven out of business by the guy charging $75/visit.

Same idea goes with college loans; if students didn't have access to $100k at a whim (like they do today), and couldn't afford to go to college, perhaps colleges would be forced to bring down their insane costs in order to keep a steady customer base.

free market competition......

this is exactly the direction the failed socialized medicine countries are headed....

 

[RDD_1210]

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

No problem, but to play devil's advocate - think about this. One of the reasons healthcare costs are so unaffordable is because of insurance. No one cares about prices, and doctors/pharma companies really have no incentive to charge $25 vs $100.

Perhaps if we were to do away with some elements of the insurance system, and make it so that people had to pay out of pocket (perhaps through programs such as those tax free healthcare accounts), doctors/pharma companies will be forced to charge lower prices due to the increased transparency and competition that would arise. The doctor who charges $250/visit would be driven out of business by the similar quality MD charging only $75/visit.

Same idea goes with college loans; if students didn't have access to $100k at a whim (like they do today), and couldn't afford to go to college, perhaps colleges would be forced to bring down their insane costs in order to keep a steady customer base.

Totally and completely agree. This is one of my major gripes with Obamacare. We are giving more power/customers to insurance companies. Part of the reason our healthcare costs are so high, is that we have a middleman (insurance companies) who have worked themselves in to the entire healthcare process who need to turn a profit. This means, that either people don't get things covered or prices go up....or in our case...both.

 

[Sallow]

I am referring to the cost of healthcare WITHOUT having health insurance. No one outside of the 1% can afford the costs of healthcare, without having insurance, should they be hit with any sort of major illness/accident.

Sorry for not being clear at first.

No problem, but to play devil's advocate - think about this. One of the reasons healthcare costs are so unaffordable is because of insurance. No one cares about prices, and doctors/pharma companies really have no incentive to charge $25 vs $100.

Perhaps if we were to do away with some elements of the insurance system, and make it so that people to pay out of pocket (perhaps through programs such as those tax free healthcare accounts), doctors/pharma companies will be forced to charge lower prices due to the increased transparency and competition that would arise. The doctor who charges $250/visit would be driven out of business by the guy charging $75/visit.

Same idea goes with college loans; if students didn't have access to $100k at a whim (like they do today), and couldn't afford to go to college, perhaps colleges would be forced to bring down their insane costs in order to keep a steady customer base.

free market competition......

this is exactly the direction the failed socialized medicine countries are headed....

Actually, no they are not.

Even Conservative Britain likes it's healthcare system.

No one is talking seriously about changing it.

 

[percysunshine]

Personally, I hate the ACA, it's a step in the right direction, not what I want though. It makes insurance companies an important part of our healthcare system, which they should be abolished.

As long as we have a fractured capitalist healthcare system without any form of centralized "best price" contract bidding for prescriptions and biotech we will continue to lead the free world in cost of care.

Example: Rather than 10 businesses/hospitals buying 100 replacement knee joints each separately, it should be the government putting out a bid for 1000 replacement to the top manufacturers. Best price wins.

Is this the same government that designed Healthcare.gov, or some other government?

Maybe we could get the Swiss to do it.

Focusing on temporary glitches is a tactical mistake. ObamaCare is going to be very popular five years from now. And the reason is because the GOP chose not to do anything about healthcare costs outpacing inflation for decades. When the GOP held all the reins of power, they did nothing about the problem. The GOP continues to not offer any alternatives to ObamaCare to solve this problem. No one knows what the GOP alternative is. The Democratic party telegraphed its intentions about the problem for years, and still the GOP sat with its thumb up its ass when it had the power to do something helpful. That is the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the GOP.

Obama succeeded because the GOP stood by and did nothing, and continues to do nothing, about the problem.

Getting joy out of the startup problems of the one and only solution on the table is a huge tactical mistake. When ObamaCare reaches supermajority approval, the people are going to remember who vindictively obstructed and gleefully celebrated its setbacks.

The GOP is way behind the power curve now. I really don't see any way the party can ever beat ObamaCare back into the box.

You have a lot of faith in a collection of people who can't copy a simple web site. Online health insurance markets already exist, and four of the 36 State run exchanges are working. So it can be done, it is just that the federal government is inept. Obamacare is fundamentally flawed because it relies on young people to be stupid, which they are not. It will go into a death spiral because not enough young people will sign up to pay for the old people and the insurance companies will stop writing policies. At that point, one of two things will happen. Either the whole thing will be trashed in a fit of public rage, or the country will go full social single payer. Let's hope it is not the latter, because then the people that designed Healthcare.gov will stop pretending to be our insurance agents and will start pretending to be our doctors.

 

[KevinWestern]

Actually, no they are not.

Even Conservative Britain likes it's healthcare system.

No one is talking seriously about changing it.

Here's the thing Sallow - who do you want "keeping an eye" on the prices?

1.) You and I who have no ties to the Health Industry and will pick doctors/meds based on price/quality comparisons

or

2.) Politicians, who receive nearly $480,000,000 in political contributions from the Healthcare Industry every election cycle (2008 statistic)

Again, if we truly want to drive down the cost of Healthcare, we need to scale down aspects of the insurance model. Allowing the gov't (in its current state) to take over the process under an insurance based system (Obamacare) will only continue driving costs upwards.

,

 

[ScreamingEagle]

No problem, but to play devil's advocate - think about this. One of the reasons healthcare costs are so unaffordable is because of insurance. No one cares about prices, and doctors/pharma companies really have no incentive to charge $25 vs $100.

Perhaps if we were to do away with some elements of the insurance system, and make it so that people to pay out of pocket (perhaps through programs such as those tax free healthcare accounts), doctors/pharma companies will be forced to charge lower prices due to the increased transparency and competition that would arise. The doctor who charges $250/visit would be driven out of business by the guy charging $75/visit.

Same idea goes with college loans; if students didn't have access to $100k at a whim (like they do today), and couldn't afford to go to college, perhaps colleges would be forced to bring down their insane costs in order to keep a steady customer base.

free market competition......

this is exactly the direction the failed socialized medicine countries are headed....

Actually, no they are not.

Even Conservative Britain likes it's healthcare system.

No one is talking seriously about changing it.

you've got your head in the sand....of course everybody wants a free ride......but they cannot afford it....so change WILL happen....


Europe's Failing Health - WSJ.com

 

[g5000]

Is this the same government that designed Healthcare.gov, or some other government?

Maybe we could get the Swiss to do it.

Focusing on temporary glitches is a tactical mistake. ObamaCare is going to be very popular five years from now. And the reason is because the GOP chose not to do anything about healthcare costs outpacing inflation for decades. When the GOP held all the reins of power, they did nothing about the problem. The GOP continues to not offer any alternatives to ObamaCare to solve this problem. No one knows what the GOP alternative is. The Democratic party telegraphed its intentions about the problem for years, and still the GOP sat with its thumb up its ass when it had the power to do something helpful. That is the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the GOP.

Obama succeeded because the GOP stood by and did nothing, and continues to do nothing, about the problem.

Getting joy out of the startup problems of the one and only solution on the table is a huge tactical mistake. When ObamaCare reaches supermajority approval, the people are going to remember who vindictively obstructed and gleefully celebrated its setbacks.

The GOP is way behind the power curve now. I really don't see any way the party can ever beat ObamaCare back into the box.

You have a lot of faith in a collection of people who can't copy a simple web site. Online health insurance markets already exist, and four of the 36 State run exchanges are working. So it can be done, it is just that the federal government is inept. Obamacare is fundamentally flawed because it relies on young people to be stupid, which they are not. It will go into a death spiral because not enough young people will sign up to pay for the old people and the insurance companies will stop writing policies. At that point, one of two things will happen. Either the whole thing will be trashed in a fit of public rage, or the country will go full social single payer. Let's hope it is not the latter, because then the people that designed Healthcare.gov will stop pretending to be our insurance agents and will start pretending to be our doctors.

My "faith" is based on evidence. RomneyCare in Massachusetts had huge startup problems, cost way more than had been predicted, and yet polling showed it was wildly popular five years after implementation. 74 percent want to keep it. That's a super-super-majority.

So it will be with ObamaCare. The GOP blundered, big time, by not addressing a pressing problem. They left the field wide open for the Democrats.

They lost because of their own inertia.

Now that ObamaCare is launched, it is here to stay. And it will be just as popular as RomneyCare because they are virtually identical.

It will be plagued with problems and corruption, as I clearly stated in my first post in this topic, and in subsequent posts. But it is here to stay. The GOP needs to adapt to this fact.

 

[percysunshine]

Focusing on temporary glitches is a tactical mistake. ObamaCare is going to be very popular five years from now. And the reason is because the GOP chose not to do anything about healthcare costs outpacing inflation for decades. When the GOP held all the reins of power, they did nothing about the problem. The GOP continues to not offer any alternatives to ObamaCare to solve this problem. No one knows what the GOP alternative is. The Democratic party telegraphed its intentions about the problem for years, and still the GOP sat with its thumb up its ass when it had the power to do something helpful. That is the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the GOP.

Obama succeeded because the GOP stood by and did nothing, and continues to do nothing, about the problem.

Getting joy out of the startup problems of the one and only solution on the table is a huge tactical mistake. When ObamaCare reaches supermajority approval, the people are going to remember who vindictively obstructed and gleefully celebrated its setbacks.

The GOP is way behind the power curve now. I really don't see any way the party can ever beat ObamaCare back into the box.

You have a lot of faith in a collection of people who can't copy a simple web site. Online health insurance markets already exist, and four of the 36 State run exchanges are working. So it can be done, it is just that the federal government is inept. Obamacare is fundamentally flawed because it relies on young people to be stupid, which they are not. It will go into a death spiral because not enough young people will sign up to pay for the old people and the insurance companies will stop writing policies. At that point, one of two things will happen. Either the whole thing will be trashed in a fit of public rage, or the country will go full social single payer. Let's hope it is not the latter, because then the people that designed Healthcare.gov will stop pretending to be our insurance agents and will start pretending to be our doctors.

My "faith" is based on evidence. RomneyCare in Massachusetts had huge startup problems, cost way more than had been predicted, and yet polling showed it was wildly popular five years after implementation. 74 percent want to keep it. That's a super-super-majority.

So it will be with ObamaCare. The GOP blundered, big time, by not addressing a pressing problem. They left the field wide open for the Democrats.

They lost because of their own inertia.

Now that ObamaCare is launched, it is here to stay. And it will be just as popular as RomneyCare because they are virtually identical.

It will be plagued with problems and corruption, as I clearly stated in my first post in this topic, and in subsequent posts. But it is here to stay. The GOP needs to adapt to this fact.

You seem to be set in your opinions. About the only thing I can offer is a report from inside officials of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services ...if you give it an honest read, it might help.

Assessing the Exchanges | National Review Online

 

[g5000]

You have a lot of faith in a collection of people who can't copy a simple web site. Online health insurance markets already exist, and four of the 36 State run exchanges are working. So it can be done, it is just that the federal government is inept. Obamacare is fundamentally flawed because it relies on young people to be stupid, which they are not. It will go into a death spiral because not enough young people will sign up to pay for the old people and the insurance companies will stop writing policies. At that point, one of two things will happen. Either the whole thing will be trashed in a fit of public rage, or the country will go full social single payer. Let's hope it is not the latter, because then the people that designed Healthcare.gov will stop pretending to be our insurance agents and will start pretending to be our doctors.

My "faith" is based on evidence. RomneyCare in Massachusetts had huge startup problems, cost way more than had been predicted, and yet polling showed it was wildly popular five years after implementation. 74 percent want to keep it. That's a super-super-majority.

So it will be with ObamaCare. The GOP blundered, big time, by not addressing a pressing problem. They left the field wide open for the Democrats.

They lost because of their own inertia.

Now that ObamaCare is launched, it is here to stay. And it will be just as popular as RomneyCare because they are virtually identical.

It will be plagued with problems and corruption, as I clearly stated in my first post in this topic, and in subsequent posts. But it is here to stay. The GOP needs to adapt to this fact.

You seem to be set in your opinions. About the only thing I can offer is a report from inside officials of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services ...if you give it an honest read, it might help.

Assessing the Exchanges | National Review Online

I do not disagree the federal web site is a bag of hammers. It absolutely is.

But where NRO and the Right are going wrong is extrapolating the death of ObamaCare from these problems. That's just plain wishful thinking. They are deluding themselves. This is a continuation of the denial they have been living in for decades with respect to the rising healthcare problems we have. How much longer are they going to slap their hands over their ears like a five year old and pretend they can't hear the American people's demands for healthcare reform?

They are doing so to their own detriment.

ObamaCare is here to stay. The quicker everyone comes to terms with that truth, the quicker they can get ahead of it.

 

[kaz]

I feel the 26 year old provision should be named the "failure to launch" provision. That is too old.

Definitely a stance that can go either way. Most young people graduate college at about 22-23, giving them 3 years to find a job that will provide health insurance or purchase it on their own. Definitely doable and reasonable, however.

I don't believe individuals who are < 26 are "high risk" and covering these guys probably won't cost the insurance a whole lot extra. That's kinda how I look at it.

I object to the whole concept that government should be deciding what is "too old"

 

[g5000]

I feel the 26 year old provision should be named the "failure to launch" provision. That is too old.

Definitely a stance that can go either way. Most young people graduate college at about 22-23, giving them 3 years to find a job that will provide health insurance or purchase it on their own. Definitely doable and reasonable, however.

I don't believe individuals who are < 26 are "high risk" and covering these guys probably won't cost the insurance a whole lot extra. That's kinda how I look at it.

I object to the whole concept that government should be deciding what is "too old"

Or that 25 is "too young" to fend for themselves.

 

[Care4all]

Study: Premiums for Young People to Rise in all 50 States

Health insurance premiums for young people will rise in all 50 states under Obamacare, with an average increase of 260 percent, according to a study released Thursday.

The young and healthy segment of the uninsured is considered crucial for the Affordable Care Act to succeed. Former President Bill Clinton suggested last week that Obamacare only works &#8220;if young people show up.&#8221;

The people receiving subsidies and increased Medicaid coverage are freeloading on the backs of the young and healthy.

If you actually do the math, this becomes blazingly obvious.

But isn't this the case with ALL health insurance, including Medicare Insurance?

That the healthy pay for the sick, so that some day when they become older and more apt to be sick, the "new Healthy" pay for the sick....

and as far as "freeloaders".... don't you think all of these working people who also pay taxes who do not have health insurance coverage through their employers are having to "pay" for the health insurance coverage of those who get it through their employer, via the "expenditure" the federal gvt gives to employers... via a tax write off for the health coverage for their employees?

People who work and pay taxes who do not have employer coverage are paying more in taxes, just for the "coverage" these other folks get through their employer and employer's tax write off on health insurance, and the employee tax free situation on what they pay in premiums from the 1st dollar spent...?

did I read it is $125 BILLION a year in tax expenditures or tax write offs for the employer health coverage a year...a year!? And what is the estimated cost for Obamacare? 50 billion? 75 billion? ???

Anyone who gets their insurance through their employer has benefited from the gvt's involvement and tax write off....they are partially being subsidized by the gvt...and have been subsidized by the gvt for over half a century or more?

isn't this what you were saying the other day, regarding expenditures?


would employers give this health care benefit if it were not a tax write off for them?

g5000...

 

[percysunshine]

My "faith" is based on evidence. RomneyCare in Massachusetts had huge startup problems, cost way more than had been predicted, and yet polling showed it was wildly popular five years after implementation. 74 percent want to keep it. That's a super-super-majority.

So it will be with ObamaCare. The GOP blundered, big time, by not addressing a pressing problem. They left the field wide open for the Democrats.

They lost because of their own inertia.

Now that ObamaCare is launched, it is here to stay. And it will be just as popular as RomneyCare because they are virtually identical.

It will be plagued with problems and corruption, as I clearly stated in my first post in this topic, and in subsequent posts. But it is here to stay. The GOP needs to adapt to this fact.

You seem to be set in your opinions. About the only thing I can offer is a report from inside officials of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services ...if you give it an honest read, it might help.

Assessing the Exchanges | National Review Online

I do not disagree the federal web site is a bag of hammers. It absolutely is.

But where NRO and the Right are going wrong is extrapolating the death of ObamaCare from these problems. That's just plain wishful thinking. They are deluding themselves. This is a continuation of the denial they have been living in for decades with respect to the rising healthcare problems we have. How much longer are they going to slap their hands over their ears like a five year old and pretend they can't hear the American people's demands for healthcare reform?

They are doing so to their own detriment.

ObamaCare is here to stay. The quicker everyone comes to terms with that truth, the quicker they can get ahead of it.

Naw...they will rebrand it 'Hillarycare' before Biden runs in 2016 and then close it down.

.

 

[g5000]

Study: Premiums for Young People to Rise in all 50 States

Health insurance premiums for young people will rise in all 50 states under Obamacare, with an average increase of 260 percent, according to a study released Thursday.

The young and healthy segment of the uninsured is considered crucial for the Affordable Care Act to succeed. Former President Bill Clinton suggested last week that Obamacare only works “if young people show up.”

The people receiving subsidies and increased Medicaid coverage are freeloading on the backs of the young and healthy.

If you actually do the math, this becomes blazingly obvious.

But isn't this the case with ALL health insurance, including Medicare Insurance?

No. In private insurance, your rate is based on the actuarials for your risk group.

and as far as "freeloaders".... don't you think all of these working people who also pay taxes who do not have health insurance coverage through their employers are having to "pay" for the health insurance coverage of those who get it through their employer, via the "expenditure" the federal gvt gives to employers... via a tax write off for the health coverage for their employees?

Absolutely! That is something I have said many times. We need to get rid of the employer-sponsored health insurance boondoggle. It is most certainly bending the cost of healthcare upward. Not just because it is the largest tax expenditures in our federal budget, but also because it is extremely wasteful.

Which is a dead giveaway that ObamaCare is not about lowering the cost of healthcare, because the ACA further embeds this disaster.

Classic bait and switch. Before it was ratified, ObamaCare supporters went on and on about per capita spending on healthcare.

did I read it is $125 BILLION a year in tax expenditures or tax write offs for the employer health coverage a year...a year! And what is the estimated cost for Obamacare? 50 billion? 75 billion? ???

$131 billion in 2008. It is the largest tax expenditure in the budget. It needs to go, along with all tax expenditures.