Obamacare
Quote: steeldco
Aren't you the guy who made the case that the insurance companies don't have large margins? You think that out of the goodness of their hearts, they're going to just absorb the large claims and not pass along the cost to all of the other insured? That would seem to be a little naïve on your part, wouldn't it?
Yes, I said that. But it is no different than any other product you buy. As I have stated before, Wal-Mart adds in the cost of shoplifting to the customers, but we do not make a law stating they have to put everything behind a counter. We do not need to force people to buy things they do not desire to buy in the name of "fairness." As I was told many times growing up, life is not fair.
Quote:What I am championing is not a fair way, but a MORE fair way than the alternative.
The most fair thing is let people choose for themselves what they desire.
Quote: AZDuffman
The most fair thing is let people choose for themselves what they desire.
Very good. That would also pertain to choosing what a nation's health care plan should look and operate like.
Quote: AZDuffmanYes, I said that. But it is no different than any other product you buy. As I have stated before, Wal-Mart adds in the cost of shoplifting to the customers, but we do not make a law stating they have to put everything behind a counter. We do not need to force people to buy things they do not desire to buy in the name of "fairness." As I was told many times growing up, life is not fair.
BTW, I failed to mention that your spin on who absorbs costs and why is rather a silly argument, don't you think? Of course it happens everywhere. You were trying to previously imply that the costs are absorbed by the insurance companies. So you now agree that the additional costs are indeed passed on to the consumers. Yes?
Quote: steeldcoVery good. That would also pertain to choosing what a nation's health care plan should look and operate like.
There shouldn't be a "nation's health care plan." Individuals should choose their own plans.
Quote: AZDuffmanThere shouldn't be a "nation's health care plan." Individuals should choose their own plans.
I would say that people should be able to choose, including whether there is a national health care plan. Get it? It's not up to you, or me.
Quote: steeldcoI would say that people should be able to choose, including whether there is a national health care plan. Get it? It's not up to you, or me.
No, there is not supposed to be a "national plan." We do not need a national health plan anymore than we need a national food plan or national cable television plan or whatever. Socialism never works.
Quote: steeldcoYou just don't seem to get it. It's not up to you.
No, you do not seem to get it. Government is not supposed to make an equal outcome. Socialism will not work.
I want freedom, you want cheaper health insurance.
Quote: steeldcoI have freedom and yes, I want cheaper health insurance. Nobody said anything about socialism. If I was proposing something socialistic then it would be along the lines of having people of a certain IQ range be made to become doctors and then provide for everyone else for free.
But by forcing people into a plan and even calling for a national plan you are calling for socialism. By forcing people to buy something they do not want you are calling for less freedom. Forcing people of a certain IQ into medical and to provide free care is calling for slavery, actually.
Quote: steeldcoI have freedom and yes, I want cheaper health insurance.
You have freedom..... for now.....
Nobody said anything about socialism. If I was proposing something socialistic then it would be along the lines of having people of a certain IQ range be made to become doctors and then provide for everyone else for free.
You are confusing socialism with communism. Niether is good for individual freedom, but there are most definitely differences between the two.
BTW, nothing is "free".
Quote: AZDuffmanUnions fought to elect Obama, then fought for Obamacare, then fought to exempt themselves and their contracts from taxes and regulations required by it. Yes, I both blame them and think they are hypocrites for it. Pre-1980s unions were more about collective bargaining, today they are socialist tools.
To be honest here, I haven't followed the arguments lately. I'm pretty sure I'm going to get screwed whoever has the pulpit. I bow up a little bit when I see/hear the broad brush rhetoric grouping everyone into either this belief or that.
Your probably pretty accurate about pre-80's and unions being more worker representative. I am as disillusioned with the managers in unions as I am in politics. Personal perspective here it appears everyone is talking their own book, and voting that way as well. I still receive union mail and around an election they will put out some letter suggesting who would be the best labor candidate. To me it's laughable, the unions don't influence my voting decisions anymore than does the man in the moon. I'm reasonably certain there are many like me who make their own decisions along national patriotic lines of belief.
My beliefs pro union are from a long lineage of working class people who wouldn't get a fair shake if they didn't have some representation as a block. Like you said above life ain't fair.
There is plenty of good and bad with the union banner. The workers are in my case so busy trying to put food on the table they don't have the time or energy to try to get a candidate to represent them at the political level. You know yourself, there wouldn't be the safety laws or a lot of good things for workers that have come about because of unions.
Yep there are some hypocrites in charge of big labor, scoundrels even. To me its the only chance a working person has of a middle class lifestyle. Unions do also fight for worker's that don't belong to a union, that part isn't well known.
What I said above though is still true. There aren't enough union votes to sway an election. The unions always in whole support dem candidates, but it just isn't that way in reverse. There doesn't seem to be any politicians that represent workers. The union workers have been flim flamed like everyone else thinking the pols represent anyone other than themselves.
Way back, the democratic politicians used to support workers, and some unions were definitely socialist platforms. Sometimes I think they're logic boils down to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?
Quote: steeldcoYour comment stating the use of an HSA system is a better solution holds merit..
I love it, you agree with AZ, yet you still want to "champion" your socialist solution.Quote: steeldcoWhat I am championing is not a fair way, but a MORE fair way than the alternative.
This comes from a guy who "champions" the GOVERNMENT getting involved in health care???? LOL!Quote: steeldcoNobody said anything about socialism.
+1Quote: AZDuffmanThere is no "the system" involved.
This is so hard to explain to people with a socialist mentality.
+1 againQuote: AZDuffman...in fact will increase them as the younger buyer who otherwise would have "walked off" a minor issue now goes for treatment to "get their money's worth."
Yep, just like with unemployment. I always have a problem whenever I see somebody who has just lost their job run straight to the unemployment office instead of trying to find another job ASAP.
Wanna bet this steel guy didn't even bother clicking the link? (Stossel's brilliant here, BTW)Quote: AZDuffmanHere is a good description of why "getting the young to pay into the system" will not work.
Quote: petroglyph
Your probably pretty accurate about pre-80's and unions being more worker representative. I am as disillusioned with the managers in unions as I am in politics. Personal perspective here it appears everyone is talking their own book, and voting that way as well. I still receive union mail and around an election they will put out some letter suggesting who would be the best labor candidate. To me it's laughable, the unions don't influence my voting decisions anymore than does the man in the moon. I'm reasonably certain there are many like me who make their own decisions along national patriotic lines of belief.
My beliefs pro union are from a long lineage of working class people who wouldn't get a fair shake if they didn't have some representation as a block. Like you said above life ain't fair.
I come from as long a line of union people as any, former union member in my first job. But along the way I learned a few things. First, the "protect your job" thing was overrated. The only jobs that got protected were for lumps I hated working around because they were just bad employees. When it came to protecting us as a group they were useless. What they got for us was not much in relation to what we paid. And 20 years later I learned millions in our dues was being spent so Paul Castellano could shake down Frank Purdue and force him to deal with Dial Poultry in NY.
Quote:You know yourself, there wouldn't be the safety laws or a lot of good things for workers that have come about because of unions.
I would not say there would be no laws at all, though I will concede nonunion outfits had to match many union benefits to compete. But today unions seem to think their job is to sway things for *everyone* and not just their members. They want to push the USA towards socialism. Many in the union movement are socialists. They fail to understand without a profitable employer then the employee will starve.
Then there is that they support any left-wing cause, which will be quite often in conflict with member views. Ask a factory worker who is a hunter in PA how he feels about more gun laws. Unions are for collective bargaining of wages and working conditions. They are not supposed to push for social policy.
Quote:What I said above though is still true. There aren't enough union votes to sway an election. The unions always in whole support dem candidates, but it just isn't that way in reverse. There doesn't seem to be any politicians that represent workers. The union workers have been flim flamed like everyone else thinking the pols represent anyone other than themselves.
Things changed. Once Democrat pols said they "were for the working man." In the 1990s they changed this to "what about the children?" The difference is in the former you support work, in the later you are defending handouts. Unions now are more for the handout than collective bargaining.
Quote: Beethoven9th
Yep, just like with unemployment. I always have a problem whenever I see somebody who has just lost their job run straight to the unemployment office instead of trying to find another job ASAP.
On my most recent layoff I was applying for jobs that morning. I got a quick call back and she asks when I got let go.
"When were you laid off?"
"About 10:00, 10:30 maybe."
"YOU GOT LAID OFF AND ARE APPLYING AT NEW PLACES THE SAME DAY?"
I think some of the salaries paid are ridiculous. Our work was fiercely competitive, and I was definitely a contender.
Your right about some of the issues unions or aclu or splc decide to defend. It would nearly baffle me what they would choose to defend, but in all reality it was never about the worker, it was about what ever power they could acquire from the headlines. Getting every twisted individual to turn over their own personal sovereignty to them.
In the union I was in, I've seen the rep come out to the job and remove employees for non performance. Policing our own so to speak.
Whoever elected the current admin, it is a tragedy. As was the Bush admin. And Clinton.
I was a Ron Paul supporter for the last one. After seeing the way he was treated at the RNC and reading his voting record for the last twenty five years, I'm pretty much done. I didn't totally agree with the man. But he voted along constitutional lines his whole life. And when he went home he performed free medical services in his district. Those facts are easily accessible. If the American voters are not going to inform themselves and vote because of what they see on tv or some catchy slogan, we are doomed.
Good for you for staying in the fight, and we don't have to agree 100%. But there is some things that are very, very wrong and it doesn't seem like it will be corrected at the ballot box.
I don't think you agree 100% with the tea party but feel it's the best chance of righting what you see wrong? And in one of those candidate threads, I don't think I saw Scott Walker. My prediction is that will end up being the R candidate, and if it were going to be an election between principles I'd like to see Elizabeth Warren run for the D's instead of that hideous creature from Jeckyl Island.
Quote: petroglyph
Your right about some of the issues unions or aclu or splc decide to defend. It would nearly baffle me what they would choose to defend, but in all reality it was never about the worker, it was about what ever power they could acquire from the headlines. Getting every twisted individual to turn over their own personal sovereignty to them.
In the union I was in, I've seen the rep come out to the job and remove employees for non performance. Policing our own so to speak.
As to the unions I forget exactly what they are required to defend. But you must realize if they do not take a grievance then said worker might have a suit against the union. But part of what did it for me was the union defending one really bad worker we had. Sadly, the guy probably had something mentally wrong with him. He got a job on the night shift which was shall we say the kind of crew where men survived and the weak perished. He took at least twice as long as anyone else to do the same work, did not talk at all to anyone and would make funny noises. Eventually he was pulled from the night shift and worked days, where his work was no better. Management fired him on thin causes instead of the many real causes they had. And the union spent my dues to fight to get him his job back. I think they shipped him to another location. I wish they policed their own.
What kind of industry were you in? Behavior as you describe sounds more likely in a higher-skill union.
Just as polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of the Affordable Care Act, now that they have begun to see some of its provisions.Quote: AZDuffmanThe most fair thing is let people choose for themselves what they desire.
Quote: steeldcoVery good. That would also pertain to choosing what a nation's health care plan should look and operate like.
HSA's would be practically irresistible to younger adults if their benefits could accumulate year over year.Quote: steeldcoYour comment stating the use of an HSA system is a better solution holds merit. But that's not what is on the books. Get it changed but don't try to gloss over the advantage of getting the young to pay in.
So more than just member of Congress and their toadies have privileges that are banned for the rest of us.Quote: petroglyphAs of 2012, 11.3% of the American workforce was in a union. With public sector workers having the highest percentage participation rate and in that group those in protection, fire and police the highest amongst them. Those worker's didn't lose their medical benefits because of the ACA.
Ask Trumka or his nearest subordinate about the cutbacks to 30-hour work weeks and the humongous tax on their existing comprehensive luxury plans. Then watch the business mandate be delayed even further.Quote: petroglyphSo many are so quick to blame unions for everything they perceive to be wrong in this country. Including electing democratic presidents. How do so few people have so much power with so few votes? It's just plain ignorant to keep blaming the unions or the workers for everything you don't like.
Quote: AZDuffmanAs to the unions I forget exactly what they are required to defend. But you must realize if they do not take a grievance then said worker might have a suit against the union. But part of what did it for me was the union defending one really bad worker we had. Sadly, the guy probably had something mentally wrong with him. He got a job on the night shift which was shall we say the kind of crew where men survived and the weak perished. He took at least twice as long as anyone else to do the same work, did not talk at all to anyone and would make funny noises. Eventually he was pulled from the night shift and worked days, where his work was no better. Management fired him on thin causes instead of the many real causes they had. And the union spent my dues to fight to get him his job back. I think they shipped him to another location. I wish they policed their own.
What kind of industry were you in? Behavior as you describe sounds more likely in a higher-skill union.
Power Lineman. To be a Journeyman lineman takes about 14 years of experience and training.
IBEW local 77/125,* not a representative.
I too have seen people on the job who had no business being there.
What business are you in? And, do you receive any monetary compensation for posting on blogs/forums?
Quote: SanchoPanzaSo more than just member of Congress and their toadies have privileges that are banned for the rest of us.
Ask Trumka or his nearest subordinate about the cutbacks to 30-hour work weeks and the humongous tax on their existing comprehensive luxury plans. Then watch the business mandate be delayed even further.
I tried for 40 years to get people to inform themselves about the decisions being made that would affect them and their families. Mostly no one cared. As long as they are fed and entertained they are disinterested in what's going on above their pay grade.
Congressional lifetime percs gag me. People don't seem to care that of maybe last year they voted to not have to even vote on continual raises forever for themselves so as not to embarrass each other near election times. The country is falling into an abyss and what I think are traitors get raises every year in perpetuity and percs for life for themselves and extended families!!
Trumka? Again, same thing. The slaves are so busy trying to feed their families they don't have the time or energy to wonder about what the master is doing.
If that wasn't/isn't bad enough look at Hoffa for crying out loud. It wasn't enough for Jimmy to loot the pension fund, now the kid gets a stab at it.
In their defense though, it's pretty hard to keep anyone honest when they can dip into a several billion dollar pile of money.
Instead of a permanent pension for the congress critters I think they should be tried. Watch that revolving door, Geitner just went to work for some big bank after the "favors" performed while at the treasury. Janet Yellon follows Bernanke, who followed Greenspan, serial bubble blowers.
Quote: petroglyphPower Lineman. To be a Journeyman lineman takes about 14 years of experience and training.
As I thought. Higher skill unions tend to police behavior better. 100 years ago higher skill unions would have nothing to do with lower skill ones.
Quote:What business are you in? And, do you receive any monetary compensation for posting on blogs/forums?
Currently I work in the title and mortgage industry. Have done just about all phases of mortgage as well as gas well abstracting and searches. Additionally I have a few side-hustles of being a notary and dealing at monte carlo night parties.
I do not receive anything for posting in forums, I wish I did as I do it enough it would add to the side hustles.
Quote: AZDuffmanAs I thought. Higher skill unions tend to police behavior better. 100 years ago higher skill unions would have nothing to do with lower skill ones.
Currently I work in the title and mortgage industry. Have done just about all phases of mortgage as well as gas well abstracting and searches. Additionally I have a few side-hustles of being a notary and dealing at monte carlo night parties.
I do not receive anything for posting in forums, I wish I did as I do it enough it would add to the side hustles.
Cool.
Your not the guy to talk to about the mbs/cdo squared and cubed real estate and rehypothecated pm derivative etf's my pension invested in are ya?
Those ninja loan securities as collateral for tier one capitol reserve fractional lending just doesn't seem like a good investment to me, but at least they offer a 1.05% return. lol
At the bottom of your posts where you mention the Roman Empire. My saying back in the day was "Rome wasn't built in a day, but then again I wasn't on that crew"
Quote: AZDuffmanNow I know you cannot be serious. Have you seen all the crying from Obama and other liberals over the very minor "sequester" cuts? And keeping taxes low is not in the liberal mindset. All that happens is a built-in increase in costs every year. The only time a government tries to keep spending low is when the money is not there, then they call for a tax increase.
Give me a private-sector company that has shareholders to answer to for keeping costs low over government any day of the week.
Given that socialized medicine is much cheaper and of higher quality (to all, on average, not individually), the answer is a resounding yes. When your margin on premiums is 25% and you are paying your doctors 3x the medicare rate for the same procedure, the answer is a resounding yes.
Quote:
Hmm, I thought you didn't like "anecdotal" stories about the Canadian system. You know, like the Canadians I have met who said they would be dead under the Canadian system? Or about dogs getting treatment faster than humans?
Okay, how about the Forbes article link here that estimates that at least 26,000 people die each year because they are not insured. How's that for an anecdote???
Quote: AZDuffmanSocialism never works.
Veterans rebuffed Romney when he suggested privatizing their socialized medicine during his campaign on Veteran's Day. At any moment maybe there will be a massive push by veterans to get their socialized medicine privatized.
Any moment...
Still waiting.
Quote: rxwineVeterans rebuffed Romney when he suggested privatizing their socialized medicine during his campaign on Veteran's Day. At any moment maybe there will be a massive push by veterans to get their socialized medicine privatized.
Any moment...
Still waiting.
Mr. Tangent strikes again. How does anything you said prove that socialism works? All you've shown is that some people want it. Hell, people want low taxes and every government service under the sun, but that doesn't mean such a model works. It doesn't. *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9thMr. Tangent strikes again. How does anything you said prove that socialism works? All you've shown is that some people want it. Hell, people want low taxes and every government service under the sun, but that doesn't mean such a model works. It doesn't. *facepalm*
WRONG AGAIN.
Do I really have to explain that Veterans are getting care under a socialized system of care, and haven't had any major push to change it to privatized system. If they did, the lawmakers would support it.
Quote: rxwineWRONG AGAIN.
Do I really have to explain that Veterans are getting care under a socialized system of care, and haven't had any major push to change it to privatized system. If they did, the lawmakers would support it.
So your argument is that socialism works because some people like it?? *facepalm #2*
Quote: boymimboGive me a private-sector company that has shareholders to answer to for keeping costs low over government any day of the week.
I will start with FedEx, who keeps cost so much lower the USPS now contracts out to them.
Quote:When your margin on premiums is 25% and you are paying your doctors 3x the medicare rate for the same procedure, the answer is a resounding yes.
You mean when you are paying doctors *market* rate? Price controls do not work. The suppliers sooner or later stop supplying.
...>>>Quote: SanchoPanzaJust as polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of the Affordable Care Act, now that they have begun to see some of its provisions.
well some of you may not remember, but hilary clinton had a healthcare plan proposal when here hubby was president. It was met with scorn and dissapproval once it came out that people may not be able to keep their current insurance company or their family doctor. iT was dismissed by the public hands down because people value the relationship with their MDs and didnt want to disrupt their continuity of care.
Learning from that fiasco, a similar program is proposed but this time the public is promised by the president that they will be able to keep their insurance if they are happy wwith it, and they can keep their doctor. An obvious lie. And the lie is evedent as people are forced out of their insurance plans and into the plan that is now provided to them which may or may not include their MD. It very well may cost them more. Its not what people bargained for. But the president reformulated the healthcare system with the publics approval based on lies
he learned from the hilary clinton fiasco where the public rejected losing their current insurance and or MD....and he knew the public wouldnt be reading the thousands of pages of the healthcare plan.....so it slipped through
And now people here are saying...but now people will afford to get councelling to prevent health problems with affordable dr visits. Except for 1 thing. If you think with all the millions of new patients unleashed on the system, doctors will be able to sit with you and plan out great eating habits, shopping habits, exercose ///you have another thing coming. If you want to learn to eat healthy and exercize...just fo to the friggin internet. You dont need a doctor to tell you. Youmd will had just enough time to treat you for the ailment that presnts itself on that day....but having meaningful consultations that take time are not gonna happen.
you will now be treated for your issue..then on to the next patient..then on to the next patient.
Quote: boymimbo
Given that socialized medicine is much cheaper and of higher quality (to all, on average, not individually), the answer is a resounding yes.
Well, you finally have admittted that you want me and my wife (we both will require care the rest of our lifes) to have a lower quality of care. Thank you very much for the compassion you show people!
Doctor's already have a 15-20 minute window for patients. They are cranking them right on through trying for as many per hour as possible. Plenty of reasons for it but it's already here.
Quote: Beethoven9thSo your argument is that socialism works because some people like it?? *facepalm #2*
My argument is veterans would be smart enough to oppose the socialism in mass if it wasn't working for them. You got a problem with that? ARE you going to call veterans stupid by saying they wouldn't know better?
The more facepalms you make the stupider your posts get.
Quote: rxwineMy argument is veterans would be smart enough to oppose the socialism in mass if it wasn't working for them. You got a problem with that? ARE you going to call veterans stupid by saying they wouldn't know better?.
The VA works sooo well. My son has a partial disabilty from his service and recieves a check from them. He wanted to get direct deposit instead of having it mailed. IT TOOK 10 MONTHS TO DO IT. HE GOT NO CHECKS DURING THIS TIME. Eventually he got one deposit for the past 10 months. The incredible efficiency of the VA at its best.
You really do need to take a course in critical thinking. Or maybe just a course in 'thinking'. lolQuote: rxwineMy argument is veterans would be smart enough to oppose the socialism in mass if it wasn't working for them.
I still can't believe you are seriously arguing that socialism works because some people like it. Talk about stupid arguments... *facepalm #3*
Exactly. This is what makes me so frustrated whenever I hear conservatives say things like, "Hillary isn't as bad as Obama."Quote: LarrySwell some of you may not remember, but hilary clinton had a healthcare plan proposal when here hubby was president.
Of course, she is! She and Bill are just as radical as Obama.....they're just better at disguising it!
Quote: Beethoven9thYou really do need to take a course in critical thinking. Or maybe just a course in 'thinking'. lol
I still can't believe you are seriously arguing that socialism works because some people like it. Talk about stupid arguments... *facepalm #3*
Never accuse anyone of evading answers, because you do it so poorly.
Quote: rxwineNever accuse anyone of evading answers, because you do it so poorly.
You just don't like my answers, so you ignore them. OTOH, saying that socialism works because some people happen to like it is about the dumbest argument I've heard thus far.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou just don't like my answers, so you ignore them. OTOH, saying that socialism works because some people happen to like it is about the dumbest argument you've made thus far.
Socialized medicine has been working in the U.S. for years. But you're wrong on facts and opinions and evasive as well.
Quote: rxwineSocialized medicine has been working in the U.S. for years. But you're wrong on facts and opinions and evasive as well.
*I* am wrong on facts? How many facts did you give to support your first statement? Oh yeah...NONE.
But that's right, you think socialism works because some people happen to like it. Embarrassing argument. *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9th*I* am wrong on facts? How many facts did you give to support your first statement? Oh yeah...NONE.
But that's right, you think socialism works because some people happen to like it. Embarrassing argument. *facepalm*
I can misconstrue the meaning of your posts if I want, but I actually have some honor.
Yeah, right. If you did, you'd clarify your statement.Quote: rxwineI can misconstrue the meaning of your posts if I want, but I actually have some honor.
Let's recap. AZ said that socialism doesn't work. You countered by saying that socialism works because some veterans "rebuffed Romney" (insinuating that they like socialism). So in the end, it looks like your problem is with your own argument, not me pointing out how silly it is.
+1
Quote: Beethoven9thYeah, right. If you did, you'd clarify your statement.
Let's recap. AZ said that socialism doesn't work. You countered by saying that socialism works because some veterans "rebuffed Romney" (insinuating that they like socialism). So in the end, it looks like your problem is with your own argument, not me pointing out how silly it is.
Socialism veterans care exists. Regardless of who likes it.
Since veterans aren't being cared for in some non-existent other system the only choice is socialized medicine.
Your posts are more full of bullshit than usual.
Quote: rxwineSocialism veterans care exists. Regardless of who likes it.
Since veterans aren't being cared for in some non-existent other system the only choice is socialized medicine.
Your posts are more full of bullshit than usual.
This is too funny. Another message, yet you've given no reason why AZ was wrong when he said that "socialism doesn't work". Now you're trying to save face by making a subtle shift in your position and claiming that socialism "exists" rather than socialism "works". You write and write and write, yet you say nothing of substance. You are becoming gr8rxwine. lol
