The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 93

Thread: Dems Don't Want It Called Obamacare Anymore

  1. #81
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    11,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Wow, that reads exactly like my life. Except I married at 28 not 29, and bought my first house at 35 instead of 37. Bought my first house with 33% down and my second with 50% down. Hope to have the house payed off before Liz goes to college. She is a high school freshman, 13 years old. Hope that works out because besides what she may get for scholarships & summer jobs, I'll be paying the rest and I don't want to dig into savings... My goal when I was younger was to retire at 55. Not going to happen.

    .
    Me three I too married in my late 20's. We only have one daughter because we wanted her to get the best education we could afford. That was a big mistake as she doesn't want to slow down professionally and provider her parents with grandkids. However, I did own (mortgage) a house when we tied the knot. I was taught that if I only earned a dollar, that I had to save a portion of it. Today, the government discourages Savings and wants us to spend more than we make.

    Gold, yes big Pharma and lawyers. Their lobby is strong, only out done by the military contractors lobby. And of course, the legal lobby was able to avoid getting Tort Reform as part of O-care as they are huge contributors to both the Dems and Repubs. No doubt that our government is run FOR special interest, that's why the Tax Code is over 76,000 pages!
    Last edited by Franco; 11-25-2013 at 05:14 PM.
    Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge



  2. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Wow, that reads exactly like my life. Except I married at 28 not 29, and bought my first house at 35 instead of 37. Bought my first house with 33% down and my second with 50% down. Hope to have the house payed off before Liz goes to college. She is a high school freshman, 13 years old. Hope that works out because besides what she may get for scholarships & summer jobs, I'll be paying the rest and I don't want to dig into savings... My goal when I was younger was to retire at 55. Not going to happen.

    FWIW I thought you might be interested in the following dentist story. My dentist's son went to dental school. When he was graduating he came home to work with dad in his practice. He bought a lot right behind my house and started building a $1/2 million house on the lot. That's a lot of house here in South Dakota. He could not convince his son to move into an apartment until he could save up some cash. He says, I don't know what he expects me to be paying him anyhow. Well I guess it wasn't enough. Next thing you know, the son is buying dad's practice. Dad cuts back to working a couple days/week. When dad had the business I got a root canal & crown for about $1000. The son takes over and the same/similar root canal crown cost me a cool $2,000. The son sells his house and builds a $1 million house about a mile away. Dad confides in me that it bothers him to see the son flaunting such wealth in a small town and complains that they teach those kids business in dental school and that is all it is to them anymore. I friend of mine who also runs field trials was a professor at University of Minnesota Dental school. Had the son as a student. Tells me the same thing, that the kids going through dental school have one thing on their minds and one thing only. The dollar... By the way, the son currently can't be any older than 35. The inside of their big home is furnished like something out of a magazine. And me and every one of his patients know why our dental rates doubled in the last half dozen years or so. But if you call around, he's just charging the going rate it seems.
    Wasn't easy was it Buzz? Hard to watch those that buy a house with zero down and a bright new shiny car on credit? Credit cards with monthly balances, till they are maxed out? You did not let envy get to you did you? Well habits are hard to break. You will always find it hard to "dip into the savings", where others are figuring if their savings will last till they die. When I retired, my income went down drastically. No pension to help make it up, only what I have saved and invested. My SS probably covers the cost of my dogs. This year, the crops are bad and the prices are down. My income will probably be about 1/2 what it was last year. This will affect how I live in 2014. So now I have to make a choice of how much to cut and how much to dip into my savings. Do I feel sorry for myself? Of course not because this is the life I chose.

    What everybody should remember is that it is never too late to SPEND LESS THAN YOU MAKE. There are only lame excuses.

  3. #83
    Senior Member Golddogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,303

    Default

    Obama’s Bay of Pigs

    By Joe Nocera


    This month, when we are remembering John F. Kennedy, I’d like to touch briefly on the greatest fiasco of his presidency: the Bay of Pigs invasion. No sooner had Kennedy taken the oath of office than he discovered that the Pentagon and CIA were preparing to send 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. Although they would be greatly outnumbered by Cuban troops, the U.S. military and the CIA assumed that once the attack began, the Cuban people would rise up and overthrow Fidel Castro.

    Kennedy was privately skeptical, but he didn’t yet have the confidence in his own judgment to override the experts he was surrounded by. So he gave the go-ahead — only to discover that the experts didn’t know what they were talking about. The exiles were quickly routed, America was humiliated and Kennedy was left to take the blame.

    So far, at least, the implementation of the Affordable Care Act has been President Barack Obama’s Bay of Pigs. Led to believe that the preparation for Obamacare was on track, Obama was blindsided when that turned out not to be the case. The website where people are supposed to enroll, HealthCare.gov, is a train wreck. People with individual policies saw that they were set to be canceled — and then couldn’t enroll in Obamacare because the website had collapsed. In other cases, people discovered that even the least expensive plan available to them under Obamacare cost more than their old plan. And on and on.

    There are two primary reasons Obamacare has gotten off to such a terrible start. The first is that it is one of the most complicated things that the federal government has ever tried to do; it was inevitable that there would be problems.

    An insurance executive friend says that the systems Obamacare required were an order of magnitude more complex than even the most complicated insurance company systems. That complexity, says Drew Altman, the president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, was necessitated by the many compromises that were required to pass the bill into law. Ted Marmor, a former Yale professor and an expert on entitlement programs, says that it has to coexist within the extraordinarily complicated “patchwork” that is the U.S. health care system.

    Marmor was a young special assistant in the old Department of Health, Education and Welfare when Medicare rolled out in 1966 — a rollout that was as smooth as Obamacare’s has been rocky. (“Our biggest worry was getting Southern hospitals to treat black people,” Marmor told me.) Partly that was because Medicare was a relatively straightforward program. But Marmor also believes that it was because the men in charge of the new Medicare program were seasoned pros who knew how to get the job done.

    Thus the second reason the Obamacare rollout has been so awful.

    “They put amateurs in charge,” Marmor says.

    Obama would have been much better served if, for instance, he had called upon his friend Jeffrey Immelt, the chief executive of General Electric, to find a team of specialists to lead the effort.

    To even think that thought, however, requires management skills that this president has never shown. Nor has his initial reaction done much to instill faith. Calling on insurance companies to allow people to keep their old insurance plans — even after they’ve been canceled — is untenable. Even if state boards of insurance would allow such a move, it still wreaks havoc with the calculations upon which premiums are set.

    Obama also announced a deadline of Nov. 30 for fixing the problems with HealthCare.gov. But what will that really accomplish? It is an arbitrary deadline that will almost surely not be met — and will sow even more mistrust.

    With each day’s stories about the troubled rollout of Obamacare, it is easy to believe that it is doomed. But it’s not — not by a long shot.

    “We’ll know a lot more when we see what the roughly 15 million to 16 million people who are expected to get coverage that first year think,” Altman says. “And they won’t know themselves what they think about Obamacare until they start getting services.”

    Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist who helped devise the Massachusetts health plan upon which Obamacare is modeled, says the deadline that matters is March 31. That’s when the individual mandate comes into play — meaning that people will either have signed up for health insurance or pay a fine.

    “It’s way too early to panic,” he says.

    Eighteen months after the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy was confronted with the Cuban missile crisis. Once again, the generals in the Pentagon wanted him to respond militarily, a route that was likely to lead to war with the Soviet Union. But this time, he trusted his own judgment, took a different path and defused the crisis. He had applied the lessons he had learned from the Bay of Pigs to the Cuban missile crisis.

    As Obama tries to turn Obamacare around, that is the looming question: Can he learn?

    Joe Nocera writes a column for the New York Times.

    Never trust a dog to watch your food!

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Golddogs View Post
    Obama’s Bay of Pigs

    By Joe Nocera


    This month, when we are remembering John F. Kennedy, I’d like to touch briefly on the greatest fiasco of his presidency: the Bay of Pigs invasion. No sooner had Kennedy taken the oath of office than he discovered that the Pentagon and CIA were preparing to send 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. Although they would be greatly outnumbered by Cuban troops, the U.S. military and the CIA assumed that once the attack began, the Cuban people would rise up and overthrow Fidel Castro.

    Kennedy was privately skeptical, but he didn’t yet have the confidence in his own judgment to override the experts he was surrounded by. So he gave the go-ahead — only to discover that the experts didn’t know what they were talking about. The exiles were quickly routed, America was humiliated and Kennedy was left to take the blame.

    So far, at least, the implementation of the Affordable Care Act has been President Barack Obama’s Bay of Pigs. Led to believe that the preparation for Obamacare was on track, Obama was blindsided when that turned out not to be the case. The website where people are supposed to enroll, HealthCare.gov, is a train wreck. People with individual policies saw that they were set to be canceled — and then couldn’t enroll in Obamacare because the website had collapsed. In other cases, people discovered that even the least expensive plan available to them under Obamacare cost more than their old plan. And on and on.

    There are two primary reasons Obamacare has gotten off to such a terrible start. The first is that it is one of the most complicated things that the federal government has ever tried to do; it was inevitable that there would be problems.

    An insurance executive friend says that the systems Obamacare required were an order of magnitude more complex than even the most complicated insurance company systems. That complexity, says Drew Altman, the president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, was necessitated by the many compromises that were required to pass the bill into law. Ted Marmor, a former Yale professor and an expert on entitlement programs, says that it has to coexist within the extraordinarily complicated “patchwork” that is the U.S. health care system.

    Marmor was a young special assistant in the old Department of Health, Education and Welfare when Medicare rolled out in 1966 — a rollout that was as smooth as Obamacare’s has been rocky. (“Our biggest worry was getting Southern hospitals to treat black people,” Marmor told me.) Partly that was because Medicare was a relatively straightforward program. But Marmor also believes that it was because the men in charge of the new Medicare program were seasoned pros who knew how to get the job done.

    Thus the second reason the Obamacare rollout has been so awful.

    “They put amateurs in charge,” Marmor says.

    Obama would have been much better served if, for instance, he had called upon his friend Jeffrey Immelt, the chief executive of General Electric, to find a team of specialists to lead the effort.

    To even think that thought, however, requires management skills that this president has never shown. Nor has his initial reaction done much to instill faith. Calling on insurance companies to allow people to keep their old insurance plans — even after they’ve been canceled — is untenable. Even if state boards of insurance would allow such a move, it still wreaks havoc with the calculations upon which premiums are set.

    Obama also announced a deadline of Nov. 30 for fixing the problems with HealthCare.gov. But what will that really accomplish? It is an arbitrary deadline that will almost surely not be met — and will sow even more mistrust.

    With each day’s stories about the troubled rollout of Obamacare, it is easy to believe that it is doomed. But it’s not — not by a long shot.

    “We’ll know a lot more when we see what the roughly 15 million to 16 million people who are expected to get coverage that first year think,” Altman says. “And they won’t know themselves what they think about Obamacare until they start getting services.”

    Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist who helped devise the Massachusetts health plan upon which Obamacare is modeled, says the deadline that matters is March 31. That’s when the individual mandate comes into play — meaning that people will either have signed up for health insurance or pay a fine.

    “It’s way too early to panic,” he says.

    Eighteen months after the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy was confronted with the Cuban missile crisis. Once again, the generals in the Pentagon wanted him to respond militarily, a route that was likely to lead to war with the Soviet Union. But this time, he trusted his own judgment, took a different path and defused the crisis. He had applied the lessons he had learned from the Bay of Pigs to the Cuban missile crisis.

    As Obama tries to turn Obamacare around, that is the looming question: Can he learn?

    Joe Nocera writes a column for the New York Times.

    I don't know if you are old enough to remember it but the author left out the MOST CRITICAL POINT. Both the CIA and the Pentagon ASSUMED that Kennedy would commit American air power should the invasion appear to fail. Instead Kennedy CUT HIS LOSSES and refused to stick another fist into the tar baby. 2000 waivers, promises the President KNEW could not be kept, complexity beyond anything ever attempted and the hollow EXCUSE THAT IT WILL BE FIXED.
    Why do you think the President delayed the Employer Mandate? Can you imagine the howl when that comes out in a year?? Sort of like feeding the victim arsenic slowly and letting it get progressively sick but slowly. If you think the individual mandate is a problem needing a "fix", just wait till the employer mandate goes on line.

  5. #85
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    11,018

    Default

    We had out corporate HR online meeting to review health insurance coverage of 2014 this morning. Same insurance company, BC/BS, same coverage, same deductible, is going to cost me (62 years old) $16. more per month. That's 3 packs of smokes per month, those thieves!
    Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge



  6. #86
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,418

    Default

    Franco, did you have a pretty good plan before?
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  7. #87
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    11,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    Franco, did you have a pretty good plan before?
    Excellant plan, low deductables.
    Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge



  8. #88
    Senior Member Golddogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,303

    Default

    How Republicans can save it, conservatively

    By Austin Frakt


    Some conservative policy pundits are starting to imagine a detente over Obamacare, in which Republicans recognize the conservative nature of the law and support it in return for tweaks that advance their ideas. Liberals should be open to such a deal.

    Even though Democrats passed it, the Affordable Care Act offers a hospitable environment for conservative reform. That’s not just because it incorporates aspects of a proposal from the conservative Heritage Foundation, closely resembles the health-care-reform bill that Mitt Romney signed in Massachu-setts, and bears striking similarities to earlier proposals by Republican members of Congress. No, the reason the ACA may be good for conservatives is that it provides a sound chassis for many of their health-policy proposals.

    Some of us have been saying so for years; finally, some conservative thinkers are recognizing it too. In a recent op-ed, Paul Howard and Yevgeniy Feyman offer ideas that would “make Obamacare a Trojan horse for conservative health-care reform.” Ramesh Ponnuru, Yuval Levin and Ross Douthat have also proposed reforms consistent with Obamacare’s structure. Well, it’s about time! Despite that the ideas are being offered from the right, liberals should rejoice.

    Imagine what could be accomplished if conservatives built a coalition for reasonable changes to the law: Democrats could rest easier about the law’s future, and Republicans could advance their priorities.

    Some conservative ideas mesh seamlessly with the ACA’s structure. It would, for example, be easy to change the law so that more catastrophic plans could be offered on exchanges. Similarly, adjustments to the “Cadillac tax” on high-cost insurance plans could help to cap or phase out the employer-sponsored health insurance tax subsidy, a goal that House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan has supported. Finally, the exchanges could be adjusted to permit health insurers to offer coverage across state lines. Starting in 2016, states are permitted to voluntarily enter compacts for that purpose; the law could be changed to allow even more of it.

    To be sure, liberals will resist such rightward moves, which may look like steps away from the left-wing ideal of a single-payer, “Medicare for all” system. But the law isn’t built to advance such a system, and Democrats might as well accept it. In fact, they may as well embrace the law’s conservative design too, and invite Republicans to take advantage of it. In exchange, they should negotiate some much needed fixes to the law. Three come to mind: First, resolving what’s known as the family glitch, in which some families simultaneously face unaffordable health insurance options at work and are ineligible for exchange-based premium credits. Second, making sure cost-sharing subsidies are not subject to government cuts known as sequestration, the consequences of which are uncertain. Third, clarifying the language of the law to remove any suggestion that premium credits be provided only through state exchanges, not the federally operated exchange that 27 states rely on.

    There’s nothing wrong with this kind of trade. After all, big laws need occasional tweaks to survive in the long run. More important, bipartisan give-andtake on health policy, undertaken in good faith, has the potential to solidify liberal ends. Bringing Republicans into the reform tent would make them responsible for trying to hold it up, stabilizing health-care politics and cementing a broader, bipartisan coalition for near-universal coverage. That would be a victory for Democrats.

    If there’s an obstacle here, it’s politics. Good ideas and reasonable compromises give way all too easily to the opportunity to demagogue or the need to appeal to the base.

    Neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted in Obamacare, but Republicans, without casting a single vote for it, achieved more than they’re willing to admit. It’s long past time for them to accept the law as a working template for the future, and for both parties to reach reasonable compromises to improve it.

    Austin Frakt is a health economist with the U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs. He wrote this column for Bloomberg View. His email address is Austin Frakt at frakt@ bu. edu.

    Never trust a dog to watch your food!

  9. #89
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    2,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeus3925 View Post
    Sorry to destroy your myth. We have the 26th best health care system in the world.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/health/were-n...res-2D11635080
    Just don't try to cut in front of any Canadians at your local clinic....heck Zeus3925 do you believe everything you read? Just askin...

  10. #90
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,418

    Default

    Golddogs, Frakt is assuming that the liberals' actual motive in O-care is halth care, when it has as much, or more, to do with control. A govt that can control your food (food stamps & farming), your heat (carbon taxation) and your health care controls just about everything in your life.

    Pragmatically, however, O-care is such a convoluted and complex law, that it is probably better to take some of the ideas that might work and craft much simpler legislation. It would be very difficult to "modify" O-care when so much is left in the hands of the bureaucrat (currently Sebelius and whoever else is appointed in the bureaucracy). It then becomes too easy for each new administration to bend the law through regulations. We have seen that Obama will change the law when he feels like it, even though it may actually be unconstitutional for him to do so, and Congress is unwilling to confront that.

    Better to have a simpler law that addresses the key issues of pre-existing conditions, tort reform, and empowering patients to spend their health care dollars more wisely; and do so in the simplest, least bureaucratic-heavy fashion.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •