ObamaCare: No More Than Federal Actuary Tax and Power Move?

In all the discussions and propaganda that was spun by the federal mouthpieces at those townhalls, it amazed me also the choice and spins that were done by the mainstream media outlets and networks on what can only be described at its most basic level as another move by Washington to centralize more and more power in DC than at the state levels, in inflicting what is nothing more than a "Federal Actuary Tax" and not providing and performing its regulatory functions over commerce, but taking over health care delivery and provision in this country for almost all citizens, especially those past the age of 55 or 60.

Since most average Americans due to the rate increaes that occur as you age and are more "at risk" of developing medical problems or difficulties due to actuarial tables and common sense are unable to afford private coverage, unless independently wealthy or employed by one of those service sector providers.

Thus, nothing more really than a Federal Actuary Tax at its most fundamental, since at the present time there is catastrophic care and provision for children, the indigent, handicapped, and those with chronic conditions provided by every state in this union.

Although, of course, there is dual taxation on the costs for those programs in all but the five states for which there is no personal income tax at the state level. Although those states have chosen to provide those sums in other ways and through other taxation. Mostly what are known as "sin" taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. Which is also a little known motivation also behind those that are now behind legalizing marijuana throughout the nation.

It is simply another way to open a market for the pharmaceutical industry for their "branding" and packaging costs, and also means to gain more state and federal taxation in the process in the form of those "sin" taxes.

Not a word has been spoken about whether or not state taxes will be reduced for those sums now collected which fund these programs. So, all appearances to the contrary, it would appear the state legislatures are also publicly supporting those that are opposed to this heinous legislation on the one hand, while privately most serving on those legislatures are the biggest proponents of this legiation in some for or another.

So that the states then also benefit in the additional source of accountable revenue they would then have access to for their NGOs and discretionary expenditures.

And, of course, those that do admit to having such a motivation also, point to the added police, fire protection or school revenue which would be available. Which, of course, historically such moves to transfer unconstitutionally authority for state issues and matters have not gone into funding those state public services at all, merely also their "sovereign subject" political campaign backers and special interest groups.

And Washington and this Administration and Congress are taking it one step further even than that. Placing themselves in the position then of administrators on a federal concocted "preferred provider list" also in order to pay back national and global interests at the cost of those small insurers and groups that provide plans at the state level. Again attempting to centralize more power in DC, and less at the state level and small businesses and emerging companies in the health care provision sector.

Which is why Mayo is now nationwide at this point, and these "health care networks" are also spreading throughout the country at a rapid pace.

And if these industries have such massive profits that they are able to afford K Street lobbyists for their industries to begin with, isn't that a clue that the costs that are being now charged for health care provision bear absolutely no relevance at all to "reasonable" profit or the true costs of delivery of those services?

What is needed is regulation of the plans which are sold, and corporate interests who have been using their profit margins in order to gain more and more access to the American people's wallets using their own physical health and existence in order to profit for the industry greed and corporate self-interests.

And more would go into public health careers also if the amounts of tuition charged at our state and public universities also bore relevance to the true costs of those educations, since most of those colleges are funded with property tax revenues and other taxes - and as such, the children of those that are funding that university are now being charged close to what private universities in the past charged for higher education.

This solution, as the "rescue" of the banks due to that manipulated crisis, auto industry "takeover" and Washington joint venture, and foreclosure "remedy" which was nothing more than feeding the Federal Reserve bank branches as "agents" to negotiate those foreign investors debts and flip American homeowners properties for bank additional gain and profit, is another convenient excuse for Washington to use the American citizens health corporate gain.

And "create" more taxpayer paid government jobs in the process in order to create more debt for the Federal Reserve and Wall Street financial sector's also eventual profit.

In inflicting on the now many homeless, after that "Cap and Trade" scam in order to also feed a new Wall Street "gambling" venture for the venture capitalists in this country, now a Federal Actuary Tax and nothing really more.

And the federal and state collusion in the negligence and hands off approach to major corporate industries for their welfare is simply now coming home to roost. But the "quick fix" again in this instance, will simply lead to higher costs, and more loss of American life in the process deemed "expendable" by the new Obama created position, "God," in charge of yet another independent regulatory agency unaccountable to Congress, by and large, in any manner whatsoever.

Like the IRS, but even much more dangeous as a true public safety threat. And another extra-Constitutional power move in federalism, rather than the founders original form of government as framed within our Constitution, Constitutional Republicanism.

I would like to know who is overseeing Harvard's Law School curriculum and most others now in this country, the British?