The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Retirement Discussions / Retire Early CampFIRE
|Subject: Re: ObamaCare and the '29ers'||Date: 2/23/2013 1:20 PM|
|Author: BGinNJ||Number: 672758 of 709339|
<What a stupid piece of legislation. Does no one ever look ahead to see what the possible results of the legislation will be?>
Only those who hate both children and the elderly.<g>
When you have legislation that is championed by someone who has never owned a business, never managed a business nor ever worked in one, well the common sense elements that you and many others mention never get any serious consideration. Some leaders who may lack regular business experience have had the useful experience of managing budgets as mayors, county executives or governors. Unfortunately, community organizers and PT faculty members do not aquire those kinds of experiences.
All of our major choices (and many smaller ones too) have consequences. This one choice by our electorate has had plenty of consequences, even for those who bought in to the hype and Nobel Peace Prize after nine days in office nonsense.
Now I hear there is another wrinkle springing up in employer provided health insurance. Many businesses that want to avoid the potential negative reaction to totally eliminating employee health insurance now have an alternative route. They can avoid the penalties and still manage to reduce their overall costs by totally eliminating spousal coverage from their health plans. It's win/win.
I cannot blame a business for looking at every possibility when it comes to surviving by protecting their bottom line. When you run a business well, you are always aware of and are on the lookout for things that will impact your business in either direction. That is the monstrous distinction between the public and private sector.
I recently read that the government program that provides low income people with free cell phones has a fraud rate of over 40%. A private business that plans on being around for any length of time cannot possibly allow something like that to go on. They would anticipate future behavior (which is the root of your question here) by putting in filters or procedures that would eliminate or greatly reduce the possibility of fraud taking place in the first place. The public sector never does any such thing. Government only considers doing so after massive losses have taken place and a lot of heat is placed on them.
This is why the fundamental idea of the government running most things is so deeply flawed. They cannot manage anything well. The irony of many of the programs they run is that in addition to millions getting things they do not qualify for is that many people who may truly need the service never get it either out of their ignorance or because the funds were depleted by those commiting fraud.
This last election was so important because we absolutely, positively cannot continue down this road without there being dire financial consequences. I believe that even a majority of Obama voters know that is true deep down. Yet the vote in many cases came down to this guy is going to keep or expand what I am getting from the government vs the other guy may reduce or eliminate some of what I get from the government. When one candidate says we need to take some strong medicine to fix things while the other says we can have more punch bowls simply by taxing the rich guy over there, well you have a clear difference of opinion.
Now the cynic in me fully believes that Obama knew and knows that we cannot continue down this path. Yet the narcissist in him saw that he could win with that argument, especially with a fawning media quivering at his every word. Had any of the debate monitors or national news editors actually pressed Obama on his prior progams and future plans, we could have had an honest discussion of how to resolve our deep and persistant problems.
So I fully expect things to get much, much messier in the healthcare arena. It is depressing when every idea Obama puts forward is couched in the demonizing of productive people. The real demoralizing part is when those ideas not only do not get challenged in the media, but they are given a full seal of approval. The $85B in cuts (out of a $3.7T budget) will bring an end to everything we hold near and dear according to countless reports I have seen on the evening news. Of course Obama has tried to maximize that perception by targeting areas for cuts that will draw the most attention and anger by those who pay scant attention to what is going on (other than American Idol, the Kardashians and countless other mindless drivel that passes for important things). Alas, many of those are the same people who are proud members of the uninformed voter group. So I surmise that a splendid time is guaranteed for all!
|Copyright 1996-2013 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|