a manageable number of statements.

This paragraph highlights my continual harping about the embedded reduction of current benefits:

The application of "spread the wealth" politics to healthcare can be interpreted without much effort as... taking current coverage for those who enjoy it....reduce their coverage benefits....and spread it to those who don't have it. The concept ultimately diminishes incentive to improve and perpetuates mediocrity of care.

And this one of course highlights the, again reduced coverage/benefit that many are trying to explain away:

The government gets what we used to call a two-fer. A two for one bang out of a healthcare policy that reduces cost and benefits for the most expensive component, Medicare. Reducing the treatment options for Medicare recipients or converting them to cheaper less expensive options saves a lot of money. The more sinister back end of the two-fer is that old people will die...with dignity... sooner... and concurrently lower the burden on Social Security. I guess the concept would be somewhere between coldly efficient and diabolically evil.

Given that the bill is still being penned I guess the POTUS can say yea or nay to almost anything and be half right (or half wrong as he was in yesterdays town meeting). Sorta like painting a bullet in flight....really, really difficult.

So from the supporters of Obama and or the "current" proposed reform, why would the above be of ANY benefit to existing 65 plus folks like many of us???

Any warm blooded, non masochistic, thinking bi-ped would or should be adamantly against the reform trial balloons being floated.

As I stated previously most intelligent folks would not attempt to try to put dimensions on a cloud.....but the POTUS and his aids, czars and congress continue to speak as though they can.

btk