http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzkwMmM4ZGU2MzljYjQzYTd...Employers would be required to insure their workers through a "pay or play" mandate. Those who did not provide "meaningful coverage" for their workers would pay a penalty, equal to some percentage of their payroll, into a national fund that would provide insurance to uncovered workers. Such a mandate is, of course, simply a disguised tax on employment. As Princeton University professor Uwe Reinhardt, the dean of health-care economists, points out, "[That] the fiscal flows triggered by mandate would not flow directly through the public budgets does not detract from the measure’s status of a bona fide tax." Estimates suggest that an employer mandate could cost 1.6 million jobs over the first five years.the oft-repeated promise that "if you are happy with your current insurance, you can keep it" is untrue. Millions of Americans who are currently satisfied with their coverage will have to give it up and purchase the insurance the government wants them to have, even if the new insurance is more expensive or covers benefits the buyer does not want.______________________________________________Couple the jobs lost to Obamacare with the jobs lost due to carbon taxes and I hope you really like your kids and grandkids, since they're going to be living with you.--fleg
flegbo posts,Employers would be required to insure their workers through a "pay or play" mandate. Those who did not provide "meaningful coverage" for their workers would pay a penalty, equal to some percentage of their payroll, into a national fund that would provide insurance to uncovered workers. Such a mandate is, of course, simply a disguised tax on employment.Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit. That's the Republican "tax" on healthcare.intercst
intercst: "Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit. That's the Republican "tax" on healthcare."Not to worry. In order for the gov't to handle all the paperwork, they'll hire about 50% more workers than the insurance industry has to provide the same service.Which, by my calculation, says that government insurance will actually cost about 25% more.....except, that is what you will pay...to support the subsidies to those who get them.Let's see..a family making 80,000 a year with a few kids gets a subsidy. Hmmm..that likely means that those earning 40K or less (half the population) will get almost free healthcare.So those earning 100K a year (as a family) or single will pay not only their own more expensive health care (due to excessive numbers of new hired gov't employees, all the buildings, and of course the cadillac type benefits).....you'll pay for 1/2 of another as well...if not more.....and of course, the illegals get free health care since most of them don't even pay any taxes....And your private plan will disappear within a few years, leaving you only with 'Hillary Care' great HMO in DC, overseen by Nancy Pelosi!.Scary......t
Just what we need...a government plan....that will regulate as well things like Freddie and Fannie.....NOT......a government plan...as sound as the Pension Guaratee Board..that is now tens of billions in the hole and going deeper and deeper........Like the FDIC.....in trouble.....borrowing more and more money....like every military program for procurement...that never ever ever comes in under cost, and gets bloated....like the state of CA, that hires people at 3 times the rate of inflation and growth in GDP, then wonders why the budget doesn't balance.....The post Office is going bust....cutting back soon on Sat delivery.....laying off folks finally after volumes have dropped 20%, but the number of people is still about the same.....and of course, postage climbing once again.Lke the gov't that pays tens of millions of farmers not to grow rice...and they haven't for 50 years along the Rio Grande River......and have nice mansions with their annual payments not to grow rice....you can't even find a farm field for miles, yet they collect millions for not growing rice!.....Way to go, government....a hundred billion in waste, and now you'll bring your proficiency to healthcare..Let's see....SS and Medicare now 102 trillion unfunded by 2050...going to get interesting....Obama can make it 150 trillion......wow.....t.t.
<<Let's see....SS and Medicare now 102 trillion unfunded by 2050...going to get interesting....Obama can make it 150 trillion......wow.....t.>> Those deficits are daunting. What to do... what to do...When one Ponzi scheme fails, why not start another?Just rolllllll those Medicare promises into the promise of national healthcare for everyone.The elderly already on Medicare can be charged again for the healthcare they are already getting. High income retirees can be charged more than the value of the Medicare benefits they receive, if they are using them at all. Raise the taxes on working people and ration the health care benefits they are used to getting.It's easy, tele --- just move the pea under a different cup. The suckers will be happy.Seattle Pioneer
Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit.You mean to say that the United States government, with all its bureaucracy, would add less 'overhead' than private insurers locked in constant competition with one another?There are a lot of valid reasons why people might support national healthcare legislation - reduced 'overhead' however, isn't one of them.
<<Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit.You mean to say that the United States government, with all its bureaucracy, would add less 'overhead' than private insurers locked in constant competition with one another?There are a lot of valid reasons why people might support national healthcare legislation - reduced 'overhead' however, isn't one of them. >> I think that the ability of politicians to skim spending power from Social Security "Trust Funds" and divert it to other purposes suggests that the Federal Government and our Federal politicians need take a back seat to NO ONE when it comes to slickering the rubes. Seattle Pioneer
Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit. That's the Republican "tax" on healthcare.And not one single insurer has noticed that they can grab a huge market share by skimming off only 15% - and end up with vastly more profit because of the larger market share.That's the really useful thing about ripoff schemes like this: to persist, they rely on the fact that people who would either enter into such a scheme or compete against it is are even bigger idiots than politicians.
I think that the ability of politicians to skim spending power from Social Security "Trust Funds" and divert it to other purposes suggests that the Federal Government and our Federal politicians need take a back seat to NO ONE when it comes to slickering the rubes.The biggest problem I have with so many of the national healthcare arguments is they rely on the idea that federal government involvement in the process will lower healthcare costs.All of the ideas I've seen floated about have to do with controlling prices and have little to do with actually controlling costs. In fact, most of them seem to favor creation of a monopsony (which, like a monopoly, is inherently economically ineffecient).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony
Under our current system of "Bushcare", private insurers skim 25%-30% off the top in excessive overhead & profit. That's the Republican "tax" on healthcare.I agree 100% along with 42 other recommendeds. It looks like intercst wins this debate.
http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis.aspOnce you have government health care, it can be used to justify almost any restraint on freedom: After all, if the state has to cure you, it surely has an interest in preventing you needing treatment in the first place. That's the argument behind, for example, the creepy teams of government nutritionists currently going door to door in Britain and conducting a "health audit" of the contents of your refrigerator. They're not yet confiscating your Twinkies; they just want to take a census of how many you have. So you do all this for the "free" health care—and in the end you may not get the "free" health care anyway. Under Britain's National Health Service, for example, smokers in Manchester have been denied treatment for heart disease, and the obese in Suffolk are refused hip and knee replacements. Patricia Hewitt, the British Health Secretary, says that it's appropriate to decline treatment on the basis of "lifestyle choices." Smokers and the obese may look at their gay neighbor having unprotected sex with multiple partners, and wonder why his "lifestyle choices" get a pass while theirs don't. But that's the point: Tyranny is always whimsical._____________________________________________Read the whole article to see what kind of a sorry state of affairs your kids and grandkids will be inheriting.--fleg
Worse than gov't health care, which we can't affordhttp://www.marketwatch.com/story/22-reasons-obama-will-raise...Get set for a doubling of taxest.
<<Worse than gov't health care, which we can't affordhttp://www.marketwatch.com/story/22-reasons-obama-will-raise......Get set for a doubling of taxest. >> Oh come on now, Tele. I have the word of Democrats (and intercst) that national healthcare can be financed out of the nefarious profits of insurance companies. Are you claiming that this is the intercst curve ---- something like the Laffer Curve? Seattle Pioneer
"Oh come on now, Tele. I have the word of Democrats (and intercst) that national healthcare can be financed out of the nefarious profits of insurance companies."I didn't realize they made trillions. I"d better buy some of those stocks immedidately!t.
I'm always in awe of the amount of sheep that follow intercst and his hateful speech. Bravo Intercst. Still miss you from the days when you were informative and fun. I'll take profit taking (and the built in motive for being better and more efficient) over Union feather-bedding and shocking government waste....any day, any time, particularly when you are talking about MY health care. The ONLY way the federal govt will save one dime with nationalized health care is by rationing. That is already going on with Medicare and will have to become more severe with the whole country being on Obamacare and the baby boomers turning 63.Why you think we have "Bushcare", Intercst, is beyond my comprehension...other than the idiotic prescription giveaway program he approved....and he was a fool to do that, he has nothing to do with the mess we're in right now. That has taken decades of Federal/State govt meddling. The states impose all kinds of crap that has to be included in any insurance policy sold in that state and WE ALL pay for it and it eliminates any reasonably priced policy for people who don't want the bells and whistles....guess they think we are too stupid to make that decision. Our govt restricts selling medical insurance across state lines. Eliminating that one thing would save a fortune....tomorrow. Going after Medicare theft would save more millions (but might raise their reported 2% administrative fees ..yeah right, they are 2%). Limits on punitive damages for medical accidents/screwups would save millions more (like in Texas)...but greedy attorneys hate that idea. Hard to believe but docs and medical personnel are PEOPLE and they are going to make honest mistakes....no matter what. Um, if we get Obamacare....who are you going to sue when absolutely nobody in the system is accountable or gives a crap? The fact that Obama and the rest of his choir are singing that socialized medicine is our ONLY option and this is our ONLY chance to do it RIGHT NOW before the whole country collapses....makes me very angry. A neighbor has horrible arthritis in her neck. Doc wanted her to have an MRI to assist him in helping her with her pain. Medicare (our govt) said NO....you can only have one every 3 years. Really??? Since when did they become so medicine savvy? Have they actually seen my friend's neck? Her doc has. I am stunned that people are buying into this crap. Get the government out of our current health care system tomorrow and the cost will drop by 1/3....just from the paperwork and the idiocy of the current laws. Then stop the attorneys and the stupid juries from awarding multi-million dollar awards for every perceived injury. Every Medicare patient that walks into the front door of a hospital requires 65 pages of documention for the Federal govt. Lunacy. Abolish HMO's and the other half of the problem will be gone. We have programmed people into thinking it's ok to pay $5 for a prescription and $10 for a doctor's visit. On what planet? Think that and the pennies they receive every month for your care covers their costs? It is simply passed on to those that have better insurance or no insurance. They have to pay their bills just like any other business. It feels like this whole thing has been orchestrated for years and now the democrats have the votes to put us all in very personal medical jeopardy (note that there is no way "our elected representatives" will personally be required to take part of this...watch). Beyond frightening that we are all having to sit here and watch this circus and can do nothing about it. Obama and his handlers ... I take my hat off. They are transforming our country as we know it into some kind of a government-controlled nightmare in a matter of months....
Just went back and re-read the Intercst post on this thread. Can someone point out the "hateful speech?"
"The ONLY way the federal govt will save one dime with nationalized health care is by rationing. That is already going on with Medicare and will have to become more severe with the whole country being on Obamacare and the baby boomers turning 63."Of course....and by cost shifting and subsidizing.You realize in France all the doctors (what are allowed by the rationing board) have their education paid for by the tax payer. That is what the 15-19% Value Added Tax (national sales tax) on top of similar income taxes pays for. "Free" college educations - if you can get in on the quota for a specialty like medicine (0nly so many allowed a year). Then France pays doctors $55,000 a year. The tax payer has paid for their $300,000 college education.Here, the medical insurance system pays for the doctor, since he/she has to pay off those student loans most likely. Same thing....In France...the tax payer pays. Under Obama care, the tax payer would pay........ but the cost is shifted and France can claim 'their healthcare costs less'. Of course, on the first look it does, but the French have already paid UP FRONT for the doc's education!....http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124416366699887489.htmlThe actual share of healthcare is less than half of what it was in 1965......Folks want the equivalent of oil changes and new tires on their car, paid for by auto insurance, to be provided under their 'health care'. But I have to disagree..most private plans will only allow an MRI every five years or so for the same condition, unless there is an emergency situation. So..she has arthritis in the neck. What is an MRI going to show? deterioating bones? What can you do about it? Would an ultra sound be just as good? Or even if an MRI, what different course of action? That's like saying your fat.....and we need to find out exactly where the fat is....duh!.....I'm not sure I follow the logic, other than to assuage the medical distress by this patient..and too many tests and procedures are not warranted...but are done just to show the patient 'we are doing everything possible' .....which is running up costs. It's like having arthritis in one finger....OK..you got it...nothing is going to fix it......other than conventional therapy..no need to have a MRI ......take a few aspirin... and maybe one xray...... but no...folks want expensive things like Celebrex (is it still around) which was nothing but glorified aapirin with lots of side effects)... t.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra