Can Obama even PRETEND like Universal Health Care might pass now?

[Alhena]

CNBC says taxpayers will spend at least half a trillion dollars on this bailout of banks, which is disgusting to me, but the experts say it's necessary. But let's be honest- I was skeptical that Universal Health Care would pass Congress (you need 60 votes in the Senate to do anything) even before this, but now it's sheer lunacy to think that it might happen. Which has really got me angry.

But I think Obama needs to be honest in the debates if he's asked whether this bailout will affect what he's able to do. Of course it will. This country is going bankrupt. You'd have to be blind not to see it. A half a trillion here and there adds up after a while. Plus, we don't even have close to the amount of money needed to keep the Medicare promises we've already made to the Baby Boomers once they get into their 80s. I think Congress has bought some time in the short term with this bailout, but it just makes our fiscal hole even deeper for coming years and decades.

[gcomeau]

1. It can be implemented if they do it right and go all the way.

Canada: Universal Health Care, spends 10% of it's GDP doing it.

U.S.: Completely screwed up health care, spends 15% of it's GDP doing it.

Save the budget, do things right.

[Union Thug]

2. And this is the great crime...

We'll be paying for the crimes of the wealthy at the expense of the working people. Meanwhile, the wealthy will go on living their lives of gold and gravy.

How many of these people will go to prison? Not one.

I'm sick. I'd I've never been so embarrassed to be an American.

[Alhena]

5. Yep, the billionaires have banked their money from the Bush years and will earn interest

and make trust fund babies for many decades to come. Working America won't ever see that lost money again. Nor will we see the money we spent on killing a bunch of Iraqis.

[cliffordu]

32. You are exactly right. I have never been so embarrassed either.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. He can't do it as long as he sticks with conventional thinking.

On the other hand, the country was in pretty dire straits when Roosevelt started the whole New Deal. If the times are perilous, there is also an opportunity for huge changes in the offing. Only at times like these would the public buy into the kind of things that are going to have to happen.

[cui bono]

19. Yes, we need another New Deal type overhaul.

Hopefully the people will see that and demand it. And if not hopefully the "leadership" will put the idea out there.

But I fear there are too many Dems also in big business' pocket that won't buck the system.

[BlooInBloo]

4. Because he's been SOOOOO dishonest so far?

Is that what you mean?

[Alhena]

8. I think he wants UHC to pass, I think he knew even before this that it probably wouldn't

he's too smart not to know that. Like I said, you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass it, and there are too many Senators who are given money to keep the status quo.

[BlooInBloo]

12. And you're very concerned about Obama being dishonest.

[Alhena]

18. Tell you what hotshot, why don't you search my 1500 posts supporting Obama

and tell me how that was all so I could come here and make this post. A lot of buildup for that.

Jesus H Christ we've got some people who can't stand anyone questioning the party line at ALL. Think for yourself once in a while.

[BlooInBloo]

28. Nah - this post suffices.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

36. You're being extremely unfair.

His point was salient - we are financially fucked and probably can't afford universal health care until we do something drastic to change the trend. If you haven't looked at budget projections, now's the time to do so.

[Cleita]

6. If he goes after the rich 5% who are not carrying their fair share of the tax

burden both could probably be accomplished.

[Cleita]

7. Dupe

[Cosmic Charlie]

9. Can you even pretend to support Obama now?

[Alhena]

11. LOL, nice try troll- *plonk*

[TheKentuckian]

10. I disagree

because by letting healthcare and infrastructure slide, it will take a much larger toll on the economy.

We have to find ways to create growth and reduce the drag. If you think food is to expensive to eat, you will starve to death. Find a way to eat so you can work and earn more.

[Alhena]

14. UHC has been my most fervent wish for years- you're preaching to the choir

but whatever hopes I had that it might actually happen went away when I read we're about to spend 500 billion on this.

I very much hope I'm wrong, but I know Congress well enough to be pretty sure I'm not.

[Kilroy003]

13. Who knows, Medicare might be easily considered

'Universal Health Care' during the Boomer's twilight years. Perhaps if everyone had access to affordable or socialized early screening we could save enough in emergency Medicare costs that it could become feasible. I have no idea the actual numbers, of course, but I would hope that preventative health care would be far more cost effective than our traditional ,reactive, sick care.

[Cleita]

17. If the $96,000 cap is lifted on the SS/ Medicare payroll deductions,

rich guys like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett will be paying their fair share of that tax on their considerable incomes and economists who have crunched the numbers on this claim that it would be enough to extend Medicare to all.

[Kilroy003]

20. That sounds like a good idea to me.

Lets put it to a national referendum. I'll vote yes.

Oh, wait, I think that might be the reason why we're voting for Obama in a few weeks...

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html - it looks like the cap is raised yearly in relation to the national 'average wage index'. "We call this annual limit the contribution and benefit base." In 2008 it is $102,000. Also, the 2.9% Medicare tax is already independent of the cap - although only for 'wage' income I think. Earning money by working is for suckers, after all. (sarcasm smiley...)

[Cleita]

30. This is why some changes need to be made to include all income not just

wages. Medicare would have to be increased from 2.9% but I think some clever number crunchers will figure out how to do it. My bad about the cap. I hadn't looked at it for several years since I'm retired and don't do that kind of work anymore.

[rucky]

38. Yep. It really is that simple.

There's a state inititiative a local group is proposing to apply a state tax that would be the equivealent of lifting the cap on payroll, and they show how it can provide statewide healthcare.

[Mojambo]

15. Cut the Pentagon budget by 25%

Honestly we could probably chop it in half, but I'll play it conservative.

Every single time someone tells me we won't be able to afford anything, the Pentagon budget is the first thing that comes out of my mouth.

[totodeinhere]

29. That's not going to happen.

Obama has promised to increase military spending, not decrease it.

Even as he pledges to end the war in Iraq, Obama promises to increase Pentagon spending, boost the size of the Army and Marines, bolster the Special Forces, expand intelligence agencies and maintain the hundreds of US military bases that dot the globe.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080721/dreyfuss

[xchrom]

16. UHC will be held hostage by bills we already owe -- and by not wanting

to piss of moderates.

it's not going to happen.

[jberryhill]

21. People covered by AIG now have US backed health insurance /nt

[On the Road]

22. No, It Shoudnt Interfere

Most of the developed countries with universal health care have about the twice the amount of debt per person that the US does. It's a question of political will and influence. That will be the major obstacle.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

23. I question your premise that taxpayers will have to pony up half a trillion

The financial crisis will be over when all bad assets have been liquidated and SOMEBODY has taken a big loss on each one of them. That somebody does not have to be the US taxpayer this time, unless Congress gives in to lobbyist pressure to "socialize" losses with a new RTC structured just like the RTC of two decades ago.

The $85 billion AIG loan has the potential for an eventual substantial profit for the US government. IMO, that's a much better model for future Federal action than the RTC of two decades ago.

The only assets the US government will HAVE to liquidate this time will be the receivership assets from banks the FDIC will take over. And most of the bad mortgages that are the heart of today's financial problem are not owned by the banks whose individual depositors the FDIC must protect. This is the fundamental difference between the S&L crisis 20 years ago and the mortgage derivatives crisis today.

If Obama's administration takes a pragmatic view, the tab for taxpayers can be minimized this time.

There are two kinds of systemic financial problems that the Fed and Treasury must deal with: "contagion" and "counterparty risk"

CONTAGION can spread a financial crisis from failing institutions to healthy insititutions holding simlar assets. This is what happened during the Great Depression. "Margin calls" gave failing institutions just houurs in which to dump huge quantities of assets. When failing institutions dump illiquid assets all of a sudden, the value of holdings of healthy institutions can plummet. But if sales of assets are spread out in time so markets can digest them, downward price spirals can be avoided. Slowing down the liquidation of illiquid assets of failing financial institutions is something the Feds can accomplish with the expectation of eventual profit for taxpayers.

COUNTERPARTY RISK endangers holders of the other side of the financial instruments failing institutions .own. A failing institution owes payments to some and has claims on resources from from others. Private counterparty conferences and Government conservatorships can let the creditors and debtors trade with each other in orderly ways to minimize the net loss and spread it out over time so markets are not overwhelmed.

IMO, if Obama can resist financial lobbyists' pleas for a universal bailout, and instead strive to slow down liquidation of illiquid assets, there may be plenty of money left for healthcare and other priorities.

[Alhena]

25. Interesting reply, thanks

[ProgressiveEconomist]

26. Do you know the website abnormalreturns.com? IMO that's the best single resource

for understanding the financial topic of the day. http://abnormalreturns.com screens the day's posts from the best financial blogs and links to the best of the best posts on subjects like "counterparty risk".

I go there every day.

[krkaufman]

24. Actually, the bailouts make universal health care more likely, politically ...

... since it could simply be framed as bailing out the citizens for once, instead of Wall Street. And it can be paid for through the saving associated with reducing the costs associated with private insurers, as well as a more progressive income tax scheme that reflects the debt owed to the country by the more fortunate, more wealthy among us.

[TankLV]

31. YOU GOT IT!!! If we can SOCIALIZE the RISKS and PRIVATIZE the PROFITS...

then we better damn well be able to GET RID OF THE REST OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ALTOGETHER as far as health insurance goes, and make health care a FREE GOVERNMENT SERVICE just like defense...

It's NOW OR NEVER!!!

NOW is the time to strike while the iron is HOT!!!

[rucky]

39. That would help employers & employment, as well.

including Ford, whose reason for moving factories to Mexico was their healthcare benefits they had to pay for their Union workers here.

[krkaufman]

40. Yep, it would decrease their health care costs and would remove endangering worker health ...

... as a competitive advantage of those companies who currently don't provide coverage. It's time we make health care about caring for the health of the patient.

[quakerboy]

27. And Universal Healthcare will Drop our spending

Your whole premise is wrong. We spend more than anyone else does, Right now. If we make a Universal plan, our spending could drop. If we cut Corp's out of the equation, it will drop. Significantly.

[and-justice-for-all]

33. Do you know what Obama would have to do to get NHS?

It is the only why it can ever come to pass and it is the Dems death blow; In order to get a NHS he would have to raise taxes.

Now, I have no problem paying more in taxes if I am getting something out of it. It would also be a nice change if EVERYONE payed their fair share of taxes, which they do not. In France, for example, they are taxed 22% of their income, while we pay only 19%...22% to some sounds dreadful. But what the French get in return is well worth it: Free Health care, Free tuition at all universities, damn close to free child care, 30 days of vacation every year w/ pay and all the sick days you need with full pay.

We pay a comfortable 19% and what is there to show for that?

But Amerika is a sink or swim society; a 'I got mine, Fuck you' country. It is really sad and I do not see why or how Amerika is a beacon for anything.

[AllentownJake]

34. New Deal

A whole lot of good things passed in the midst of a Great Depression. He has a better chance now than he would if the economy was great and everyone was covered by an employer. We aren't in a depression but a recession tends to wake people up to what happens when they don't have a job becuase they no someone who they respect who is at of work.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

35. Great point! In a severe crisis , a genius politician like Obama could step up,

put together a real brain trust, and accomplish FDR-level results that will last for decades.

For instance, one of the things I think has to happen to ultimately save Social Security and Medicare is creation of centrally-managed hard-assets Trust Funds whose holdings can be used only to reserve for and pay out benefit obligations. As Treasury bails out failing financial institutions over the next year, accumulating long-term assets at bargain prices, historic legislation could give sharp-pencil Social Security and Medicare Trustees the power to accumulate some of these assets. Certainly they could make somo wrong choices, but IMO such hard assets would be vastly more likely to generate payments to retirees than the current non-tradable "renege bonds" into which all FICA cash flow is funneled now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. It Should Be Part Of Some Grand Bargain

Where the Democrats help big business and in turn big business gets on the bus to ensure everybody has access to medical help...

[mrreowwr_kittty]

41. It's either that or millions more lose their health care

It's well known that we could cover everyone in this country today with what we already spend. The US has the highest per capita health care expenditure in the world, and yet millions are uncovered or inadequately covered.

[jjanpundt]

42. Maybe he could slash the defense budget? n/t

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

43. There were two economics experts on CNN a few minutes ago

They were both introduced as big time experts but I don't remember their names. Both were saying that the bail-out would cost perhaps even more than a trillion and that it may affect jobs and the access of small business to lines of credit.

But they said there was a chance it might work and the entities that the federal government has taken over might actually turn a good profit.

What I found interesting is that they said if there was a profit from any of this, that profit should go directly to help the American people. They suggested that it all go into medicare and saving social security. I think that's a very interesting idea and I'd like to know Obama's take on it. Perhaps it could also go towards a national healthcare system, if it's truly profitable and not another major disaster.

[endthewar]

44. President for 4 year and control both Houses of Congress.

What do you think? I think the Democratic Party will realize that this is their opportunity of a lifetime.