Allow me to quote from today's New Hampshire "Town Hall Meeting" (in quotes because "phony staged agitprop event" would sound "mean" like the 13 year old girl said).
All we want to do is set up a set of options so that if you don't have health insurance or you're underinsured, you can have the same deal that members of Congress have which is they can look at a menu of options -- we're calling it an exchange but it's basically just a menu of different health care plans -- and you'll be able to select the one that suits your family best. And I do think that having a public option as part of that will a keep the insurance companies honest because if they've got a public plan out there that they've gotta compete against, as long as it's not being subsidized by taxpayers -- then that will give you some acceptance of what sort of a good bargain for basic health care would be.
I would like to know how a "public" plan is not subsidized by the public through taxes or payments. Or is Orwellian language at work here?
To be fair, Mrs. Ausonius thought NObama meant that the plan would be breaking even, and would not be in the red.
Oh, like other government businesses that break even:
Like the Post Office, in NObama's own stuttering example. Like Fannie Mae. Like Freddie Mac. And let's add a new name to the family, Ginnie Mae, the Government National Mortgage Association, another financial black hole operated by the government and "owned" by the American people.
It will within 6 months be holding $1,000,000,000,000 dollars in...(drum roll)...sub-prime mortgages!!!
And you thought that was all over! For the Congressional and bureaucratic incompetence involved, see:
More proof as to why there should be no public hell-th care program, "subsidized" by Americans or not.