Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
NOT ONE CENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO DATE!
Published on January 17, 2006 By COL Gene In Politics




The news is full of the initial problems to implement the new Medicare Prescription drug plan. Some of the confusion is because of the large number of plans and some is because many of the participants are older and are having trouble understanding the details. In time these initial problems will be solved and 55 plus million seniors will be receiving this new benefit.

Now lets ask the question, who is to pay for this new benefit that has an estimated initial cost of $60 Plus billion per year? As the baby boomers retire, the annual cost of this new benefit grows even more. President Bush told Americans how much of a future financial problem the Social Security System was and most economists now tell us that Medicare is a MUCH bigger and more imminent problem then Social Security. Then WHY did Bush and his GOP supporters in Congress ADD another $60 Billion per year to a system that is already in financial trouble? To date NOT ONE CENT has been provided to pay for one of the biggest new entitlement programs EVER approved by Congress. Bush is still talking about making his tax cuts permanent while ignoring the funding for his new entitlement program that was designed to get VOTES. Make no mistake about it, many Democrats also voted for this plan. However it was Bush that pushed it and it would never have become law without Bush and the GOP. It is also Bush and the GOP that refuses to pony up the new funding. The way this plan was enacted with NO MONEY to pay for it will make the problems of paying for Medicare a far more difficult problem to solve and bring the date when the problem begins much sooner! This is another example of how we are passing OUR financial problems to our children to solve!

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jan 18, 2006
If the choice is a little higher tax on the wealthy or having poor people starve or live on the street, ANY one that would choose to help the wealthy is a poor excuse for a human being!


Being poor in this country is a choice. It has nothing to do wtih the rich. Penalizing people who are successful is not the way to go.


That is what Bush and those that support his policies are doing!


Wrong. We do not want a welfare state, and the punishment of successfull Americans.
on Jan 18, 2006
Being poor is NOT a CHOICE. That is the conservative answer and for millions is NOT TRUE! There are many jobs that do not pay a living wage. No matter how much training people have, we still have many jobs that do not enable those with those jobs to live. The influx of illegal works drives the wages even lower. That is NOT the fault of the poor or a choice they make. Millions are too old and did not accumulate the wealth during their working years to be able to live. Still others are disabled which is NOT a CHOICE.

People like GWB have money because of the help he received from his family. He did very little of worth and if it had not been for his father's contacts he would be one of those that have very little given his performance in the REAL WORLD! He was NOT a good student, did not meet his obligations in the military and failed with the two businesses he formed with the help of investors from his father's contacts. BEING POOR IS NOT A CHOICE for millions. There are some that are poor because they did not try and help themselves. However that is not true for millions of others.
on Jan 18, 2006
Being poor is NOT a CHOICE.


Yes it is.

There are many jobs that do not pay a living wage. No matter how much training people have, we still have many jobs that do not enable those with those jobs to live. The influx of illegal works drives the wages even lower. That is NOT the fault of the poor or a choice they make. Millions are too old and did not accumulate the wealth during their working years to be able to live. Still others are disabled which is NOT a CHOICE.


We have gone over this with you before col. There will always be jobs that don't pay much. People have lived on them before and will continue to. Creating a welfare state is not the answer. Do not penalize successful people.


People like GWB have money because of the help he received from his family. He did very little of worth and if it had not been for his father's contacts he would be one of those that have very little given his performance in the REAL WORLD! He was NOT a good student, did not meet his obligations in the military and failed with the two businesses he formed with the help of investors from his father's contacts.


Col, do you just copy the same paragraphs over and over? What does it matter to you how Bush got his money? His grades were the same as Kerry who you voted for. He got an honorable discharge from the military. I bet he sold more books than you can ever dream of also.


BEING POOR IS NOT A CHOICE for millions. There are some that are poor because they did not try and help themselves. However that is not true for millions of others.


Yes it is a choice. There are so many ways to get yourself out of so-called "poverty", but most are too lazy or incompetent to do it.
on Jan 18, 2006
That is just BS for anyone that is working or has worked and is now too old or for those that are disabled. None of these people would choose to be poor. Only those who just do not work on a regular basis is your statement true. This is what is wrong with the conservative policies. You would rather see people who do not have enough to eat or have a place to live go without so the wealthy can add more zeroes to their net worth. Anyone that has worked or has attempted to contribute (by working) even though they had a job that does not enable them to live and needs help should be helped.
on Jan 18, 2006
Something that Gene & I can agree on - how sweet is that?

The Part D plans just took effect 1-1-06 so not much, other than the pre-implementation hype (Carol Burnett's commercials, etc.), has hit the mainstream media. There has been a lot of coverage in AMA News and other medical economics news publications, however, and probably in the WSJ (which I don't read).

The problems of implementation haven't had a chance to bubble up much to the MSM as yet, though I'm sure they'll pick up on it soon as it's mostly bad news. Footing the bill is another issue and I fundamentally disagree with the whole concept of expanding government involvement in and micromanagement of medicine. The more the government tries to "help" the less efficient and more expensive provision of healthcare becomes.

The unintended consequence of the effort to "help seniors" will be fewer physicians accepting Medicare. Until a week ago, we had no real idea how many plans would be out there hustling seniors, how needlessly complex their choices would be, and how difficult it would be when the s--t hit the fan this month - our staff have suddenly found themselves on hold for up to 2 hours trying to get phone authorizations for individual drugs that the health plan sales staff said would be covered "with your doctor's approval." Sounds simple enough, doesn't it? It isn't.

Part D, it turns out, is the straw that has broken our Medicare back and prompted us to close our 4-physician Internal Medicine practice to new Medicare patients, just today in fact. In adult primary care, "margins" are too thin to take on all the additional uncompensated work that Medicare now requires, especially when reimbursements under Medicare, presently what they were in about 1990 in constant dollars, are scheduled to be cut by 26% over the next 4-5 years.

I plan to do an article with more detail about what we've seen happen to medicine over the past 20 years and the unintended consequences of those changes. When I have a week or two.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on May 01, 2006
Best games to play, best strategies to win. User ratings & reviews of top online casinos & pokers with largest bonuses & highest payouts.
2 Pages1 2