The 5 Pros listed here are only the Top 5 Pros of the bill, and ALL the 5 Cons are heavily biased speculation just so they can stack up to the Pros!
Let’s take a quick look at this shall we, so we can show the kind of amateurish reporting we expect from “reporters” these days:

“1. Given the huge amount of expenses pegged at $940 billion in a spread of about 10 years, it might slow down the growth of heavily burdened US economy.”

This is not “reporting”, this is pure speculation.
Using words like “huge amount” is ridiculous! Compared to what exactly?
The 2 needless wars have cost the country over $1 trillion, and we got NOTHING from them. So declaring war is more important than saving your own citizens lives and making them better?
Lesser countries have paid more than this to take care of their citizens, so what is the comparison here, exactly?
Let me re-write this point so its Accurate:
1. Its expensive.

That’s it, that’s all you needed to say! Whether or not it will slow down the growth of the economy is pure speculation, AND it goes against what industry analysts say is a bill that will end up SAVING and CUTTING costs in time. Many “average joes” agree that health care costs can and have completely crippled families in the past, and that a change HAD to be made to fix a broken system. So in a economic crisis, you don’t stop offering life saving services to your citizens, you HELP them, they are the ones who will help you prosper, its their money and their actions that pay for your budget!

“2. Insurance Availment Mandate. You have no choice but to get a health insurance. Otherwise, you will be subjected to a 2% tax increase which will be used to subsidize the insurance costs of other Americans. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.”

Once again, terrible twisted reporting. Using words like “no choice”, “subjected”..
Also, completely falsifying facts.
Its very simple, if you don’t have insurance, you will NOT be denied health care. If you show up at a hospital with a life threatening disease, you will not be thrown out to the curb because you don’t have insurance, instead you will be provided with health care, and the government will pay for your health care, and when its time to do your tax returns, if the government owes you back any amount, the 2% tax will be deducted and will be used to pay for your healthcare insurance.

To me, this is very fair. Its a good system that respects the dignity of the patient, and if you can’t afford to pay the 2% tax, you will be excused after the necessary arrangements and paperwork is made. Read the bill because you clearly don’t understand it.

“3. There will be a tax increase on people with very high income. If you are making more than half a million per annum, you will have about a 1% tax increase.”

Are you kidding me? a 1% tax increase on the rich is in the “CONS” section?
This needs to be moved up to the Pros section.

“4. The US Government will have more control in the health insurance industry causing patients’ confidentiality to be more likely compromised since centralized health information will likely be maintained by the government.”

Get real, would you?
If you want to give honest unbiased reporting, don’t use the word “likely” so much, because in the end what that really means is you don’t know!
Just say it, you will feel a lot more comfortable: “I don’t know!”
And just purely due to the fact that the government wants to regulate the Health Care business, that automatically means that all our medical information will be compromised? Where did you get that from exactly?

No matter what way you look at it, private or government insurance, someone else will ALWAYS have access to your medical history. They need it to effectively treat you. So that fact its moved from private sector to government is not a bad thing. I don’t want any private corporation who’s primary mandate is to “Make a profit” to “OWN” my information (which they currently do), I’d be much more confident if the government is the one responsible for guarding that information.
And its nothing new, more than half the worlds most prosperous governments (Canada, UK, Finland, Sweden, France, etc) do it this way! They had no problems, so why would we?

“5. Chances of bribery may possibly increase as health care equipment, drugs, and services may end up being rationed by the government.”

“Chances” of Bribery may “possibly” increase??
That last one is just a joke.

So to sum up, the Cons of this bill are:

1. Its expensive.