UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (81) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: JohnEBgood Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1977332  
Subject: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/9/2012 11:42 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 32
After making a big deal of publicly supporting the Affordable Care Act, Walmart—the nation’s largest private sector employer—is joining the ranks of companies seeking to avoid their obligation to provide employees with health insurance as required by Obamacare.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/12/09/walmart-bai...

Hey....maybe WalMart got a cheaper healthcare plan from China. ;o)

Jack
Print the post Back To Top
Author: rubberthinking Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843524 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 3:51 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Hey....maybe WalMart got a cheaper healthcare plan from China. ;o)

Jack

you do know that one to two hundred million Chinese have health care in china. The communists and the well off, but no one else.

There is a bottom of the barrel. It is inherent in having a barrel. I am for a universal system. And we will get there one day. But for now companies like Walmart are bottom of the barrel as far as working conditions go in retail within the US.

Woe to those who have to work for Walmart.

Dave

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843543 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 8:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
They aren't avoiding their obligation to provide insurance under Obamacare, they are following the law to a tee.

As for getting a cheaper plan from China, heck that's not tough...ObamaKare raised the cost of healthcare for everyone who buys it. Nothing affordable about the "affordable health care act".

Print the post Back To Top
Author: goofnoff Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843544 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 8:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 43
The continuance of the atiquated programof employers providing most of the nation's health insurance has long since past its usefulness.

We need public health.

The argument from the right is that ER care is a satisfactory answer for the poor. That would make us the only industrialized nation, indeed nearly the only nation, that does not recognize the need for universal health care.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843546 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 8:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
rubberthinking:"Hey....maybe WalMart got a cheaper healthcare plan from China. ;o)"



Actually, Walmart employees will get a better plan from the government. At least the older ones who will be subsidized by the young ones......


The new law requires gold plated benefits that can cost $14,000 a year for 'family coverage' and Walmart would be required to likely pay 90% of that.

Now, for someone making 8 or 9 bucks an hour at an 'entry level' job - like flipping burgers, stocking shelves, etc.....you can't afford to about double their 'employee costs' by providing them insurance that takes their total compensation to $18 /hour.

You don't have to work for Walmart.....99% of the population doesn't. But if you don't have a job and that is the only one available to feed your family - you take it rather than be a welfare weenie or queenie.

Now libs would likely argue that Walmart should double prices to be able to pay for it. Same for McDonalds and all their Starbucks and other joints they frequent. They'd soon find they couldn't afford them, and half the folks in those industries would simply be laid off with no jobs at all. or they'd be replaced by more automation quickly.

WHen you find the tree for Obama to shake to get another trillion a year, let me know and then you'll be able to afford 'universal health care' for all the weenies and queenies and deadbeats...in the mean time, you'll find that more and more will have to fund their own health care and spend less on cigarettes and booze and lottery tickets and new games for their game console. And fewer trips to the casino or bingo hall. or drug dealer.



t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843549 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 9:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Heckofajob Obama.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843550 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 9:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Now libs would likely argue that Walmart should double prices to be able to pay for it. Same for McDonalds and all their Starbucks and other joints they frequent. They'd soon find they couldn't afford them, and half the folks in those industries would simply be laid off with no jobs at all. or they'd be replaced by more automation quickly.

_________________-

When "conservatives" argue that subsidizing behemoths at the cost of 140,000 per employee doesn't trickle down into the tax bill that they themselves do not want to pay, but does enrich their balance sheets is what? The other side of a lopsided equation?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ekavana186 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843553 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 9:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
Woe to those who have to work for Walmart.

Dave


Dave,

Nobody has to work at Walmart.

Ed

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843561 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:16 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
stonewashed:"When "conservatives" argue that subsidizing behemoths at the cost of 140,000 per employee doesn't trickle down into the tax bill that they themselves do not want to pay, but does enrich their balance sheets is what? The other side of a lopsided equation? "

were you on drugs when you wrote the above?



It doesn't make any sense.


t

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843562 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:20 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
stonewashed:"When "conservatives" argue that subsidizing behemoths at the cost of 140,000 per employee doesn't trickle down into the tax bill that they themselves do not want to pay, but does enrich their balance sheets is what? The other side of a lopsided equation? "

were you on drugs when you wrote the above?



It doesn't make any sense.


t
________________

Well actually 140,000 was when we are getting off easy.


http://boards.fool.com/blurred-lines-30423031.aspx?sort=whol...

(I see you have taken to the methodology of the most rabid leftists on here.)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843563 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Nobody has to work at Walmart.

____________

At the rate we're going, nobody is going to have to work anywhere. Free food, free cell-phones, free health insurance, free everything. The best jobs are going to be under the table cash where you make money report nothing and get government freebies.

(Of course free really means someone else is paying).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843565 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:32 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Well actually 140,000 was when we are getting off easy.


http://boards.fool.com/blurred-lines-30423031.aspx?sort=whol......

(I see you have taken to the methodology of the most rabid leftists on here.)
_________________

Without drilling too far down into the embedded links that are required to digest the entire article

All I can ask, is are you actually falling for the tax breaks are the same as spending argujment?

Seriously? Or did I miss something.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843568 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Without drilling too far down into the embedded links that are required to digest the entire article

All I can ask, is are you actually falling for the tax breaks are the same as spending argujment?

Seriously? Or did I miss something.
_________________-

It all depends on just how long the government really thinks it is going to take them to recoup "that incentive", how many people in reality really benefit from it at a reasonable cost via some proposed stimulus and where the shortfalls will be paid and by whom, and who gets to pocket the cash at everyone else's expense and whether or not commitment is confined to a timeframe only long enough to take the money and run.

If that isn't fairly addressed then corporate welfare is just as a much about spending as "entitlements".

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843571 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 56
As for getting a cheaper plan from China, heck that's not tough...ObamaKare raised the cost of healthcare for everyone who buys it. Nothing affordable about the "affordable health care act".

I'm an independent businessman whose health insurance premiums (including co-pays and deductibles) were running about $15,000/yr for myself and $16,000/yr for my wife.

Under the Affordable Care Act, my total out-of-pocket yearly for myself is limited to $7,000/year. Because of the stipulation that one has to be without insurance 6 months, my wife is afraid to do so, so we still pay $16,000/year for her.

So, you're statement that it raises the cost of healthcare for everyone is just flat out wrong.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843572 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Another reason not to shop at Walmart. (As if I needed another reason.)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843575 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:56 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
1poorguy:"Another reason not to shop at Walmart. (As if I needed another reason.) "

Now we know why you are 'poor'.....waste your money at high priced stores!...when you can afford it, and being poor I guess you don't go very often.

On the other hand, I hit the Walmart twice a week for great fresh fruit and veggies.......and stock up on other things on weekends (sunday morning at 8am normally) on the other stuff....


They're doing very good without out, and I'm sure they'll not miss another 'poorguy'.

If you are that 'poor' you could probably redeem your food stamps at the Walmart with no hassles, too.


Then again, if you are poor because you don't have a job, there's a waiting line for those wanting jobs at Walmart so you might have to work in a fast food place, scrubbing out the deep fat fryers every night before closing at midnight (really cruddy job), or washing the floors or the windows at McDonalds or Arbys or your fast food or slow food place of your choice.

The 'poor' get good value for their money at Walmart. As 'poorguy' maybe you should try it.....


t.



t

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JohnEBgood Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843578 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:01 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
telegraph wrote:

WHen you find the tree for Obama to shake to get another trillion a year, let me know and then you'll be able to afford 'universal health care' for all the weenies and queenies and deadbeats...in the mean time, you'll find that more and more will have to fund their own health care and spend less on cigarettes and booze and lottery tickets and new games for their game console. And fewer trips to the casino or bingo hall. or drug dealer.

Sounds like you're talking about the famous 47%

Are you a ghost writer for Mitt Romney?

Jack

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MetroChick Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843582 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
I'm really not into pointing the finger/blaming companies nor states who choose legal ways to follow ACA, even if that means not explanding healthcare coverage - such as how some states are opting out of setting up their own exchanges and are going with the Fed option.

IMO any "blame" lies in those who drafted ACA since it seems it was poorly and quickly done by those who just cared about a "win" on the issue and not what would really be best for citizens and the country long-term.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843583 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Under the Affordable Care Act, my total out-of-pocket yearly for myself is limited to $7,000/year.

++++++++++++++++

And what's your out of pocket to your employees that's now mandatory? You're claiming that your out of pocket is limited to $7,000 a year?

Premiums and co-pays and everything capped at $7,000?

I'm calling BS on that...no way your out of pocket is capped that low.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MetroChick Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843584 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Another reason not to shop at Walmart. (As if I needed another reason.)

But do you own Walmart through any of your investments?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843586 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
IMO any "blame" lies in those who drafted ACA since it seems it was poorly and quickly done by those who just cared about a "win" on the issue and not what would really be best for citizens and the country long-term.

_____________

It was a good stratergy...pass a bad bill then fix it in the future. Basically they destroyed the health insurance industry and will just wait for their next chance to reform it via "Universal Healthcare".

Each reform will be worse. I already miss the old system.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843587 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:28 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
But do you own Walmart through any of your investments?

Wouldn't matter. Walmart got their money from the issuance of the stock. Anything that happens to those shares later is irrelevant to them (in terms of supporting their business). The shares are basically just trading cards after the initial offering is done. I sell to you, you sell to me. Doesn't matter to Walmart.

It is quite possible that one of the funds I have in my IRA or 401K have WMT in them. Don't know for sure. In my brokerage I do NOT own WMT. But again, it wouldn't really matter if I did. It doesn't help Barry Bonds if I acquire his trading card (nor Topps, for that matter...they got their money from the card long ago).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843588 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:29 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It all depends on just how long the government really thinks it is going to take them to recoup "that incentive", how many people in reality really benefit from it at a reasonable cost via some proposed stimulus and where the shortfalls will be paid and by whom, and who gets to pocket the cash at everyone else's expense and whether or not commitment is confined to a timeframe only long enough to take the money and run

_____________________


But does anyone pocket the cash at everyone's expense?

If they are taking the money and running what type of businesses are we talking about, and would it be cheaper to simply cross the border?

If the capital expenditure is so low that relocation is that simple, what incentive do you use to keep them even in the US ?

You are right when you say it depends. It sure as heck does. It depends on a huge array of things.

Comparing it even remotely to spending is IMO, a rather absurd argument to make.

Although I do admit, I wish we had a system where neither side could really play these games with taxes. But neither side really seems to want that

Need more revenue consumer tax goes from 8 - 9 or 38 - 39 or 46 to 72
A little kick back for essentials to everyone whatever an average person spends on food and a little more and that's it

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sano Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843589 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
When "conservatives" argue that subsidizing behemoths at the cost of 140,000 per employee doesn't trickle down into the tax bill that they themselves do not want to pay, but does enrich their balance sheets is what? The other side of a lopsided equation?

Is this the verbiage that finally resonates with people?

Previously I'd heard people discussing how corporations were 'privatizing profit while socializing the expense" of the business.

Either way, it's the same thing. A business either takes care of its labor force, or the taxpayers take care of that business's labor force.

Or we just create and accept a caste sytem and declare low level laborers and retirees will be taken out and shot when they are no longer self-sufficient and/or productive.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843590 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 11
And what's your out of pocket to your employees that's now mandatory? You're claiming that your out of pocket is limited to $7,000 a year?

Premiums and co-pays and everything capped at $7,000?

I'm calling BS on that...no way your out of pocket is capped that low.


One, no employees.

Two, yes facts are stubborn things, $7,000 total. I live in Florida which does not participate in the ACA, so that puts me into the national pool. I'm 61 years of age, the premium is $432/mo. with a total yearly out of pocket capped at $7,000.

Here's a link to PCIP with the rates for Florida. You can click on "benefits" to see what's covered and what the yearly out-of-pocket caps are.

https://webaccounts.geha.com/public/pcip/rates/rates.asp?id=...

It's funny that you call BS without investigating first....

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843593 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:36 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It was a good stratergy...pass a bad bill then fix it in the future. Basically they destroyed the health insurance industry and will just wait for their next chance to reform it via "Universal Healthcare".

The "good old days" argument, eh? Well, that health insurance industry that "they basically destroyed" was extremely dysfunctional.

It had as its core model, increasingly excluding those who needed it. It wasn't changed because everyone was having a good time.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843596 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The "good old days" argument, eh? Well, that health insurance industry that "they basically destroyed" was extremely dysfunctional.

______________

Maybe, but I had better coverage that cost less. Maybe it wasn't perfect, but I never had a problem with it and would take it again in a heartbeat.

I have no doubt some people are better off under the new systerm (those who get their insurance paid by others). But that doesn't make it cheaper or affordable...it just means someone else is paying for it. Nothing was done in ObamaKare to bring down the cost or even attempt to maintain it. The law was about increasing access, not affordability.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843597 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But does anyone pocket the cash at everyone's expense?

An example you might find acceptable to being very representative of that is Soladrya and every other business that went bankrupt while skinning the cat prior to the bankruptcy and after in a variety of ways. Apple might not go bankrupt but I guarantee you they shouldn't be getting grants and subsidies. You don't think the big wad of cash they got on their balance sheet has anything at all to do with how well they eat out of the trough?

If they are taking the money and running what type of businesses are we talking about, and would it be cheaper to simply cross the border?

They are doing both. Bankrupting under one name, and starting up under another or in some instances the parent plays one game, while one of their LLCs do another.

If the capital expenditure is so low that relocation is that simple, what incentive do you use to keep them even in the US ?

Oh, we're way past "simple". We might start asking ourselves what incentive is there anymore for the regular Joe Blow to stay, short of building a wall to keep them here or threatening to charge an exit tax on already taxed money (something the behemoths not concern themselves with, at least for now).

You are right when you say it depends. It sure as heck does. It depends on a huge array of things.

Comparing it even remotely to spending is IMO, a rather absurd argument to make.


Not really. Calling those who paid into SS and Medicare for decades leaches or justly need to be made the sacrificial lambs, might reach that caliber though. (And, no, I am not saying you did)

Although I do admit, I wish we had a system where neither side could really play these games with taxes. But neither side really seems to want that

That's right.

Need more revenue consumer tax goes from 8 - 9 or 38 - 39 or 46 to 72
A little kick back for essentials to everyone whatever an average person spends on food and a little more and that's it


Not sure what you said here, but I will say, kickbacks seems to be the winning game for anyone that can pull them off (legally or illegally, as it may be).

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843599 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Two, yes facts are stubborn things, $7,000 total. I live in Florida which does not participate in the ACA, so that puts me into the national pool. I'm 61 years of age, the premium is $432/mo. with a total yearly out of pocket capped at $7,000.

_________________

So your annual premium alone is $5K...and co-pays are capped at $2,000 and you believe this? (total of $7,000)

Yeah, hopefully you won't need anything major but if you think you're capped that low, you need to read the fine print.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843601 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The law was about increasing access, not affordability.
_______________-

I wouldn't go so far as to say it was about increasing access. More like controlling All of those who have access.

I wouldn't go to a doctor today unless my arm was dangling from a thread, most likely to find out that a shot of whiskey and a saw is suitable treatment at my age, unless they could figure out a way to put me through treatments that does no one a lick of good, including me, but they could bill for.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843602 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:51 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Maybe, but I had better coverage that cost less. Maybe it wasn't perfect, but I never had a problem with it and would take it again in a heartbeat.

I have no doubt some people are better off under the new systerm (those who get their insurance paid by others). But that doesn't make it cheaper or affordable...it just means someone else is paying for it. Nothing was done in ObamaKare to bring down the cost or even attempt to maintain it. The law was about increasing access, not affordability.
<

Yep. Left wing arguments for Obamacare always boil down to "We had to do something..." and when challenged to point out salient features of the 2,400 page bill, they invariably chant "no pre-existing conditions" or the 26 year old child thing. Okay, great. 10 pages down, 2,390 to go.

Meanwhile, restaurants are slashing hours for employees and no small business is ever going to hire employee 50 unless they're growing so fast they need 100. Health care costs will shoot up as 30 million more people demand the full buffet of options. Defensive medicine will continue as there was no tort reform anywhere to be had.

But as an added "bonus", we now have the federal government setting the freaking standards. Good luck to libs and their long lines.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843604 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I have no doubt some people are better off under the new systerm...

Quite a switch in position from the original one I responded to just moments ago where you claimed it raised costs for everyone.

But that doesn't make it cheaper or affordable...it just means someone else is paying for it. Nothing was done in ObamaKare to bring down the cost or even attempt to maintain it. The law was about increasing access, not affordability.

Well, I (surprisingly) have a slightly different take. Being an independent businessman meant that I couldn't get group rates for my insurance, so in effect, my higher rates were subsidizing all those who got company paid benefits. Obamacare leveled that playing field so it looks to you as though it raised your costs and it looks to me as though it lowered mine. But that's what happens to both sides when the field is skewed and then made more balanced.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MetroChick Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843605 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It was a good stratergy...pass a bad bill then fix it in the future.

Or in the future our cr@ppy 2-party system just uses it as another thing to fight about and play tug-o-way, and while our country is stuck doing that, other countries who've got their act together on at least this issue more forward into a productive future for their citizens.

I've accepted our government - and maybe our country as a whole - is now more interested in fighting about issues than actually solving problems. But I guess it's like "consulting" - constantly dealing with issues creates an on-going job - even if those issues are of one's own making - while solving a problem might mean the job is no longer necessary.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843606 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"
It was a good stratergy...pass a bad bill then fix it in the future. Basically they destroyed the health insurance industry and will just wait for their next chance to reform it via "Universal Healthcare".

Each reform will be worse. I already miss the old system. "


---


Worse...it's all a sham. THey are collecting 10 years of taxes to pay for five years of programs.

IT's a desired 'failure' from day 1.

What happens in 10 years when suddenly they find they don't have HALF the money to keep running the program?

Can you say MASSIVE MASSIVE new taxes, major rationing of everything and every medical procedure and test.......

It's a train wreck from day one, designed to self destruct in 10 years.

THen, they'll tell you they can't end it, or go back (Nothing will be left of the private insurance or private doctor industry)...... and it will all collapse upon itself...



t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MetroChick Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843610 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Wouldn't matter. Walmart got their money from the issuance of the stock. Anything that happens to those shares later is irrelevant to them (in terms of supporting their business). The shares are basically just trading cards after the initial offering is done. I sell to you, you sell to me. Doesn't matter to Walmart.

Of course it does because they can always issue more stock. Sounds like an excuse to me because you don't want to admit you're a part owner of Walmart as you probably own some of it's stock.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rubberthinking Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843611 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Nobody has to work at Walmart.

Ed


sure "nobody" can sit home and wait for the checks till the checks run out.

You think 'everybody' has what it takes not to work at Walmart?

You dont know squat. Look around you man. Not everybody has the wherewithal to do better.

Dave

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843613 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Wouldn't matter. Walmart got their money from the issuance of the stock. Anything that happens to those shares later is irrelevant to them (in terms of supporting their business). The shares are basically just trading cards after the initial offering is done. I sell to you, you sell to me. Doesn't matter to Walmart."


No wonder libs are the worst in the finance world!....

Yes, Walmart got money from issuing stock...but they still hold some,and they likely have stock option plans and employee purchase plans......

THey also likely have to borrow - for things like building new buildings in new locations as they expand worldwide and issue BONDS..


the ratings and interest rates on those bonds will be based upon their performance, which is directly shown in the stock prices.

YOu know, those investors expect a RETURN on their investments. Dividends for stock and interest on bonds. And they expect to see that stock go up year after year as the company succeeds.

Only a lib totally disconnects stock price from company performance and need to maintain an ever increasing stock price.

Maybe that is how they did the 'financially finagling in the ACA...where it magically runs out of cash in 10 years, but they don't worry about that.....they just double taxes on everyone......maybe a 20% VAT to catch the middle class big time.

Even libs wouldn't buy a SOlyndra stock at 'bargain prices' , say $2, when it had been at $200...... oh, right,...just a trading card....I got it..... but just think, you could have bought a '200 dollar stock' for 2 bucks at the end!......heh heh...



t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843616 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Of course it does because they can always issue more stock.

So? They get their money from that initial offering, and then it's back to trading cards. Completely irrelevant to anyone not participating in the offering**.

And I already said one of my funds might own WMT. I don't know (and don't care). You want to affect Walmart, don't buy from their offering. THAT could hurt them. Me not buying shares you already own is a non-event to Walmart.

Me not buying their cheap crap that doesn't last a month without breaking? That hurts them. And I'm going to go on hurting them.

1poorguy

**OK...there are dilutive effects of more shares being on the market. Which affects shareholders. But, again, Walmart gets its money from the offering, and from selling garbage to rubes. It gets NOTHING if you sell me your shares.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843618 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It gets NOTHING if you sell me your shares.
_____________________

But it does increase or decrease the value of those shares and their balance sheet, and ability to get financing, etc. to expand.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rubberthinking Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843622 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But it does increase or decrease the value of those shares and their balance sheet, and ability to get financing, etc. to expand.

assets, liabilities, equity.......but no shares or value of shares is directly on the balance sheet......just worth thinking about for you before you post......

Dave

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843626 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But it does increase or decrease the value of those shares and their balance sheet, and ability to get financing, etc. to expand.

Value of shares, yes.

Ability to get financing? In principle, yes. In practice, I doubt it makes much difference. Walmart is enormous. Assuming they even need credit (I have no idea how much cash they have...I assume a lot), I very much doubt they would have any trouble getting it. While I can't conceive of a way this could occur, but suppose WMT went to $1. Pink sheets. And yet they were still very profitable, making money. The stock dropping to $1 would not affect that. It would make the execs unhappy since their compensation is going to have a large component of stock. But it does not affect whether or not the business is doing well.

Among the stocks I follow (including my company) I see this disconnect all the time. Company is doing well, stock drops anyway. Doesn't affect how well the company is doing, nor even reflect it. It's just that today people don't want the Barry Bonds card. They want the Randy Johnson card. Tomorrow they may want the <insert name here> card. Doesn't both Topps (or Randy).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843628 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Ability to get financing? In principle, yes. In practice, I doubt it makes much difference. Walmart is enormous. Assuming they even need credit (I have no idea how much cash they have...I assume a lot), I very much doubt they would have any trouble getting it. While I can't conceive of a way this could occur, but suppose WMT went to $1. Pink sheets. And yet they were still very profitable, making money. The stock dropping to $1 would not affect that. It would make the execs unhappy since their compensation is going to have a large component of stock. But it does not affect whether or not the business is doing well.
___________________________________

LOL

That is among the most silly paragraphs ever writtn on PA

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843629 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
That would make us the only industrialized nation, indeed nearly the only nation, that does not recognize the need for universal health care.

Just to play devil's advocate here, the "everyone else is doing it" argument by itself is very weak. There are more compelling arguments. Like it would be cheaper than subsidizing the ERs as we presently do. Like it would make American business more competitive because a huge expense they presently pay to employ someone would disappear. Etc.

Those reasons are why "everyone else is doing it".

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843630 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I very much doubt they would have any trouble getting it. While I can't conceive of a way this could occur, but suppose WMT went to $1. Pink sheets. And yet they were still very profitable, making money. The stock dropping to $1 would not affect that. It would make the execs unhappy since their compensation is going to have a large component of stock. But it does not affect whether or not the business is doing well.
____________

It might make guys who live for hostile takeovers very happy.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843633 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Just to play devil's advocate here, the "everyone else is doing it" argument by itself is very weak. There are more compelling arguments. Like it would be cheaper than subsidizing the ERs as we presently do. Like it would make American business more competitive because a huge expense they presently pay to employ someone would disappear. Etc.

____________

Yeh, it just disappeared from their pocket to yours. That's where it is now. And don't think the way it is set up, it is going to be cheap(er) because "the government" is taking care of it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ekavana186 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843634 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
Ed
sure "nobody" can sit home and wait for the checks till the checks run out.
You think 'everybody' has what it takes not to work at Walmart?
You dont know squat. Look around you man. Not everybody has the wherewithal to do better.
Dave


So what you seem to be saying is WalMart hires only from the bottom of the barrel? People who are unskilled and inept, people who can't get it together? And WalMart hires them. It sounds like WalMart is doing a great service to give these folks something to do to make some earnings.

Sounds like we should be thanking them instead of berating them.

Ed

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843637 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Just to play devil's advocate here, the "everyone else is doing it" argument by itself is very weak. There are more compelling arguments. Like it would be cheaper than subsidizing the ERs as we presently do. Like it would make American business more competitive because a huge expense they presently pay to employ someone would disappear. Etc.

Those reasons are why "everyone else is doing it".


Finally someone with brains weighs in. If I thought the feds could do a halfway decent job of managing a single payer system I'd be all for it. However...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: goofnoff Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843643 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Nobody has to work at Walmart

Nobody had to work in the cola mines, either. There was always the poor house. Want to bring back poor houses and debtors prisons?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: goofnoff Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843644 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Those reasons are why "everyone else is doing it".

Actually everyone else does it because it is the moral and humane thing to do. If you are making the cost effectiveness argument, letting people die is more cost effective, and Teavangie supported.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843645 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
What happens in 10 years when suddenly they find they don't have HALF the money to keep running the program?

The conservative "job creating tax cuts"--from start of 2002 through end of 2011. They crashed and burned many times. Conservatives ran out of "other people's money" to fund further conservative excesses.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843649 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 12:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
So what you seem to be saying is WalMart hires only from the bottom of the barrel? People who are unskilled and inept, people who can't get it together? And WalMart hires them. It sounds like WalMart is doing a great service to give these folks something to do to make some earnings.

Sounds like we should be thanking them instead of berating them.


We are thanking them.....through Medicaid and Food Stamps. So, if you are for cutting those programs, does that make you an anti-capitalist?

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843653 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 1:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Two, yes facts are stubborn things, $7,000 total. I live in Florida which does not participate in the ACA, so that puts me into the national pool. I'm 61 years of age, the premium is $432/mo. with a total yearly out of pocket capped at $7,000.

Here's a link to PCIP with the rates for Florida. You can click on "benefits" to see what's covered and what the yearly out-of-pocket caps are.


Just to pop in for a second, but when I clicked over to benefits, it stated that the total out-of-pocket (deductible plus copay) is capped at $4,000. So that would put your total at $9,000 - not $7,000. Or is there a Florida-specific provision? I think the 'benefits' link isn't state-specific....

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Stonewashed Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843655 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 1:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Nobody had to work in the cola mines, either. There was always the poor house. Want to bring back poor houses and debtors prisons?
_____________

That's what places like The Bronx and entire cities like Philadelphia and Baltimore are for, isn't it? The gangsters will keep them in line and where they belong. No? They know who signs their paycheck.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ekavana186 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843659 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 1:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Nobody had to work in the cola mines, either. There was always the poor house. Want to bring back poor houses and debtors prisons?

We talking Middle Ages Europe now? You must have seen Les Miz.

BTW when did Coca Cola start mining for product?

Couldn't resist,

Ed

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843672 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 1:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If you are making the cost effectiveness argument, letting people die is more cost effective, and Teavangie supported.

OK. I agree. I was assuming that option was off the table, however. We've already demonstrated with the requirement that ERs must treat everyone without regard for ability to pay. So we already have "moral and humane" (at least in principle). I was just going from there.

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SGIZ1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843686 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 2:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"If I thought the feds could do a halfway decent job of managing a single payer system I'd be all for it. "

That's the difference between the right and left, the left doesn't care one bit about the governments ability/competence in managing/running a single payer system, its as simple as "we want it" with no thought about consequences, cost, etc.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843728 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 3:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
albaby

Just to pop in for a second, but when I clicked over to benefits, it stated that the total out-of-pocket (deductible plus copay) is capped at $4,000. So that would put your total at $9,000 - not $7,000.

Here is a quote from the site and the link for it:

Your combined out-of-pocket costs for in-network and out-of-network covered services cannot be more than $7,000 per year. The maximum is even less if you use only in-network providers.
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/features/choices/pre-existing-...

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843734 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:18 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I'm an independent businessman whose health insurance premiums (including co-pays and deductibles) were running about $15,000/yr for myself and $16,000/yr for my wife.

Under the Affordable Care Act, my total out-of-pocket yearly for myself is limited to $7,000/year. Because of the stipulation that one has to be without insurance 6 months, my wife is afraid to do so, so we still pay $16,000/year for her.

So, you're statement that it raises the cost of healthcare for everyone is just flat out wrong.


To be fair, your specific plan is getting $5 billion in federal dollars to subsidize your cost.

And, you are actually capped at $4000 out of pocket, after you pay for the $3500-$4900 annual premium. So about $7500 to $9000 max expenses depending on age.

For 2013, the maximum you will pay out-of-pocket for covered services in a calendar year when you use an in-network provider is $4,000.

You basically on a quasi medicare disability plan when you consider how much it is subsidized by the fed.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843739 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Your combined out-of-pocket costs for in-network and out-of-network covered services cannot be more than $7,000 per year. The maximum is even less if you use only in-network providers.
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/features/choices/pre-existing-......

Poz


You are mixing up the terms.

You have two caps. In-Network cap is $4000 plus the premium.

Out-of-network cap is $7000, plus the premium.

The maximum you will pay out-of-pocket for covered services in a calendar year is $4,000 in-network/$7,000 out-of-network.

http://www.pciplan.com/forms/pdfs/2013BenefitsSummary.pdf

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843740 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You basically on a quasi medicare disability plan when you consider how much it is subsidized by the fed.

I wouldn't need Obamacare if I could get insurance at group rates. As I said in an earlier post, in effect individual purchasers of health insurance have been subsidizing group plans by paying much higher premiums.

All depends on how you look at it.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843741 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I wouldn't need Obamacare if I could get insurance at group rates. As I said in an earlier post, in effect individual purchasers of health insurance have been subsidizing group plans by paying much higher premiums.

All depends on how you look at it.


That's right. You got yours, which was the 1 and only goal for ALL supporters of Obamacare.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Goofyhoofy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843742 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 73
Nothing affordable about the "affordable health care act".

I wrote a month or so back that I got a $500 check from Aetna as a rebate on my 2011 payments because the law now requires they spend at least 80% of premiums on, you know, health care, rather than limousines, hookers, and CEO bonuses.

Last week Aetna sent the annual renewal notice to Mrs. Goofy for her policy which every year tells us all the swell things they are doing to improve themselves, and, oh by the way, here's the rate increase. To our great surprise, for the first time EVER it is a decrease. It's only -$10 a month, but that is welcome since every year past it has gone up by +$20 or so. You suppose it could be linked to that 80% thing?

Sadly I will not be getting a check from them this year, or even having my rate lowered, since I am no longer a customer of Aetna. I have moved over of to some newfangled plan which is costing me significantly less, and having used it for 10 months and on several occasions with different doctors, I am highly satisfied. It is called "Medicare", and I don't know exactly how it works, but it is "single payer", whatever that means.

I just hope the government doesn't get ahold of it, or they will ruin it fer sure.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843743 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Here is a quote from the site and the link for it:

Your combined out-of-pocket costs for in-network and out-of-network covered services cannot be more than $7,000 per year. The maximum is even less if you use only in-network providers.


Ah, I see the confusion. When they refer to "out-of-pocket costs," that does not include premiums. That refers to your deductibles, co-pays and other expenses:

After you pay the deductible, you’ll pay 20% of medical costs in-network. In 2012, the maximum you’ll pay out of pocket, for covered services in- and out-of-network combined, is $7,000. This does not include premium payments. The maximum is even less if you use only in-network providers.

http://www.healthcare.gov/news/brochures/pcip-federally-run....

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843748 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I wouldn't need Obamacare if I could get insurance at group rates.

While I have no disagreement with you on this point, nothing kept your state from allowing insurance companies to pool their risk in a greater manner to provide such insurance.

It would be nice if something like the SBA on a state level provided group rates. It would be even better if there were half a dozen member organizations that allowed you to chose the plan that makes the most sense for you and your wife.

While PCIP may be an improvement for you as it pertains to cost, we can only hope that it is as flexible when it comes to in-network providers. You will still save some regardless but $9000 Out-of-Pocket (OOP) is certainly better than $12000 OOP if you have to go Out-of-Network.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SGIZ1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843753 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"It is called "Medicare", and I don't know exactly how it works, but it is "single payer", whatever that means.

I just hope the government doesn't get ahold of it, or they will ruin it fer sure. "

You are aware medicare is bankrupt, yes?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843754 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
albaby

Ah, I see the confusion.

Let's assume you are correct and I have to pay the premiums plus $7,000 (I am not stating that this is the case but getting past the point for a moment....besides I have friends who are lawyers & there's really no end to the possibilities for argument....and I've currently got a bout of bronchitis and not up to the challenge). That would still work out to be much cheaper than the $16,000 my wife currently pays for her health insurance.

My entry into this discussion came about when a poster stated that no one benefited with lower rates because of Obamacare.

In that context, I think I've made the point I wanted to by showing that it just wasn't a factually correct statement.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843756 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 4:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"It is called "Medicare", and I don't know exactly how it works, but it is "single payer", whatever that means.

I just hope the government doesn't get ahold of it, or they will ruin it fer sure. "

You are aware medicare is bankrupt, yes?
_____________________________________

I know I am desperately looking forward to when I get there in a little bit. I know my doctor does not take it, so oh boy what a treat, and when they cut the reimbursement a little to teach those greedy doctors a lesson I should have no problems at all

Damn greedy doctors sending folks for tests they don't need, we'll teach them a lesson

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843806 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 6:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Hawkwin

While I have no disagreement with you on this point, nothing kept your state from allowing insurance companies to pool their risk in a greater manner to provide such insurance.

There is actually a law in Florida which makes it illegal to band together to form a group for insurance purposes. (We have the best government money can buy)

When I first looked into PCIP one critical element for me was whether my primary care physician was in-network or not. He was as was every other specialist that either my wife or I had seen in the last 10 years.

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843824 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
PosFCF wrote: I'm an independent businessman whose health insurance premiums (including co-pays and deductibles) were running about $15,000/yr for myself and $16,000/yr for my wife. Under the Affordable Care Act, my total out-of-pocket yearly for myself is limited to $7,000/year. Because of the stipulation that one has to be without insurance 6 months, my wife is afraid to do so, so we still pay $16,000/year for her.

Did you have a catastrophic health care policy? You expressed your "premiums" as including co-pays and deductibles which puts apples and oranges in the same bowl. If you had a catastrophic health care plan, your out-of-pocket could have been limited to, say, $7,000-10,000 and your premiums would have beneficially reflected this.

In addition, you could have purchased a relatively inexpensive policy to pay the deductible in the event of an accident and/or another inexpensive policy to cover the three most frequently incurred debilitating conditions (cancer, heart attack and stroke) in addition to providing a death benefit--all a much better alternative to Obamacare.

Don't credit Obamacare as rescuing you from something you could have taken care of yourself by intelligently purchasing insurance products to meet your specific needs.

However, if you or your wife have a pre-existing condition--which Americans constitute a small percentage (25 million = .080%) of all covered persons (312.8 million)--then Obamacare is just what the doctor ordered...for you.

That an entire health care system and all 50 states have been thrown into utter chaos for the benefit of .080% of the population is why Obamacare was so roundly criticized before Nancy "Chief Libtard" Pelosi urged Congress to sign the 2,700 page bill before anyone even knew what was in it.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843826 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 10:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Quoted: After making a big deal of publicly supporting the Affordable Care Act, Walmart—the nation’s largest private sector employer—is joining the ranks of companies seeking to avoid their obligation to provide employees with health insurance as required by Obamacare.

Obligation? Since when are employers "obligated" to provide health care for their employees?

Health care became an employment benefit when wage controls were put in place during World War II. Otherwise, no employer has an obligation to pay anything but wages for work performed.

Which is why companies are now doing whatever they can to keep government from telling them what to do in this, a supposedly free country.

Grow up!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843834 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/10/2012 11:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Did you have a catastrophic health care policy? You expressed your "premiums" as including co-pays and deductibles which puts apples and oranges in the same bowl. If you had a catastrophic health care plan, your out-of-pocket could have been limited to, say, $7,000-10,000 and your premiums would have beneficially reflected this.

No, it was not a catastrophic care policy, it was a guaranteed issue policy following the COBRA period from a previous employer who provided health insurance as one of its benefits.

When I state $15,000 which included premiums and co-pays, I am not mixing anything. It is a reasonable way to state actual out-of-pocket expenses during a calendar year. A way in which other plans might be effectively measured against each other in terms of their cost to the indidual.

However, if you or your wife have a pre-existing condition--which Americans constitute a small percentage (25 million = .080%) of all covered persons (312.8 million)--then Obamacare is just what the doctor ordered...for you.

Yes, both my wife and I have pre-existing conditions. I have no idea where you get your numbers, but by the time people reach about the age of 50, a much higher percentage have pre-existing conditions.

That an entire health care system and all 50 states have been thrown into utter chaos for the benefit of .080% of the population is why Obamacare was so roundly criticized....

Estimates of about 50 million Americans uninsured, and growing each year as a dysfunctional health insurance industry kept either eliminating those who might cost money (i.e. those with pre-existing conditions) or through rate hikes that took the rates to unsustainable levels were the drivers of health insurance reform.

Mitt Romney signed into law a very similar plan when he was Governor and I'm pretty sure Nancy Pelosi didn't have anything to do with that.

As far as shopping around is concerned, if you think I was paying $30,000/year for my wife and I, and didn't want to see if alternatives existed, then I guess it would be easier to dismiss my tale as one of someone too ignorant to shop.

I have found that if I give, by default, other people credit for having the same level of common sense that I ascribe to my own self (a version of the "Golden Rule"), then when I see them take a direction that I wouldn't have I might be able to learn why. If however, I denigrate and demonize them, I remain ignorant when maybe I could have learned something.

Poz

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ModernViking Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843846 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 1:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The new law requires gold plated benefits that can cost $14,000 a year for 'family coverage' and Walmart would be required to likely pay 90% of that.

Now, for someone making 8 or 9 bucks an hour at an 'entry level' job - like flipping burgers, stocking shelves, etc.....you can't afford to about double their 'employee costs' by providing them insurance that takes their total compensation to $18 /hour.


I don't see where the employer is obligated to pick up 90% of the cost of the plan.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843856 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 6:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
PosFCF wrote: I have no idea where you get your numbers, but by the time people reach about the age of 50, a much higher percentage have pre-existing conditions.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/fact-check-mitt...

The Affordable Care Act, on the other hand, created special health care plans in 2010 for people who have pre-existing conditions, and by 2014 it will prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone because of a pre-existing condition.

It is not a small population who would be cut from health care coverage under a proposal similar to what Romney has suggested. A Health and Human Services report published in January 2011 estimated that between 50 million and 129 million people currently have a pre-existing condition in the eyes of insurance companies. Twenty-five million of those do not have health insurance, according to the report. That number does not take into account those who have had gaps in coverage, suggesting a much larger number of people have pre-existing conditions but have not had continuous coverage. [...]

But some people look at that generally low enrollment in the state and federal high-risk pools and wonder if the number of uninsured with pre-existing conditions is as large as 25 million.

It’s like saying everyone who lives on the Gulf Coast is at risk of dying whenever there is a hurricane, said Ed Haislmaier, a senior research fellow in health policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Read his argument here.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/06/saving-the-...

Haislmaier does not know what, specifically, Romney would suggest to fix the problem of uninsured people with pre-existing conditions.

But Haislmaier has written extensively on the subject, and said the best way to do it would be to extend the HIPAA protections to the rest of the insurance market, which he said have worked for people in employer-sponsored health insurance plans.

The flaw was that Congress didn’t extend those HIPAA protections to the individual market, Haislmaier believes. ”That’s what the conservative solution would be,” he said. “Some reasonable changes to the rules, which are essentially finishing what was left undone when you fixed 90 percent.”

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843857 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 6:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
PosFCF wrote: No, it was not a catastrophic care policy, it was a guaranteed issue policy following the COBRA period from a previous employer who provided health insurance as one of its benefits.

But you could've gotten a catastrophic care policy along with other policies as I described, and spent far less than you're spending now. With the money saved, you could put that into a kind of self-insured fund (Health Savings Account) that has tax benefits and grows on a tax deferred basis.

There are illnesses that ruin your week, and then there are those that ruin your year and maybe your life. A term life insurance policy with an Accelerated Benefits Rider is often a much more sensible alterative than what you're doing now and sure beats the heck out of Obamacare.

http://www.healthplans4less.com

But when libruls get on their socialism jag, no one can suggest anything but "You pay, I pay, we all pay--the government."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843867 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 8:06 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I wrote a month or so back that I got a $500 check from Aetna as a rebate on my 2011 payments because the law now requires they spend at least 80% of premiums on, you know, health care, rather than limousines, hookers, and CEO bonuses.

Too bad we can't call that a "tax cut" because Republicans would be creaming themselves over it. Or probably not. Since it'd be something good Obama did.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JoshRandall Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843873 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 8:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Good job Walmart. Employers have zero obligation to provide healthcare to their employees. ZERO!

More companies should follow suit. This is America, not Greece.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843876 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 9:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Oddly enough, this was in the news this morning:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/10/obamacare-pre-exist...

Obamacare Pre-Existing Condition Fee To Cost Companies $63 Per Person


Your medical plan is facing an unexpected expense, so you probably are, too. It's a new, $63-per-head fee to cushion the cost of covering people with pre-existing conditions under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

The charge, buried in a recent regulation, works out to tens of millions of dollars for the largest companies, employers say. Most of that is likely to be passed on to workers.

Employee benefits lawyer Chantel Sheaks calls it a "sleeper issue" with significant financial consequences, particularly for large employers.

...

But employers already offering coverage to their workers don't see why they have to pony up for the stabilization fund, which mainly helps the individual insurance market. The redistribution puts the biggest companies on the hook for tens of millions of dollars.

--------

Group plans now directly subsidizing individual plans; at least for the next three years. So your coverage is of course cheaper for you at the cost of everyone else covered by a group plan.

Right or wrong, this sure is a messy way to provide healthcare insurance coverage.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: luckyguesser Two stars, 250 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1843884 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 10:11 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
CCinOC wrote:
...if you or your wife have a pre-existing condition--which Americans constitute a small percentage (25 million = .080%) of all covered persons (312.8 million)...
...That an entire health care system and all 50 states have been thrown into utter chaos for the benefit of .080% of the population...


At first I thought your ".080%" was a typo, but your use of the figure to attempt to advance your argument makes it clear it wasn't a typo.

Check your math CCinOC, you've calculated wrong by a factor of 100.

Mathew

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Goofyhoofy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1844057 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 50
You are aware medicare is bankrupt, yes?

Actually, no. Make that NO.

I understand that is the meme over at Fox News and other places not significantly involved with "facts", but in the real world, NO.

As examined by the Columbia Journalism Review (not an expert on "medicine", but pretty good at discerning "factual analysis":)

The word “bankrupt” is high on Romney’s list of talking points, too. A Romney spokesperson told CNN, when it asked for a response to Clinton’s charges, “Medicare will go bankrupt in 2024.” That’s when Medicare trustees now say the hospital trust fund will have a money shortfall.

But is Medicare really going bankrupt? Definitely not, says CNN. The network is correct, and the point is crucial.

http://www.cjr.org/swing_states_project/medicare_bankruptcy_...

Now it is true that if overall health care costs continue to escalate at the rate they did under the "free market" systemm, then Medicare will be "bankrupt" by 2024. Of course "bankrupt" has a different meaning here, like Social Security it doesn't mean the same thing as when a company goes bankrupt and ceases to exist, it means that it won't be able to pay 100% of claims. It might pay 95%, or 87%, or whatever, but it will still exist - and that assumes several things, such as that there will be no savings from allowing the government to competitively bid for quantity discounts on widely prescribed drugs (something the George Bush legislation expressly forbade), or that there won't be other cost-bending changes in health care. And maybe there won't, I don't know.

But "bankrupt"? Not hardly.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1844066 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/11/2012 4:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But "bankrupt"? Not hardly.

As long as there is one more dollar that can be raised through taxes, or one more doctor or hospital that will accept $0.87 on the $1.00

Medicare will never be "bankrupt"

As for "allowing the government to competitively bid for quantity discounts on widely prescribed drugs"

I get my "widely prescribed drugs" from Publix or Walmart, both of which charge $0.00 for over 300 "widely prescribed drugs"

Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MadCapitalist Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1844399 of 1977332
Subject: Re: WalMart Bails on Obamacare Date: 12/12/2012 3:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You are aware medicare is bankrupt, yes?

Actually, no. Make that NO.


Maybe not bankrupt in a legal sense, but has zero real assets and massive liabilities. That's not good.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (81) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement