Speak Out: Another target of Obamacare: Americans' right to financial privacy.

Replies (18)

• Forgot to say: Think I alluded to that sort of thing somewhere on the Missourian fairly recently ... wondering how people would feel about government health care if it came to a point where the government decided exactly what they could or could not afford to pay for the coverage.

  So the way this section sounds ... they could very well do that by the tracking of an individual's finances. And at some point in time ... they could very well dictate that a person will have to pay a certain amount of percentage of their income toward health coverage ... by eliminating what someone in government might consider 'frivolous' or 'unnecessary.'

  Hmmm ... 'We'll take away your cell phone, big-screen TV, motor scooter, golf club membership, cable connection, internet connection, junk food, dining out once a week, and you will use that amount of money, plus whatever's left over, to pay for your health insurance/coverage.'

  Sounds like a science fiction novel, doesn't it? Or like more government control and intrusion? Am I making any sense tonight?

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Fri, Aug 21, 2009, at 9:23 PM

• Wiff, the government has been keeping track of peoples financial history for along time. At least those who receive government assistance, food stamps, SSI, AFDC, Medicaid, etc.... Upon filing the applications you also give them the right to check your bank records. So not alot will change. Sorry to burst your bubble.

  With that said, I think if you receive government assistance than they should be able to verify that you really need it and are not scamming the system, in that way anyway. ☻

  -- Posted by Turnip on Fri, Aug 21, 2009, at 9:27 PM

• As Wheels tried to explain ... they forced it on us Old Folks. If I understand it from an over-65 friend who is still working ... he had to accept Medicare, but the company's insurance does pick up the extra charges. That just doesn't make any sense to me, though ...

  However ... actually, I've been pretty pleased with Medicare, even though all the supplements are fairly pricey ... and of course none of those premiums are based on 'income.' Which means many seniors (generally the even older ones who didn't have access to much in the way of retirement plans) cannot afford them.

  It does bother me to see how little Medicare 'approves' for things ... which means of course that everyone else's costs are probably inflated to cover the shortages. That also makes it difficult sometimes to find doctors who accept it.

  Turnip is pretty much on target about government having access to many (most?) people's financial information ... well, if they want it.

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Fri, Aug 21, 2009, at 11:24 PM

• Or at least leave the country if he don't like it.

  -- Posted by Grandpa_Sassy on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 12:59 PM

• But ... darn! Doesn't the old 'love it or leave it' mantra actually mean ... We should be a country of sheep, accept every single thing our government leaders decide ... without question?

  Doesn't sound like a very good idea to me, if one thinks much about it.

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 1:06 PM

• Mom

  You should rely on the left wing sheep... they will tell you the truth!

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 1:30 PM

• 

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 1:35 PM

• Wheew Touchy today aren't we?

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 2:06 PM

• All kidding aside Willy, you seem to have lost sight of the position President Obama holds. Re-think what you just posted, please.

  -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 2:34 PM

  What has his position got to do with if or not he is lying. He holds an office created by our founders and that means he works for us, not the reverse. The office is to be respected, the office holder, only if he earns that respect. Lying to the American people does not earn respect, and all heads need not bow at the mention of his name.

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 2:44 PM

• Hmmm..Wheels you must have been reading conservabold again. The office does demand respect, and you should respect the person holding the office unless you can prove otherwise. Can you?

  -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 2:53 PM

  Conservabold... will need help don't know what it is. Seldom read any of the crap the right or left spews.

  Respect the person etc... Why?

  Prove what... that he doesn't deserve respect?

  Did he lie... Yes! Just one instance when he said NO taxes would be raised on those people making less than $250,000.00. Tobacco taxes were raised, so he lied!

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 3:06 PM

• Oh you're grasping....tobacco tax is a luxury tax, not a necessity. Can't count that! NO way, No how!

  Besides, I personally make less than $250K, and the tax does not effect me at all...he told the truth!

  -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 3:11 PM

  A lie is a lie and NO TAX INCREASE on those making less than $250,000.00 means no tax increase of any kind, just like he said. the fact that it does not affect you has nothing to do with if it is a lie or not. That tax affects more people making less than $250,000.00 than it does over $250,000.00 by far. Doesn't affect me either.

  I thought the compassionate liberals cared about their fellow man. You do not appear to do so in that if it doesn't affect you... no big deal.

  That was the lamest come back I have seen for awhile!

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 3:18 PM

• Have to have, has nothing to do with it. Those people who use it are being taxed, in direct contradiction to what Obama said, so he lied.

  Call it what you want, a tax is a tax, is a tax.

  No comprehension problem here. Got to go.

  

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 3:32 PM

• 

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 3:39 PM

• Aina ... Perhaps we should levy some sort of Fine for Dumb Sayings ... like 'love it or leave it?' Perhaps you could start a thread of such dumb things people often say ... usually when they can't think of anything more sensible to say? ~grinning~

  Thank you, Theorist ... Do NOT rely on EITHER party's scare tactics, fear mongering, or psychological twisting (or hiding) of actual facts. Thing is, we the people keep pretty much proving again and again how easily hoodwinked and fooled we are by the rhetoric of politicians who seem to believe they know what's best ... That we sometimes overlook their shortcomings and errors ... mainly because of party leanings ... isn't very responsible or intelligent on our part.

  Have to defend Wheels a little, even though he doesn't really need help ... He's actually pretty sharp ... just, like Pops ... sharp but perhaps a little too party-oriented sometimes (a common ailment in America). ~laughing~ But they're good guys ... no kidding!

  Liars? Our politicians might be liars? Oh, no! They're above lying, surely. Wondering ... do politicians consider lying not lying if it is for what they consider a good reason, maybe ...? Yep ... Respect must (should) be earned, not expected due to a person's position or rank or ...

  Wheels is right, though on taxation. Perhaps Obama only 'meant' his administration wouldn't raise INCOME taxes ... but the fact is, he didn't specify that, and he did allow a tax increase, and it does affect MAINLY lower-income people (Y'all can look that up; think I posted some of the stats in the past--the ones predicting when SCHIP funds would be depleted due to smokers quitting). So, that wasn't exactly a lie, just a ... little fabrication, twisting it a little to fit the needs ...

  Kept this, but misplaced the main site I liked which gave a ton more info ... Why people keep assuming that smokers are 'usually lower-income class?

  Because of things like Gallup 2009:

  $12,000 or less ........ 34% smoke

  $12,000-$35.999 ........ 28% smoke

  $36,000-$59,999 ........ 22% smoke

  $60,000-$89,999 ........ 16% smoke

  $90,000 & up ........... 13% smoke

  Yep, an excusable tax increase because smoking is bad and it isn't a necessity, and SCHIP for children in families (still bewildered about the 'up to 30 years old' section) with up to $80,000 income who obviously can't afford insurance premiums is ... good. And after all that ... I'm actually sort of hoping that as more smokers quit, the government has to come up with a way to fund that SCHIP increase so that it falls on another targeted group. And hoping the tax increases to pay for it will be on 'non-necessities' ... you know, the things people COULD do without, don't have to have but choose to have?

  Thanks for the Smilies, Wheels! I probably need those lately ...

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 8:22 PM

• Have to defend Wheels a little, even though he doesn't really need help ... He's actually pretty sharp ... just, like Pops ... sharp but perhaps a little too party-oriented sometimes (a common ailment in America). ~laughing~ But they're good guys ... no kidding!

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Sat, Aug 22, 2009, at 8:22 PM

  Mom, Thanks, I need all the help I can get.

  Regards the party-oriented, I am not regigstered as anything, never have been and never will. I consider myself right of center as things are calculated today and have as much distaste for the far right loonies as I do the leftist loons.

  I cannot say I am disappointed in what Obama is doing, as he is doing exqctly what I calculated he would do before I voted against him.

  If a man is doing exatly what you thought he would do, at least in my mentality, I would have a hard time conidering myself disappointed. I think a significant number of his supporters are disappointed, to the point that if he persists in his I know best attitude, he will be a one term President. And that will be good!

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Aug 23, 2009, at 3:29 AM

• Aina ... I have suspected for a while, and finally have come to the conclusion that you are, in fact, NOT Megal after all. Shoot ... I miss Megal. ~almost weeping~ Can't even josh with Aina, as we could with Megal ...

  All the polls I've read this past week or so, Wheels, show that. But ... except for a few exceptions, American voters tend to support and vote for the 'known name,' ie, the ones already in office ... regardless ... Sort of like preferring the known problem as opposed to the unknown?

  -- Posted by gurusmom on Sun, Aug 23, 2009, at 12:09 PM

• Wiff,

  I have always handled it that way. Something I don't think my two Grandfathers could do, so they might both just as well stayed at home. End result would have been exactly the same with one less vote for each candidate.

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Aug 23, 2009, at 1:54 PM

• Children, children! Now stop this senseless bickering.

  WWRS?

  What Would Rush Say?

  -- Posted by voyager on Sun, Aug 23, 2009, at 10:48 PM