Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: coalkirk On: Sun Jan 24, 2010 10:25 pm

No. :lol: I'm still with my first wife....33 years. I got a life sentence.
coalkirk
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Harman VF3000
Coal Size/Type: antrhcite/rice coal

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: Yanche On: Sun Jan 24, 2010 11:10 pm

smokeyCityTeacher wrote:
Yanche wrote:In the many postings on health care there is frequent reference to the health care provided to Congress. The belief seems to be that it's in a league of it's own. But that's not the case, it's the same health care coverage available to any federal government employee or retiree. It's good health care but certainly not free to it's members. It's no where as inexpensive as the heath care benefits some union contracts offer. The plan is managed by OPM, Office of Personnel Management. See: http://www.opm.gov/Insure/ It is run by insurance companies. IT IS NOT GOVERNMENT RUN INSURANCE. OPM's roll is largely administrative, it defines a minimum core benefit and lets insurance companies bid on the contract annually. The different choices one has depends on where you live and how many insurance companies want to do business in that area. You get to chose what company you want. Your premium is different depending on the insurance company and the benefit. Insurers can not deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. <...snipped for brevity...>


If the bill was to pass in its present form .....

? - would the Fed employees keep their insurance the way it is or be subject to the new plan ?
(a common answer seen on the web is that they would be exempt from the new legislation)

? - would any citizen be able to get that Federal employee plan and get the same amount of subsidization as a Fed employee ?
(a common answer seen on the web is that the public option was to let private citizens buy in BUT they do not get subsidized or get subsidized almost nothing - to the point of making it a very bad deal for anyone but Fed employees.)

note... the gov't itself knows better than to insure its own members with govt run insurance.


Please straighten out these rumors /misconceptions if you can

Clearly the problem with making the current OPM plans available to all is cost. Especially if the expectation is that the government is to provide the same sharing of costs it now affords to its employees. This can't possibly happen, it's to expensive. One proposal is to tax the better coverage plans, the so called Cadillac plans. The proposal certainly is unliked by those that have Cadillac plans now. Apparently a deal has been struck with the unions to exempt the tax on their plans for a period of time, I think 5 years. The Federal OPM plan currently misses the criteria for a Cadillac plan. But the tax is somehow inflation adjusted and likely would apply in coming years. NARFE, (http://www.narfe.org/home/)the association that represents Federal employees and retirees has objected, arguing if the exemption applies to unions why not the same treatment to the Feds. What the press reports gets twisted to imply that the Feds would somehow have a better plan than the rest that would choose a public option.

If the public option based on the current OPM model becomes law, there will be many choices. There has to be. The cost sharing model naturally means those with lower incomes would choose plans that cost less, and have corresponding less benefits. Many government employees have better paying jobs and would likely choose plans more costly than the cheapest.

It's important to understand that the OPM plans now are part of an entire employee benefit plan. Just like private industry provides, at least those that can afford to do so. It's unfair to say, "the gov't itself knows better than to insure its own members with govt run insurance." Naturally the government subsidy for it's employees is significant because its part of the employment benefit plan.

Again it's not government run insurance, it's insurance company run insurance that meets minimum coverage standards, like you can't prohibit coverage for pre-existing conditions. It would address an need to provide medical coverage to those that don't have it now. Any government subsidy and how to pay for it is totally unclear. You must understand that for any plan to work it must have universal coverage eligibility. It's the only way to spread the costs. The medical coverage costs for the uninsured are now being paid by all of us anyway. We are just paying it in ways hidden from us. Like the emergency room visits that don't get paid, state social programs that vary from state to state, etc.
Yanche
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: jpete On: Sun Jan 24, 2010 11:16 pm

What is they incentive to lower costs for anyone when the government is picking up part(most?) of the tab?

How can insurance companies lower costs when they are REQUIRED to cover anyone and everyone?
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice


Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: Black_And_Blue On: Sun Jan 24, 2010 11:41 pm

Black_And_Blue wrote:The current fight/resistance is within the Democratic party, (there are rotten apples in the other isle too.)

If the infection isn't purged we will have one or all of the following :

Scientific socialism
Green socialism
Guild socialism
Market socialism
Revolutionary socialism
Communism


I'm quoting myself to post additional evidence that the fight is really within the Democratic party itself. Progressives are on the precipice of taking over and if they are successful you will witness some form of totalitarian government in the near future.

http://www.freedomslighthouse.com/2010/01/msnbcs-ed-schultz-tells-audience-he-had.html
Black_And_Blue
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska 140

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: Yanche On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 12:16 am

jpete wrote:What is they incentive to lower costs for anyone when the government is picking up part(most?) of the tab?

How can insurance companies lower costs when they are REQUIRED to cover anyone and everyone?

The insurance companies would have the same incentives they have now, competition from other insurance companies. The bigger they grow the more profit they make. It's important that the rules not stifle the competition. Right now if a federal employee doesn't like one insurance companies plan the choose another one. Unfortunately the insurance and drug company lobby has been successful in even the current OPM plans. Drug costs are much higher than they need to be because of something know as the drug exchanges. The government run VA system has much lower drug costs.

The countries total medical costs can't possibly go down. At least not without major changes to the way health care is delivered. Right now the long term trends in the general public health looks frighteningly grim. Type II diabetes is growing rapidly. It will be a future major, major health care cost. It and other diseases that effect our population will put this nation at a distinct disadvantage compared to others nations that better manage health care costs. We have become lazy and obese. Our general nutrition is awful. Short of famine the government is the only one that could make a difference. Remember the government requirements to fortify milk, bread and other food products in the 1930's. They delivered major improvements in general health. Government intervention could make a difference. Will it? Not a chance, way to much political polarization.
Yanche
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: jpete On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 12:35 am

Yanche wrote:
jpete wrote:What is they incentive to lower costs for anyone when the government is picking up part(most?) of the tab?

How can insurance companies lower costs when they are REQUIRED to cover anyone and everyone?

The insurance companies would have the same incentives they have now, competition from other insurance companies. The bigger they grow the more profit they make. It's important that the rules not stifle the competition. Right now if a federal employee doesn't like one insurance companies plan the choose another one. Unfortunately the insurance and drug company lobby has been successful in even the current OPM plans. Drug costs are much higher than they need to be because of something know as the drug exchanges. The government run VA system has much lower drug costs.

The countries total medical costs can't possibly go down. At least not without major changes to the way health care is delivered. Right now the long term trends in the general public health looks frighteningly grim. Type II diabetes is growing rapidly. It will be a future major, major health care cost. It and other diseases that effect our population will put this nation at a distinct disadvantage compared to others nations that better manage health care costs. We have become lazy and obese. Our general nutrition is awful. Short of famine the government is the only one that could make a difference. Remember the government requirements to fortify milk, bread and other food products in the 1930's. They delivered major improvements in general health. Government intervention could make a difference. Will it? Not a chance, way to much political polarization.


How can there be competition when the government allows health insurance companies to collude?

The 1945 McCarran Ferguson Act allows de facto monopolies. In RI, we have exactly TWO insurance companies. Where is the competition? Why can't I buy medical insurance across state lines like I can with life, auto, home and every other insurance?

I our general nutrition is so bad, why does the FDA continue to allow such horrible food in our system? Why is it illegal to label a food saying it DOESN'T use growth hormones? Why can I be sued and possibly imprisoned if I violate so called "veggie libel" laws?

Government intervention is the REASON we are where we are at. They are NEVER the solution.
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: smokeyCityTeacher On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 12:56 am

jpete wrote:Why can't I buy medical insurance across state lines like I can with life, auto, home and every other insurance?


That is a very unfair restriction that serves no purpose but to protect monopoly and stifle competition
smokeyCityTeacher
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Englander, Hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: 30-NC, 30-95

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: Richard S. On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 12:59 am

jpete wrote:How can insurance companies lower costs when they are REQUIRED to cover anyone and everyone?


The mandate that insurance companies cover everyone will only work if there is mandate that everyone have insurance.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: lowfog01 On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:14 am

In my opinion, what the government needs to do is get out of the health insurance business all together. Why can't the people directly receive the tax credit that businesses now receive for providing their employees health insurance. It would work sort of like getting car insurance. You could buy the level of insurance you want and it would open up competition so the cost would be less. Doing something along those lines would also provide portability of the insurance because it wouldn't be dependent on keeping your job. You would be the manager of what ever health insurance you had. Lisa
lowfog01
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Mark II & Mark I

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: jpete On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:26 am

Richard S. wrote:
jpete wrote:How can insurance companies lower costs when they are REQUIRED to cover anyone and everyone?


The mandate that insurance companies cover everyone will only work if there is mandate that everyone have insurance.


How?

If insurance companies are forced to cover people that the ordinarily would not due to high risk health conditions, how does that lower costs?

You are not going to say that "young, healthy" people will balance it our are you?

These are the same "greedy and "evil" insurance people we keep hearing about. Will they suddenly grow a conscience and NOT jack the rates up because they can?

Look at what the credit card companies are doing in response to government regulation. Why will health insurance be any different?
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: samhill On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:11 am

This point & time I think they ought to just forget about it. With the money thats been spent to fight it & buy politicians we simply can`t afford it. The Ins. Co.s are going to hit everyone up to cover whats been spent so far. The only way out would be to elimanate Ins. Co.s all together & let the tax payer pay for it, we`re paying for most of it already. Soon only the rich will have insurance & everyone else will work & pay until they die, thats the grand scheme of things anyway might as well get on with it.
samhill
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: Scotttique On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 1:13 pm

One thing that Obama can definitely take credit for saving or creating:

Obama: Millions of Republicans Created or Saved
Scotttique
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Baker
Stove/Furnace Model: Heat King

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: rberq On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:16 pm

lowfog01 wrote:Norway: Yes a quick trip around the internet shows that Norway has a very high standard of living. It also will show you that Norway has a 49.5% income tax and is topped off with a 25% value added tax.

Slavery: I don't understand your reference to slavery.

Capitalism: No, the U.S. hasn't been purely capitalist for a very long time ... [but] capitalism does define whether or not a country is socialist or not. Under capitalism the means of production, i.e. materials and labor, are privately owned and the benefits gained are split among those that produced the product based on the level of each individual’s efforts ...


On Norway: You asked me to name a country where liberalism worked. I did. Now you are arguing why it SHOULDN'T work. But it does. So forget about your shoulds and should nots.

On slavery: It was just a snide remark on my part -- an example of what can happen with unfettered capitalism.

On capitalism: You say the benefits are split among those that produced the product, based on their efforts. That is the theory, but... When Chinese labor built the railroads in this country, were the profits split equitably among those who did the work? No, the profits went largely to those who owned the assets, and many of those assets were outright grants from the government, which wanted railroads to be built. When there is a glut of labor, those who own the capital take advantage of the situation by driving down wages -- look at the situation in this country right now! When there is a dearth of labor, the unions stick it to the corporations. Benefits are split on the basis of who has the power, not who did the work.
rberq
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: DS Machine 1300
Coal Size/Type: Nut -- Kimmel/Blaschak/Reading
Other Heating: Oil hot water radiators, propane

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: jpete On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:22 pm

rberq wrote:
lowfog01 wrote:Norway: Yes a quick trip around the internet shows that Norway has a very high standard of living. It also will show you that Norway has a 49.5% income tax and is topped off with a 25% value added tax.

Slavery: I don't understand your reference to slavery.

Capitalism: No, the U.S. hasn't been purely capitalist for a very long time ... [but] capitalism does define whether or not a country is socialist or not. Under capitalism the means of production, i.e. materials and labor, are privately owned and the benefits gained are split among those that produced the product based on the level of each individual’s efforts ...


On Norway: You asked me to name a country where liberalism worked. I did. Now you are arguing why it SHOULDN'T work. But it does. So forget about your shoulds and should nots.

On slavery: It was just a snide remark on my part -- an example of what can happen with unfettered capitalism.

On capitalism: You say the benefits are split among those that produced the product. That is the theory, but... When Chinese labor built the railroads in this country, were the profits split equitably among those who did the work? No, the profits went largely to those who owned the assets, and many of the assets were outright grants from the government, which wanted railroads to be built. When there is a glut of labor, those who own the capital take advantage of the situation by driving down wages -- look at the situation in this country right now! When there is a dearth of labor, the unions stick it to the corporations. Benefits are split on the basis of who has the power, not who did the work.


Should rewards be proportional to risks?

Who took the risk, the laborer or the capitalist? And I'm talking about the REAL capitalists, like Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone. Not high paid employees like modern day CEO's.

You are right, when there is a glut of labor, wages could or should go down. Then the issue become falling prices. If people can't afford to buy products, then prices MUST fall(absent government subsidies to artificially prop up the price).

That's how REAL capitalism works. That is how a truly free market operates.

We haven't seen a free market in a century. Most people don't have any idea what it looks like.
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: Here is what the Democrats need to do to pass thier bill

PostBy: mikeandgerry On: Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:30 pm

Yanche wrote:Clearly the problem with making the current OPM plans available to all is cost. Especially if the expectation is that the government is to provide the same sharing of costs it now affords to its employees. This can't possibly happen, it's to expensive. One proposal is to tax the better coverage plans, the so called Cadillac plans. The proposal certainly is unliked by those that have Cadillac plans now...

... Any government subsidy and how to pay for it is totally unclear. You must understand that for any plan to work it must have universal coverage eligibility. It's the only way to spread the costs. The medical coverage costs for the uninsured are now being paid by all of us anyway. We are just paying it in ways hidden from us. Like the emergency room visits that don't get paid, state social programs that vary from state to state, etc.


You know the numbers, John. No matter what, it is going to be ungodly expensive to add 40 million people to the insurance roll which currently has 260 million people at a cost of 17% of our GDP. Since it is believed that those 40 mil don't have the cash, one can only assume that, despite the belief that they are paid for in the current system, they will add to the national expenditure as they receive better benefits than just basic services.

In another thread there is a discussion of the need for more capacity. Personally, I believe they will add about three times their current burden to the system or ((40/260)*.17*14Trillion*.75)= about $275 billion per year. That assumes that they are consuming only basic services at a cost of about 25% of the average health care consumer that is already built into the system.

Only the upper 50% of the taxpayers will actually pay for this because they are the only ones who actually pay taxes. That will amount to about ($275B/138Mil) or $2000 per average single actual tax-paying taxpayer ($4000 per family) after it is all said and done.

I estimate that the top 5% of taxpayers (those earning over $137k/yr) will absorb 60% of the cost ( an average of $25,000 per taxpayer in that group) while the bottom 50% of taxpayers (those earning $30k/yr or less) will absorb only 3% of the cost (an average of $120 per taxpayer in that group).

It is a redistribution of wealth on par with communism. That is not the United States of America that the Framer's built.
mikeandgerry
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman-Anderson Anthratube 130-M