Only for those who can handle the truth. No weak minds allowed.

http://washingtonexaminer...e-flimflam

"These survey results mean Obamacare will be vastly more expensive than the Congressional Budget Office claimed. The CBO's computer models calculated Obamacare's costs on the assumption that only 7 percent of employers would drop their employee health plans. If the percentage is closer to the 30 percent, as the McKinsey survey results predict, Obamacare's price tag would rise by almost $1 trillion. To put this in terms even an Obama White House staffer can understand, the McKinsey survey makes clear that Obamacare's cost is unsustainable and the program should be repealed."

I suspect that your post will be ignored, given the general climate of this forum.

Are you f'n kidding me? This is the McKinsey survey that even McKinsey won't stand by?

If by "environment" former means "not willing to swallow koch bullpoop", then I would say that MC.com has improved tremendously.

Do I have this right?

1. When the healthcare reform act takes full effect, employers will pay a penalty of $2,000 per employee per year for not providing health insurance to employees.

2. Average cost of health insurance is $5,000 to $25,000 per employee per year.

3. Employers will save $3,000 to $22,000 per employee per year by dropping health insurance and just paying the federal penalty.

4. Healthcare reform act will cause employers to stop providing health insurance for their employees because it provides financial incentive to do so.

Questions:

1. Before healthcare reform act, what penalty does the federal government impose on employers who do not buy medical insurance for employees?

2. Before healthcare reform act, doesn't an employer stand to save $5,000 to $25,000 per employee per year to drop their medical insurance?

3. Doesn't the healthcare reform act actually reduce the financial savings an employer can realize by dropping employee health insurance?

4. Why are/were employers providing medical insurance to their employees prior to the healthcare reform act?

Since when is a poll become "the truth?"?

Its kind of like "the truth" of the Montana legislature's revenue forecasts, which were cynically used to enact severe cuts to education and social services. Then the actual revenues come in, and they mirror the governor's office forecasts. But the legislature's forecasts must be "the truth", because that's what the budget is based on.

Lets run a poll about who will be elected president in 2012, and maybe that can become "the truth", and we won't have to go through 16 more months of campaign blather.

Only for those who can handle the truth. No weak minds allowed.

So the most important line in the article cited is "By: Examiner Editorial" which usually indicates that it is an opinion piece, not necessarily fact. Only a weak mind would consider opinion, based on a poll where the survey methods are unknown, as fact.

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr. (6/23/2011)]

Very well put, Richard....

CHEMTRAILS! Only people with weak minds are non-believers!