Liberals in state of shock as they realize Free health care was another Obama fairy tale

PF Louis
Natural News

Finally, though too late, the chickens have come home to roost for many Obama supporters and apologists.

111013obamacare Liberals in state of shock as they realize Free health care was another Obama fairy tale

Image: Obamacare.

It isn’t from the endless invasions and occupations, Wall Street bailouts, drones, increased gestapo security measures, NSA or several other corrupt episodes swept into the memory holes of mainstream media.

Nope. The wake-up call that has many on the other side of the aisle saying “I told you so” is Obama’s “Affordable Care Act” insurance premium price hikes for those whose private plans are now more expensive than before.

Already, there have been several reports of tremendous premium hikes from Obama supporters upon enrolling for Obamacare, even though they haven’t had major health issues or medical care. They are truly shocked.

A few sample horror stories

The San Francisco Bay Area is a liberal strong-hold. But the San Francisco Chronicle came out recently with the headline “Health Insurance Shoppers Suffer Sticker Shock.”

op_small2 Liberals in state of shock as they realize Free health care was another Obama fairy tale

One example they cited was SF Bay Area resident 47-year-old Shelley Ross, self employed, who was looking forward to getting a better deal through Obamacare. After registering, she lamented that “every plan is going to cost more than what I pay now, and what I pay now is ridiculous.”

Another San Francisco resident, 63-year-old John Lonergan lost his reasonably priced Kaiser Permanente plan, because it can’t comply to Obamacare mandates. In order to maintain the same level of coverage with Obamacare that he had with Kaiser, his annual premium cost will increase by over $3,600.

In nearby San Jose, California, the San Jose Mercury News reported, “Like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills.”

This paper featured Cindy Vinson’s and Tom Waschura’s sticker shock. Both are Obama supporters. Vinson’s annual premium bill went up $1,800, and Waschura’s annual premium spiked incredibly to $10,000 over what he was accustomed to paying.

Cindy Vinson explained that she’s in favor of everyone having coverage, but “[she] didn’t expect to be the one paying for it personally.” Waschura told the Mercury News, “I really don’t like the Republican tactics, but at least now I can understand why they are so pissed about this.”

The Christian Science Monitor reported a case where the cost increase of $8900 annually for North Carolina couple Michael Yount and his wife has them considering going without health insurance.

The Younts need to be alerted about those tax penalties for not complying with their unaffordable Affordable Care Act coverage, which can be enforced by the IRS with their tyrannical police powers.

Are there real options or is it catch-22 forever?

San Francisco health insurance agent, Jeff Sher, who ironically does conceptually favor a universal plan, pointed out that the Affordable Care Act may help those whose incomes are low enough to warrant subsidies, but most will suffer higher prices from this “horribly complex and ill-designed system.”

To consider options, it’s wise to drop the foolish left-right political schism meant to keep us arguing while politicians deceive us. Both sides of the aisle house the same monster that really only wants to feed itself by catering to the so-called one percent.

So why should people go bankrupt over medical bills? And why must only the most monopolistic, dangerous and least effective medical system take the spotlight with oncologists making up to a half-million per year poisoning patients, often making them die faster than cancer can kill them?

Until a single payer-system with minimal bureaucratic complexity and overhead allows individuals coverage for so-called “alternative” medical practices instead of catering to the Medical Mafia’s excessive profit monopoly, it will be catch-22 forever.

4 Replies to “Liberals in state of shock as they realize Free health care was another Obama fairy tale”

  1. The last line is your REALLY conclusion?! You advocate (1) a single payer-system (2) minimal bureaucratic complexity and overhead (!) (3) individual coverage (4) so-called “alternative” medical practices but then say there is now (5) catering to the Medical Mafia’s excessive profit monopoly.I don't get how that is a coherent, realistic proposal. A single-payer system will never be minimally bureaucratic. It will be incredibly bureaucratic, because it's a public system. Have you EVER dealt with a city/state/federal office?? Individual coverage is best handled, by far, in a free-market capitalist system. I probably can't comment on 'alternative' medical practices, but I'll wager it's the same. Finally, 'excessive profit monopoly' is countered precisely by a free and open market with full disclosures.
    But really, the main problem with everyone's proposals is they are fallacious at the root. "Insurance" should be for catastrophic, savings-draining health problems, not routine care. I had a high-deductible plan through my employer five years ago and paid only $8 per month. I was single and in good health.
    My father had a family practice working out of an office in our house (last of the 'country doctors' making house calls and delivering babies.) When the first HMOs came along (in the 60s) I remember he didn't mind, the growth of Medicaid in the 70s groused him, but then the PPOs and such really galled him. The paperwork in his two-person office killed his productivity. He retired in 1988 and didn't live to see this grotesque debacle of his beloved profession.
    It has been perverted by insurance companies, sure, but that is a function of people wanting more and more services as the cost of delivering those services has risen with frivolous lawsuits and concomitant increased testing to cover doctors' asses. And there you are: A 'perfect storm' for a charlatan like BHO to convince the nation he has a better scheme.

  2. I tracked-back and now see the last para is not yours but was from the original article. I apologize for going off and thinking it was from this blog ("Conservative Read.") Of course "Natural News" would want 'alternative medical practices.'

  3. The last line is your REALLY conclusion?! You advocate (1) a single payer-system (2) minimal bureaucratic complexity and overhead (!) (3) individual coverage (4) so-called œalternative medical practices but then say there is now (5) catering to the Medical Mafia’s excessive profit monopoly.I don’t get how that is a coherent, realistic proposal. A single-payer system will never be minimally bureaucratic. It will be incredibly bureaucratic, because it’s a public system. Have you EVER dealt with a city/state/federal office?? Individual coverage is best handled, by far, in a free-market capitalist system. I probably can’t comment on ‘alternative’ medical practices, but I’ll wager it’s the same. Finally, ‘excessive profit monopoly’ is countered precisely by a free and open market with full disclosures.
    But really, the main problem with everyone’s proposals is they are fallacious at the root. “Insurance” should be for catastrophic, savings-draining health problems, not routine care. I had a high-deductible plan through my employer five years ago and paid only $8 per month. I was single and in good health.
    My father had a family practice working out of an office in our house (last of the ‘country doctors’ making house calls and delivering babies.) When the first HMOs came along (in the 60s) I remember he didn’t mind, the growth of Medicaid in the 70s groused him, but then the PPOs and such really galled him. The paperwork in his two-person office killed his productivity. He retired in 1988 and didn’t live to see this grotesque debacle of his beloved profession.
    It has been perverted by insurance companies, sure, but that is a function of people wanting more and more services as the cost of delivering those services has risen with frivolous lawsuits and concomitant increased testing to cover doctors’ asses. And there you are: A ‘perfect storm’ for a charlatan like BHO to convince the nation he has a better scheme.

  4. I tracked-back and now see the last para is not yours but was from the original article. I apologize for going off and thinking it was from this blog (“Conservative Read.”) Of course “Natural News” would want ‘alternative medical practices.’

Comments are closed.