Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Health Care Reform Passed (Part 3)  
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3191 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Kindly continue your discussion here in part 3.

If you would like to access part 2, follow this link: Health Care Reform Passed (Part 2)


Enjoy the website!

SA7700


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
125 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3117 times:

From the previous thread:

San747:
Quoting DXing (Reply 262):
The company also gives me a huge discount on flying for which no taxes are paid. It's called a benefit, it's something I earn. You evidently don't understand the concept, if this is the only argument you have left then I think we are done here.

If you had that company discount from day 1 at your job, it wasn't earned. It's a benefit, just like my flight benefits at OO, but neither you nor or I earned that benefit. We were awarded and given access to it.



You earn it from the 1st day of your work. Just like you earn paid sick time from day one. Just like you earn paid vacation days from day 1. All benefits.

Also, for those claiming that the polls show a huge turn around in public opinion, guess again. Two of the polls taken since the legislation was signed into law cancell each other out. The other two show the public still disagrees that the law is a good thing.


http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 1):
All benefits.

And some come with a free ride from taxes.

Nice of you to bring up the tax free trip benefits. I'll let my Senator (Tom Coburn) know about that as he's always looking to find ways to pay for new programs.   


User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2079 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3095 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 1):

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php



Opportunity missed: with a bit more control over his approval ratings, the President could have plotted a full set of cock and balls.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 2):
Nice of you to bring up the tax free trip benefits.

I don't get the seat unless it's going to be empty. In other words I can't displace revenue. How much value does an empty seat bring to the airline? You simply do not get it.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

ATT takes a Billion Dollar write-down because of the health care reform.

But should we feel sorry for them? Nope.

Turns out that all this is about is the ending of a tax deduction that wasn't and expense. A sweetheart deal from the 2003 Prescription drug program that the Republicans were handing out to business.

So how did it work?

Say a company paid $100 Million for retirees prescription benefits.

They would get a $28 Million government subsidy. Dash from the taxpayers.

But they would write off the entire $100 Million as a tax deduction. Didn't matter that they only had a $72 Million expense.

Smoke & mirrors. But the new law changes that - makes the taxpayer cash a reduction of their costs - which it always has been. Big companies, like ATT, are trying to make it appear that they are being treated badly.

And we can see why Corporate America is so in love with the Republicans. They hand out some very sweet cand.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3065 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 5):
A sweetheart deal from the 2003 Prescription drug program that the Republicans were handing out to business.

And that passed out of the Senate to the conference with a vote of 76-21. Since there were only 51 Republicans that means that 25 democrats went along with it. In the House all the democrats voted against it. Party of NO anyone? After conference, you know that's where the two different bills differences are ironed out, some thing the democrats can't seem to figure out, the vote in the Senate was 55-44 which means that 3 democrats actually voted for it. In the democrats world that's called bipartisanship. In the House again all the democrats voted against the bill. Party of NO anyone? Original 10 year cost 400 billion. Revised 2009 ten year cost 549 billion. Of course the new health care law projected costs will be dead on and have no overrun whatsoever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicar...Improvement,_and_Modernization_Act


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3048 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 5):
ATT takes a Billion Dollar write-down because of the health care reform.


Oh, never mind the fact that it is business that pays for our entire country, your and my livelyhood, the roads, utilities, healthcare, and everything. Your hatred of business is irrational.

How do you feel about this?

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/assets_c/2010/03/ATTpageone.php

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/assets_c/2010/03/ATTPagetwo.php

The Democrats know that if, over the next few months a lot more companies start coming forward with disclosures of how much this boondoggle is going to cost, they are going to be in a lot of trouble. The answer? Intimidate them into silence by putting all the companies that have already made announcements to undergo interrogation in front of Congress, and bring their analyses of the fiscal impact, and any documents including emails and messages reviewed by their senior officials that support their claim of increased operating costs.

The purpose is clear. I'll bet you pounds to donuts that from now on, any company desiring to disclose the negative impact of Democrat-passed laws (as required by SEC regulations) will bury them in the notes to financial statements, noticed only by wall street analysts.

Change we can believe in, right?

[Edited 2010-03-28 15:30:35]


Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 6):
Original 10 year cost 400 billion. Revised 2009 ten year cost 549 billion.

And how did the Bush/Cheney Gang FINANCE this?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
Your hatred of business is irrational.

You miss the mark as far as DXing does.

I don't hate business. I even owned one before being hit with cancer.

What I don't believe in is anyone playing the big write-offs as the "mean old government hurting them".

All it takes is an Introduction To Accounting 101 to see what went on. They were taking a deduction when they didn't have one.

Maybe poor law writing by the Republican lawyers, maybe just very sharp tax lawyers for the companies finding the loophole.

But it's a loop hole you can drive a freight train through and Obama & the Democrats have closed it.

Oh, let's not forget that when they take the write-off they cut the tax they will be paying. Each $100 million will end up saving about $35 million in cash outflow at the federal level, plus what ever state level taxes are saved. Not too shabby.

Maybe you can explain why Bush & the Republicans didn't close it when they were in power.  


User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6584 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3030 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
How do you feel about this?
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
undergo interrogation in front of Congress, and bring their analyses of the fiscal impact, and any documents including emails and messages reviewed by their senior officials that support their claim of increased operating costs.

I feel great about it. You and i already agreed that the "impact" will be minimal. Are you afraid that this minimal impact will become public knowledge and in the process have more people support of the plan?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineAverageUser From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3031 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):

Oh, never mind the fact that it is business that pays for our entire country, your and my livelyhood, the roads, utilities, healthcare, and everything.

Would we need some people who work for the businesses, and customers who will buy those products and services as well? A car is not the engine alone but everything that keeps the vehicle on the road.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3002 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 8):
And how did the Bush/Cheney Gang FINANCE this?

How have the democrats financed the health care law? When you take away the double count in supposed medicare cuts, the 6 for 10, and add in the doc fix as well as the cost of hiring a whole bunch of IRS auditors (neither were included in the legislation so were not scored by the CBO) that supposed bargain at 945 billion shoots up well past 1 trillion. No wonder President Obama wanted to buy GM, he must harbor a secret desire to be a used car salesman.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2949 times:

Medicare "cuts" will be the elimination of the unnecessary 15% surcharge private companies get for showing that they can do a better job than the government. Duh. Why do they need that unnecessary 15% when it can be better applied to others?

The IRS & Justice Departments are going to be going after Medicare/Medicaid fraud. That's not a problem for me as these good folks will be able to earn their keep.  

As for GM, let's hold onto those shares until we can get a nice, tidy profit off of them. Sorta like the Citi deal.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2939 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Medicare "cuts" will be the elimination of the unnecessary 15% surcharge private companies get for showing that they can do a better job than the government. Duh. Why do they need that unnecessary 15% when it can be better applied to others?

The cuts go much deeper than that. Plus the cuts are double counted.

Or as the CBO says:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...e-counting-medicare-savings/32538/

The key point is that the savings to the HI trust fund under the PPACA would be received by the government only once, so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs. Trust fund accounting shows the magnitude of the savings within the trust fund, and those savings indeed improve the solvency of that fund; however, that accounting ignores the burden that would be faced by the rest of the government later in redeeming the bonds held by the trust fund. Unified budget accounting shows that the majority of the HI trust fund savings would be used to pay for other spending under the PPACA and would not enhance the ability of the government to redeem the bonds credited to the trust fund to pay for future Medicare benefits. To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government's ability to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would essentially double-count a large share of those savings and thus overstate the improvement in the government's fiscal position.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
The IRS & Justice Departments are going to be going after Medicare/Medicaid fraud. That's not a problem for me as these good folks will be able to earn their keep

Good luck with that. The IRS has trouble keeping track of who is supposed to get what and how much right now.

http://healthfreedomblog.com/?p=1065

Howard Gleckman, of the Urban Institute, sees the IRS’s proposed new role as a part of a historical pattern. “We are always asking the IRS to do all kinds of social engineering,” he said, such as tax credits for new homeowners and renewable energy firms.

In one of the biggest examples of using the tax code to achieve a social goal, Congress shifted much of its effort to help the poor in the 1990s from direct spending to the Earned Income Tax Credit, an IRS-run program that pays rebates to low-income working people to offset taxes.

In 2005, more than 22 million people claimed the credit, resulting in more than $40 billion in payments, a Treasury Department inspector general found last year. The audit also found $11.4 billion in improper payments in 2005 — about 28 cents of every dollar paid out.


Yep, I bet they'll be all over that medicare fraud.

Oh yeah, remember the Presidents line about no new middle class tax, and he defined middle class as 150,000 to 200,000 dollars, depending on which week you heard him speaking?

From the same link:

Under the health care legislation, the IRS will determine who qualifies for the insurance subsidies. Those subsidies would apply to people with incomes up to four times the federal poverty level, which is $43,320 for an individual and $88,200 for a family of four. The government would pay insurance companies to help individuals buy policies on the new exchanges. The exchanges, a central feature in both bills, are a sort of marketplace where small businesses and individuals who don’t get employer-sponsored coverage could shop for health plans.

So if the government decides that a "minimum qualified plan" ends up costing more than what you are paying now, that's a defacto tax increase. What a Country!!!!


The extra IRS agents are there to help make sure that everyone is purchasing a qualified health care plan. On top of that, if the fraud is going on, why was than not a focus of the Administration and the Justice department during the first year in office so at this point they could show some results to prove their point?

The new IRS agents will also, one would think, be put to work making sure that tanning salons are correctly charging the surcharge (which is actually a discriminatory tax since how many latinos and blacks use tanning salons?) that the law calls for as well as making sure that granny and grandpa are being charged the correct amount of tax for their medical devices.

And that doesn't begin to address the cost of the Doc Fix which was not included in the actual health care law since it would have put the bill over a trillion in cost and in the red. Nor does it explain how the second ten years will be paid for since the 6 in 10 gimmick only works in the first ten year period. There are so many financial flaws in this law just awaiting their moment to shine. I guess that's what you get when people vote on a bill they haven't read and don't understand, and submit a less than honest bill to be scored. But to the liberals a bad law is better than no law at all.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
As for GM, let's hold onto those shares until we can get a nice, tidy profit off of them. Sorta like the Citi deal.

As I said, we will all be dead and gone of old age by the time that happens.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2909 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 13):
Good luck with that. The IRS has trouble keeping track of who is supposed to get what and how much right now.

They can always ask the Aussies how to do it. As I mentioned before, a friend (ex-cop) went to work for the Fraud Group there and they already had their first Doc nailed to the wall. Programmers, statisticians and cops finding and nailing the cheats.

When crooks commit fraud via a computer they can be found via a computer.

The Doc FIx is one of those games left over from the Bush/Cheney years. It needs its own review, which should include motivations for med students to go into GP/Family Practice. It will be interesting to see how the conservatives approach replacing that current situation with a solid, intelligent law that addresses problems in those areas. Will the Republicans work with the Democrats, or fight them on everything? Contributions from Doctors may hand in the balance.  


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2906 times:

Dont know if this is related ..but my Girl friend who is a heart specialist at a hostpital here in Tucson was notified that they are cutting the work force by 20% over the next 18 months. A 15% cut will be made fiscal 2010 with a 20% by 2011. Seems weird to me . The employees are blaming the cuts in Medicare / Medicaid reimbursment rates , basicaly they cant not make a profit.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 9):
You and i already agreed that the "impact" will be minimal. Are you afraid that this minimal impact will become public knowledge and in the process have more people support of the plan?

The plan is designed to be low impact .... it is simply going to degrade insurance companies and private providers profitablity over time. The slow change will eventualy cripple them until a full government take over will be required. The President said exaclty that in several interviews. They tried for full universal healthcare in the initial bill ...it served to give them a fall back position that seemed easier to pass . What they got was not what they wanted immediatly ...but they can wait ... they know the insurance companies can not operate under these rules and will have to raise thier rates. Its a very sinister play ...



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2903 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
The Doc FIx is one of those games left over from the Bush/Cheney years.

      The last major change to medicare was in 1995. Not an additional new program but a change to the basic financial structuring. The supplemental budget to cover the shortfall in the medicare annual budget to cover doctors fees has been a recurring annual event since then.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
It will be interesting to see how the conservatives approach replacing that current situation with a solid, intelligent law that addresses problems in those areas.

You mean like the new health care law with its major funding flaws? Hopefully if the liberals try to ram through yet another such flawed piece of legislation the GOP will be strong enough to once again say they want no part of a bad law.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8231 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2892 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 16):
The last major change to medicare was in 1995.

After the Republican Landslide? The Contract With America?

So the Republicans got what they wanted - lots of power from that '94 mind term election on through the 06 mid term.

Why wasn't that enough time to fix that problem? Bush/Cheney had a lot of opportunities. Guess they were so focused on cutting taxes and invading Iraq that they couldn't be bothered.


User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6584 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2882 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 15):
The plan is designed to be low impact .... it is simply going to degrade insurance companies and private providers profitablity over time

I think we are talking about two different things. What Dreadnought and agree on have nothing to do with insurance companies. Its the fact that Caterpillar will see a $100M charge which will "cripple and will destroy caterpillar and all that is holy". He and i agreed that that is a completely baseless claim designed for Fox News headlines.



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2865 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 18):
He and i agreed that that is a completely baseless claim designed for Fox News headlines.

I guess we will see about that ... Waxman wants the CEO's front and center to hear they're case. I hope that the Caterpiller and John Deer CEO's lay it out clear.

You can be as smart as me and figure out that the insurance companies are going to have to raise rates... forced to cover pre existing conditions ?? It sounds nice but it is bad buisness ... it defies all logic when it comes to the idea of insurance. I agree with parts of the bill that effect dropping patients when they get ill , but forceing companies to insure someone who is irresponsible is crazy .



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6584 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2861 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 19):
I guess we will see about that ... Waxman wants the CEO's front and center to hear they're case. I hope that the Caterpiller and John Deer CEO's lay it out clear.

I Hope they do too.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 19):
but forceing companies to insure someone who is irresponsible is crazy .

So in fact - you are saying that Insurance companies currently run "death panels"?

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 19):
You can be as smart as me and figure out that the insurance companies are going to have to raise rates

In theory do agree with you, BUT the huge pool of people that will have to be insure will help leverage that risk. I agree that this is a theory too, but looking at the raw data and analyzing it is beyond my pay scale for this website.

Ill defer to people who do make their living analyzing data - the good people at Wall Street - They cant steer us wrong can they? Never - don't be ridiculous.

United Healthcare Stock is up for the year. Closed up today again
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=UNH

WellPoint stock s also up for the year.Closed up today again
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=wlp

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1950...rm-winners-and-losers?source=yahoo

I don't question the market (nor should you)- after all we are not communists.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 19):

You can be as smart as me

How can anyone be as smart as you?  



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2841 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
So the Republicans got what they wanted - lots of power from that '94 mind term election on through the 06 mid term.

Really, you mean despite not having control of the Senate from '00 to '02? You mean despite not having a 60 seat majority in the Senate at any time during those years? Or perhaps you mean not having a veto proof majority in both houses from '94 to '06? Lot's of power means you can actually control legislation from start to finish. Something the democrats could not do this entire past year. Of course when you're Reid you blame the tools and not the carpenter.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/6...e-was-led-astray-by-the-ama?page=3

Prior to the 47-53 procedural vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) blamed the American Medical Association (AMA) for giving him bad information on the number of Republicans expected to support the measure.

What a rube. Remind me again how many seats the democrats held in the Senate last October?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Guess they were so focused on cutting taxes and invading Iraq that they couldn't be bothered.

In 1995 President Clinton was in office. No Iraq, no cutting of taxes. You really do have a memory problem. On top of that, as far as the democrats were concerned, no universal care, no bill.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 18):
Its the fact that Caterpillar will see a $100M charge which will "cripple and will destroy caterpillar and all that is holy"

Exactly who said that and where?


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2828 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 20):
So in fact - you are saying that Insurance companies currently run "death panels"?

No ... I am saying that if you dont buy insurance before you get sick then they should not have to accept you. Its pretty simple . We just cant have people wait until they have cancer then decide to go buy insurance ... right ?

Quoting mt99 (Reply 20):
BUT the huge pool of people that will have to be insure will help leverage that risk

Valid point ..and quite possibly the reason that the stocks are are going up. I have been watching them too ... just sold and made 10K on a healthcare sector stock last week (ISRG). But I am sceptical of the long term profitability with a government that is so vehemently outspoken about them.

That said I still vote with my dollars ...

UHC looks like a decent buy $32 a share right now .. but I am not sue about it.

I am looking at Universal American Corp right now .. .. they specialize in Medicair supplement packages ... $15.00 a share ? .

Quoting mt99 (Reply 20):
How can anyone be as smart as you?

Easy ... breathe, eat and play call of duty and your qualified .   



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6584 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2819 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 22):
We just cant have people wait until they have cancer then decide to go buy insurance ... right ?

So you agree with the mandate to buy insurance?

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 22):
Easy ... breathe, eat and play call of duty and your qualified

Hehehe Well Played!  



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2807 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 23):
So you agree with the mandate to buy insurance?

No I dont ... I dont like the idea that the G forces me to buy something. Its not like car insurance .... you are forced to buy health insurance or you pay higher taxes thats just going too far. I know its complicated but I am just a small government low restriction guy from another age and time.



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
25 DXing : How does one necessarily have to follow, or mean he is for the other?
26 Ken777 : Now that will be interesting. Especially when it's pointed out that they received cash for 28% of the expense, but claimed 100% on their tax returns.
27 DXing : The gop did not have veto proof majorities in the House or the Senate. If it means giving Rep, Barney Frank a chance to do more damage than he has al
28 Post contains links Yellowstone : Here's a good one... What was the first time in US history that people were mandated to purchase health insurance (from the government rather than a p
29 DXing : Even better was the fact that the politicians of the day were already in the habit of spending any extra money collected on the government rather tha
30 Yellowstone : You didn't read that passage too carefully, did you? Seems to me that building hospitals is part of health care, which is what the tax was for in the
31 DXing : Nope, I saw it. But before that it specifically states: So if there is a surplus, rather than give it back they will hold on to it as long as they se
32 Ken777 : If the party was as impotent as you make them out to be it's amazing that they were able to achieve all they did - in terms of their wish list. It's
33 Post contains images Dreadnought : Do we really, really have to dig up the videos again which showed Barney Frank vigorously arguing against any attempts at increasing monitoring and r
34 DXing : Is social security privatized? Are the tax cuts permanent? Considering how much Rep. Frank had to do with the failure of Fannie and Freddie, not to m
35 Ken777 : Fortunately not - some Americans would have lost a huge amount when the Dow went from 14000+ to the 6000 range. So basically the elderly in this coun
36 Post contains links Dreadnought : For someone your age I am surprised that you seem to have no idea what such funds would be invested in. They would be bond-heavy, such as these funds
37 DXing : As opposed to depending on a trust fund that is stuffed with IOU's and doesn't really exist? Recessions come and go as this one will. The difference
38 Ken777 : I'll take what backs my monthly Social Security check each months over a private company that is only half way to rebuilding after the Bush Years. An
39 DXing : You just have never understood the difference between mending and ending. Someone is going to have to mend those programs or of their own fiscal weig
40 FlyPNS1 : The basic question as a society we have to ask is simply this, is it important to our society that everyone (or almost everyone) have quality health c
41 Post contains links DXing : Opposition continues at better than 50% even after almost two full weeks of barnstorming around the country trying to sell a plan that is already law.
42 Dreadnought : We passed a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn’t read it but exe
43 FlyPNS1 : No, healthcare will simply become a luxury good that only the well-off can afford. Sure they've affected the price, but they've also made it so that
44 Dreadnought : No, it means that health care will be priced at levels that the free market can accept. If people had to pay for their own health care and insurance
45 Post contains links and images DXing : There aren't that many "luxury" types around. In case you hadn't noticed, a significant minority in this country pays the majority of taxes. Fix Medi
46 FlyPNS1 : And those price levels will be out of reach for a significant portion of the population....particularly when you consider the stagnant incomes that m
47 Dreadnought : Complete supposition on your part. Prices are high now because doctors and hospitals can get away with it because the Insurance companies are willing
48 FlyPNS1 : Do you really think that business model will work with doctors? How many more patients do you really think a doctor can see? Many don't spend enough
49 Dreadnought : Not a bad example - the price of cosmetic surgery is a lot lower than insured operations taking a similar amount of resources. According to the Ameri
50 AverageUser : Have I mentioned national single-pool insurance any time lately?
51 Post contains images Dreadnought : You mean, handing over the management of our healthcare completely to the same entity which has run Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public pensi
52 DXing : Well get ready because that is exactly the premise behind Obamacare. Lower premiums means more people can afford insurance which means more people ge
53 Post contains images Dreadnought : Well, to be fair I for one fully support better tits for the entire female population.
54 FlyPNS1 : When you consider the relative simplicity of the procedure, that's a pretty high price. Remember, that is only the surgeon's fee for a procedure that
55 Post contains links DXing : The difference being in that the officials in the private sector are not elected to serve the people. On top of that there is a whole threads worth o
56 AGM100 : Correct ... and the governemnt is there with the deep pockets to cover all the issues. Same thing happening in higher education right now ... the gov
57 FlyPNS1 : They can be removed if the public isn't happy with them. Oddly though, the public seems to always replace them with someone that is equally as bad. I
58 AGM100 : Their is not one person in this country who ..if they work hard and dream of going to college can not get there. Is it easy? ...hell no ... will you
59 Starbuk7 : I agree totally, ther eare a lot of people in this country who no longer know what it means to work for something. Thay all expect to get everything
60 DXing : The stockholders of the company can demand a CEO's removal but only the BOD can vote for a CEO's removal. Quite different from a Senator or Congressm
61 FlyPNS1 : All the more reason why leaving this country's future in the hands of CEO's is a dangerous proposition. They have NO accountability for their actions
62 Dreadnought : Not true. Scholarships have been available for deserving students for ages. There is the GI Bill. Anyone who really wants to continue their education
63 Post contains images AirStairs : Right, because Frank's genius policy of forcing banks to make housing loans to bad credit risks and then charging Fannie and Freddie with the moral d
64 Post contains images DXing : In most cases if you are in the private sector and don't get the job done, you're gone. Not so in Congress. As long as you can blame the other party
65 AGM100 : What other country in the world has had millions of poor kids rise to the levels that we have?. None. Millions of lower middle class and poor kids ha
66 mt99 : So you want "Death Panels"? Sarah P would not like you...
67 Dreadnought : Basically that's what would be required, but the federal government has never shown itself capable of controlling costs on just about anything, so it
68 mt99 : What you are doing is assuming.. right?
69 FlyPNS1 : And a good chunk of scholarship money orginates from government. And private scholarship money doesn't even come close to providing enough resources
70 AGM100 : Yes ... I guess your right. It is only responsible and "just" to the taxpayer community that steps are taken to assure the dollars are spent on reaso
71 Dreadnought : Wrong. Scholarships are generally from companies and wealthy persons. My late grandmother set up a foundation that provides full scholarships to six
72 Post contains images Ken777 : Selling across state lines is trivial IF you allow states the state's right to set standards. As soon as that happens you stop the dream of selling f
73 AGM100 : Yes ... if Johnny has shown signs of unreliablity or being weak minded enough to say skip classes or not perfom up to standard then I dont want to pa
74 mt99 : I know that you are trying to be all cute and stuff - so ill shoot back with something as absurd as you are suggesting.. You are wiling to leave with
75 Post contains links and images Dreadnought : We can do better than that. These two little washers cost a cool $1 million. Paid for by our government. What private company would have paid that? h
76 mt99 : They got caught no?
77 Dreadnought : Well after they were paid.
78 mt99 : But they were caught..
79 Post contains images Dreadnought : But the money was paid...
80 AGM100 : No ... they should be taken from thier parents and re-educated to conform, obviously they are not contributing. If they are getting my money I want t
81 mt99 : But they were caught... I fail to see your point. Has a private company NEVER EVER been charged more that they should?
82 FlyPNS1 : Yes, if most of our population would simply drop dead by age 65, you are correct that we wouldn't need social security. It would fix our healthcare c
83 Dreadnought : If your company got a million dollar invoice for a couple of washers, would you pay the invoice and then try to get the money back (and hope that the
84 Dreadnought : Not necessarily. I went to University of Texas at Austin. I don't know if this is still the case today, but back then the State of Texas paid nothing
85 Post contains images JakeOrion : Genius. Pure genius. I literally LOL'd. Welcome to my Respected Users List.
86 Post contains images AGM100 : You mean the universties that the left is now crying about the costs going up .... so the governemnt pays a big portion of the tuitions and the cost
87 mt99 : As always using big scary numbers but fail to put it in context (ie. $100M cost for Catepillar- run for the hills!!) What was the total supply contra
88 FlyPNS1 : But they still subsidized your education using revenue that wasn't yours. They used state assets to help pay for your education. I don't have a probl
89 Dreadnought : But most is not enough. I think you are right, but even if it's only 5% of the population that are bums whose only claim to fame is an occasional sta
90 AirStairs : The Federal Trade Commission has plenty of power to prevent large corporations from merging and enforcing anti-trust laws, so your point is meaningle
91 Post contains images Ken777 : Let's start with some European and Asian countries after WW II. Strangely enough, I believe that some "lefties" overseas (which would include conserv
92 DocLightning : Yup. This is why any allusions to healthcare being a "free market" are wrong. There are too many things that are out of the control of consumers. Con
93 DXing : I take it you never look at your grocery reciept to see if there were any errors made, you just assume that the total is correct if it falls within y
94 AGM100 : Sorry , Ken .... I was just trying to credit the US with something done well.... I forgot we are supposed to be down on everything.. make a crisis of
95 mt99 : Well if i paid $200 in groceries and there is a $1 item on a list of 50 items.. i wouldn't take a second look. Does that make it right? Absolutely no
96 DXing : But somehow it's ok for the government to ignore it simply because there are more zero's involved? I watch the price as it is rung up and stop the ca
97 AGM100 : Doc what they want is one big giant Medicare correct ? Isnt that what universal healthcare is ? . What they are trying to do now is just kill off the
98 Post contains images mt99 : I never said it should be ignored. My point is that you make the fact that 1/200th of the total cost something is a HUGE deal. I never said it was ri
99 AGM100 : No ...the price is the same they just want me to loan it from the G . They are actively "selling loans" from the government. Our government is now a
100 mt99 : OK,, so what if it was cheaper to get to Government loan? Would you have acted the same way?
101 AGM100 : If tuition was less per year if you took the governemnt money ..over paying it with your own money ? Dont give them any ideas ... they will no doubt
102 mt99 : No silly .. i am talking about long term .. It technically can be cheaper to get a cheap loan spread out over 30 years than to paying cash for things
103 AirStairs : The only way it is ever going to be cheaper is if inflation rises substantially. Long-term students loans may and often do make sense from a cost/ben
104 AGM100 : Ahh...yes I see what your saying. Me personaly I would not take a loan from the governemnt ... it just goes against my grain. Its that outdated from
105 Post contains images Ken777 : The cuts in payments are simply because both parties in Congress have yet to Fix the Doc Fix. Maybe the Republicans can hold hands with the Democrats
106 Post contains images DXing : Your last several responses said exactly that as does this one, simply because the price is only a percentage of the total it shouldn't be addressed.
107 mt99 : What if you buy Grapes? Do you weight you own? bring your own scale? Do you really trust the supermarket scales? Where did i say it should be ignored
108 DXing : Yes because there are multiple scales in the store of different types. Also the price is per pound. I can tell the difference between one and two pou
109 mt99 : Can you tell the difference between 1 and 1.1 pounds? Man your are even more talented than i thought!. You are way too trusting. I mean it could be a
110 Ken777 : The Doc Fix is not part of the Health Care Reform law that has been passed. The Doc Fix is an annual event in DC. George had to wade through it also.
111 DXing : Don't need too. The price is per pound. If I'm going to buy by the pound why would I not then buy 1.9 pounds? Correct because if it had been it would
112 Post contains images AGM100 : How did I know that Ken!! Short term they may ...but the G program will grow and grow and grow until everyone is on it ...and we can all slop at the
113 FlyPNS1 : Buying by the pound doesn't mean you only pay in even increments of 1, 2, 3 lbs, etc. If the rate is $2/lb and you buy 1.9 pounds, you will pay $3.80
114 mt99 : Yikes!. DO you know how "per pound" pricing works? When was the last time you were in a super market?
115 AGM100 : A balance .... most conservatives want the governemnt to offer some safety net and some programs for the truly disadvantaged Americans. But a total t
116 FlyPNS1 : But what happens when 40-50% of the population is disadvantaged? This WILL happen and MUST happen in the free market society. As the global economy e
117 AGM100 : You win . And you hit it right on the head ... the administration believes the best days are behind the US . Not only that , they beleive our best da
118 Post contains images Ken777 : Are you talking about all the years of the Bush/Cheney Administration? They and their Republican buddies in Congress lacked the balls to get the job
119 DXing : Here we go again. When did the GOP have 60 votes in the Senate which is what it took the democrats to get health care out of the Senate? As usual, un
120 Ken777 : Making excuses for the horrors of the Bush years again. Going back to that old "we didn't have 60 votes so we couldn't do anything right when we were
121 Dreadnought : It's like having one foot on the boat and one one the dock, with no idea on how to get the other foot over. We are going to get wet. How do you expec
122 DXing : And exactly what where the democrats saying during those years......why "NO" of course. No need to make any excuses for the Bush administration but s
123 Ken777 : Dude, after seeing my premiums doubling during the first four years of the Bush/Cheney Administration I felt like I was drowning. There have been som
124 Dreadnought : Excuses, excuses. We have been seeing increasing productivity for generations, and nothing revolutionary has happened in the past few years. The one
125 Ken777 : We saw something similar during the Bush I Era. Companies at the time called it "Right Sizing". Look at the changes in technology in those days - esp
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Health Care Reform Passed! posted Sun Mar 21 2010 19:58:53 by Yellowstone
Health Care "Reform " Is This It ...? posted Mon Mar 15 2010 09:32:43 by AGM100
Pelosi..Current Health Care Reform Dead! posted Thu Jan 21 2010 12:17:35 by DXing
A Better Idea For U.S. Health Care Reform posted Fri Nov 6 2009 09:22:01 by Texan
Excellent Program On Health Care Reform - DVR It! posted Fri Oct 16 2009 17:25:42 by Dreadnought
Obama To Be On TV More - Health Care Reform posted Thu Sep 17 2009 12:48:00 by Homer71
Americans Want Health Care Reform posted Sat Sep 18 2004 17:34:24 by Qb001
The Way Health Care Legislation Should Be Passed. posted Thu Dec 3 2009 10:14:04 by DXing
Obama Admits Health Care Could Be His Waterloo! posted Thu Mar 18 2010 08:02:31 by DXing
House To Pass Health Care Without Voting posted Thu Mar 11 2010 10:46:56 by Dreadnought