Nanker Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 It's about time that people like me were punished for daring to appreciate our employer-provided "Cadillac plans". Soon I won't have to feel guilty for intentionally selecting an employer who provides excellent benefits. Boy, that'll sure be a load off...... "Cadillac plans" are very hard to find these days - unless you're in a union or a member of the public sector - which makes the employer's plans exempt from the "luxury"tax - because that's fair. I have my HC coverage through my wife's work. They dropped below the Cadillac plan level to something more like a Chevy II plan. So now we have higher premiums, higher deductibles, and oh yes - the best part is that we get to pay over $3,000 in extra Fed taxes - because we "make too much" and it's "fair" to do so.
Azalin Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 "Cadillac plans" are very hard to find these days - unless you're in a union or a member of the public sector - which makes the employer's plans exempt from the "luxury"tax - because that's fair. I have my HC coverage through my wife's work. They dropped below the Cadillac plan level to something more like a Chevy II plan. So now we have higher premiums, higher deductibles, and oh yes - the best part is that we get to pay over $3,000 in extra Fed taxes - because we "make too much" and it's "fair" to do so. I'm sure mine will be reduced to "Chevy II" status soon enough, but for now it's still really good. It's getting expensive for the employer, but the union (Communications Workers of America) has managed to keep our health insurance pretty much the same for the last 20 years. It will likely be a different story when the current contract expires in May. I have no doubt that as retirement approaches in nine or ten years, my health coverage will have changed quite a bit. The only thing that I can think of that may work in my favor is that labor costs are constantly being reduced through not replacing retirees. My position with the company is a good one, but since telecom is evolving at such as fast pace, there will soon be no need for techs who know how to work with copper or repair analog data circuits (you'd be surprised how many of them are still in service).
keepthefaith Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 "Cadillac plans" are very hard to find these days - unless you're in a union or a member of the public sector - which makes the employer's plans exempt from the "luxury"tax - because that's fair. I have my HC coverage through my wife's work. They dropped below the Cadillac plan level to something more like a Chevy II plan. So now we have higher premiums, higher deductibles, and oh yes - the best part is that we get to pay over $3,000 in extra Fed taxes - because we "make too much" and it's "fair" to do so. My family plan has $5K annual deductible and the premium is approaching what the gubmint considers "cadillac" which I think is $25K permium or greater per year. We're slightly above $20K in premium now and we've got no sickness in the family or significant history of extraordinary claims.
B-Man Posted September 2, 2016 Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) Coming soon.............to a country near you. Forced Reeducation for MDs Who Don’t Want to Kill by Wesley J.Smith Earlier today I posted a comment about a bioethics “Consensus Statement” published by Oxford University that advocated eviscerating medical conscience rights of doctors with religious or moral objections to procedures such as abortion and euthanasia. Looking more closely at the authoritarian document, I see that the bioethicists would require dissenting doctors to perform community service for their thought crime and go to reeducation classes about the harm From the “Consensus Statement”: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2016/08/consensus-statement-on-conscientious-objection-in-healthcare/ Healthcare practitioners who are exempted from performing certain medical procedures on conscientious grounds should be required to compensate society and the health system for their failure to fulfill their professional obligations by providing public-benefitting services. Medical students should not be exempted from learning how to perform basic medical procedures they consider to be morally wrong. Even if they become conscientious objectors, they will still be required to perform the procedure to which they object in emergency situations or when referral is not possible or poses too great a burden on patients or on the healthcare system… Healthcare practitioners should also be educated to reflect on the influence of cognitive bias in their objections. Bottom line: Refuse to commit or be complicit in what your religion considers a terrible sin, or your conscience believes to be a terrible wrong, and you will be made to pay! If you are pro-life and want to become an MD, forget about it: You are not welcome in the healthcare professions. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439628/forced-reeducation-mds-who-dont-want-kill ADDED: DEATH PANEL DISCUSSION: Obamacare Costs Skyrocket; When Does It Stop? Middle-class households are finding more of their Obamacare costs are coming out of their own pockets. Self-covered individuals are hit hardest, but employers providing coverage have fought back against rising costs by reducing plan benefits. Deductibles are up 67% since 2010. That’s seven times more than wages. And the cost of prescription drugs is out of sight. Read the whole thing, including some scary-ass charts from the Obamacare-lovin’ Kaiser Foundation. Edited September 2, 2016 by B-Man
B-Man Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 STUART VARNEY DEMANDS ON-AIR APOLOGY FROM OBAMACARE ARCHITECT ZEKE EMANUEL. Why would Rahm’s brother apologize? This risky healthcare scheme (to paraphrase Al Gore) is imploding on schedule nicely, thus paving the way for single payer and fully socialized medicine. It’s crashing by design, to coin a phrase. FLASHBACK: Remember how Hollywood told us Obamacare was the bee’s knees? But that didn’t also stop such (allegedly) nonfictional sources as CNN from sending out a children’s choir to sing Obamacare’s praises, and Katie Couric (then host of the CBS Evening News) to read on-air poems about it as well in the months leading up to Obamacare’s shotgun passing by an entirely Democrat vote.
GG Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 STUART VARNEY DEMANDS ON-AIR APOLOGY FROM OBAMACARE ARCHITECT ZEKE EMANUEL. Why would Rahms brother apologize? This risky healthcare scheme (to paraphrase Al Gore) is imploding on schedule nicely, thus paving the way for single payer and fully socialized medicine. Its crashing This is precisely why cable news sucks. Varney had him on the ropes, and all he had to do was let Emanuel explain his half truth and then slam him with the reality that ObamaCare is a disaster and keep hammering away with insurers walking away from the tire fire and premiums skyrocketing. But he didn't. So now Dems have a talking point that Fox News is part of the obstructionist GOP week don't offer alternative solutions These guys are paid to be morons?
Doc Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 This is precisely why cable news sucks. Varney had him on the ropes, and all he had to do was let Emanuel explain his half truth and then slam him with the reality that ObamaCare is a disaster and keep hammering away with insurers walking away from the tire fire and premiums skyrocketing. But he didn't. So now Dems have a talking point that Fox News is part of the obstructionist GOP week don't offer alternative solutions These guys are paid to be morons? He got the point across. All Zeke was going to do was mention the few good things about it.
GG Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 He got the point across. All Zeke was going to do was mention the few good things about it. Not really. He badgered him. It would have been a much stronger segment if he let Zeke get his standard talking points and then hammered him back. easy stuff.
Doc Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 Not really. He badgered him. It would have been a much stronger segment if he let Zeke get his standard talking points and then hammered him back. easy stuff. The article says he mentioned that "premiums are going through the roof, health insurers are pulling out of exchanges, and the cost of health care is skyrocketing -- all points even The New York Times this week admitted."
B-Man Posted September 5, 2016 Posted September 5, 2016 (edited) The next 60days will see the complete attempt at rewriting #ObamaCare history-Soviet and Orwell style- @hughhewitt Government's Obamacare Failures Spur Calls for More Government Meddling From the public option to stiffer penalties, Obamacare supporters won't admit government is the problem The troubles besetting Obamacare include the cost of Medicaid expansion, which has blown past projections on both the individual and state-government level. Another ailment: the withdrawal of several major insurance companies from state marketplaces, driven by a lack of individual participation. Aetna, Humana, and United Health Group all have pulled out of state after state—in some cases, leaving only a single insurer to offer policies through the exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act. The reason is simple enough: While plenty of sick people have signed up, millions of healthy individuals have decided they would rather not. The law prohibits insurers from turning down the former for coverage. And while it penalizes the latter for declining insurance, it doesn't force people to enroll. The result: Insurance companies don't have enough healthy people paying premiums to offset what it pays out for medical claims. The numbers are staggering: Three years ago, federal officials estimated that 24 million people would have signed up for individual coverage through the federal and state exchanges by now. The actual number: 11 million. Many of those who didn't have decided it makes no sense to pay steep premiums for a product they don't think they'll have to use. They've made a calculated bet that a few hundred dollars wasted in tax penalties beats a few thousand dollars wasted on unused insurance. The obvious lesson here is that the government shouldn't try to hammer square pegs into round holes. So naturally, Washington is ignoring it. President Obama thinks the answer is to create a "public option"—a government insurance program—for the exchanges, to spur competition. Brilliant plan: Insurance companies already have a hard time eking out a profit on the exchanges, so set up a nonprofit competitor to underbid them. That'll have them knocking down the door to get back in, right? To others, the answer lies in jacking up the federal tax penalties levied on those who don't buy insurance to make nonparticipation altogether too painful. In their view, government is just not being punitive enough. More at the link...... Edited September 5, 2016 by B-Man
reddogblitz Posted September 5, 2016 Posted September 5, 2016 (edited) The law prohibits insurers from turning down the former for coverage. And while it penalizes the latter for declining insurance, it doesn't force people to enroll. The result: Insurance companies don't have enough healthy people paying premiums to offset what it pays out for medical claims. They should have gone with The Red Dog plan. Raise everyone's taxes a few percent, and the the government buys a basic health plan for everyone. Everybody is insured and can be treated it they need it. Then healthy people would be bought in too. It would be the largest pool in the world. And the government could negotiate for price spurring competition. If you want more extensive coverage, you can buy it. Edited September 5, 2016 by reddogblitz
DC Tom Posted September 5, 2016 Posted September 5, 2016 And the government could negotiate for price spurring competition.
B-Man Posted September 9, 2016 Posted September 9, 2016 (edited) OBAMACARE FAILED BECAUSE IT VIOLATED ECONOMICS 101 AND HUMAN NATURE 101: Get ready for the source of this insight: The Chicago Tribune. Remember, not a single Republican in Congress voted for ObamaCare. Violating Economics 101 as well as violating common sense were two reasons the GOP opposed the hideous thing en masse. More from The Chicago Tribune: It straitjacketed insurers into providing overly expensive, soup-to-nuts policies. It wasn’t flexible enough so that people could buy as much coverage as they wanted and could afford — not what the government dictated. Many healthy people primarily want catastrophic coverage. Obamacare couldn’t lure them in, couldn’t persuade them to buy on the chance they’d get sick. Read the whole thing. RELATED: Harry Reid says “ObamaCare has been terrific” for the country. Edited September 9, 2016 by B-Man
unbillievable Posted September 9, 2016 Posted September 9, 2016 They should have gone with The Red Dog plan. Raise everyone's taxes a few percent, and the the government buys a basic health plan for everyone. Everybody is insured and can be treated it they need it. Then healthy people would be bought in too. It would be the largest pool in the world. And the government could negotiate for price spurring competition. If you want more extensive coverage, you can buy it. There is a great example of this method being run, but encompassing other industries as well, in Venezuela. You should go live there.
Alaska Darin Posted September 10, 2016 Author Posted September 10, 2016 They should have gone with The Red Dog plan. Raise everyone's taxes a few percent, and the the government buys a basic health plan for everyone. Everybody is insured and can be treated it they need it. Then healthy people would be bought in too. It would be the largest pool in the world. And the government could negotiate for price spurring competition. If you want more extensive coverage, you can buy it. If there's one thing the government is good at, it's negotiating for the lowest price. Said no one. Ever.
reddogblitz Posted September 10, 2016 Posted September 10, 2016 There is a great example of this method being run, but encompassing other industries as well, in Venezuela. You should go live there. America, Love it, or Leave it.
/dev/null Posted September 11, 2016 Posted September 11, 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/10/hospitals-on-brink-of-collapse-say-health-chiefs
GG Posted September 11, 2016 Posted September 11, 2016 If there's one thing the government is good at, it's negotiating for the lowest price. Said no one. Ever. Funny. I keep hearing how healthcare administrative costs are going to drop to 2% upon a government takeover.
Gary M Posted September 12, 2016 Posted September 12, 2016 Coming soon.............to a country near you. Forced Reeducation for MDs Who Don’t Want to Kill by Wesley J.Smith Earlier today I posted a comment about a bioethics “Consensus Statement” published by Oxford University that advocated eviscerating medical conscience rights of doctors with religious or moral objections to procedures such as abortion and euthanasia. Looking more closely at the authoritarian document, I see that the bioethicists would require dissenting doctors to perform community service for their thought crime and go to reeducation classes about the harm From the “Consensus Statement”: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2016/08/consensus-statement-on-conscientious-objection-in-healthcare/ Bottom line: Refuse to commit or be complicit in what your religion considers a terrible sin, or your conscience believes to be a terrible wrong, and you will be made to pay! If you are pro-life and want to become an MD, forget about it: You are not welcome in the healthcare professions. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439628/forced-reeducation-mds-who-dont-want-kill ADDED: DEATH PANEL DISCUSSION: Obamacare Costs Skyrocket; When Does It Stop? Read the whole thing, including some scary-ass charts from the Obamacare-lovin’ Kaiser Foundation. Killing babies in utero, the elderly and infirmed is now considered "basic medical procedures"?
Recommended Posts