77 replies to this topic

[Merc14]

-Mr_Fess-, on 18 December 2012 - 12:08 AM, said:

A few weeks back there was a thread here about Walmart and unions trying to interfere and fight for $13 standard wages for all employees. Currently it's $8+. Anyhow, without modesty I'd like to say I owned that thread with logic, math and basic business economics with a touch of common sense. In every way I could figure those wages would necessitate prices for things at Walmart by nearly double. I don't need to tell you all the pros and cons of that. So, last week I was bs'n with one of my best friends of 25 years who I've come to find recently that he's pretty much a liberal which I haven't taken too well. He's never been into politics much before recently and I always figured we saw eye to eye but things were blown wide open this election year. So, the Walmart subject came up some how. We argued and I sent him the link to the thread since I am better at debating through type than through speech. After all the evidence I supplied, the math the logic ect; he ended the argument which we continued through text message, yes we need a life, with 'whatever, they're greedy sobs who need to give back to the employees and screw their profits.' His favorite documentaries are produced by Michael Moore.

It is pretty depressing isn't it.  Liberalism is about feelings and nothing else.  They don't care about the real world effects of their poliies, only that it makes them feel good.  That is until the bottom falls out and they riot like the Greeks and Spaniards.

Edited by Merc14, 18 December 2012 - 12:13 AM.

[F3SS]

Merc14, on 18 December 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

It is pretty depressing isn't it.  Liberalism is about feelings and nothing else.  They don't care about the real world effects of their poliies, only that it makes them feel good.  That is until the bottom falls out and they riot like the Greeks and Spaniards.

That's right. He was getting very emotional, he tried to say he was passionate, but yes emotional about it and I was being calm and reasonable, albeit frustrated. This whole gun control issue right now is going to get nasty. The libs want to enact major policies based on high emotions and I've always said that countries can't be ran on emotion and most liberal policies are based on just that. It's reacting during the heat of the moment and how many times does that go well in your personal life?

[Startraveler]

RavenHawk, on 17 December 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

And that is Obamacare.

Yes it is.  It is not the insurance I had before.

Who's selling or sponsoring your plan? Anthem, Blue Cross, Aetna, Humana, your employer via self-insurance? Unless you've got Medicare or Medicaid, I know who isn't: your state and federal government.

Quote

If it's just "offer" then why are companies looking at reducing their workforce to at least part time (or those just above 50 employees to cut under 50) so that they don't have to deal with the penalty?

Employers are under no obligation to make an offer of coverage to part-time workers, nor are employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees required to make any offer of coverage to anyone.

Quote

This is neither here nor there.  Then this is one of the few Republican ideas that remained in the law.  If so then I'm sure the Republican concept was for this to work with other Republican ideas which would have made coverage less expensive, that have been thrown out.  So this isn't really a Republican idea.  I.e. if interstate competition was included with higher deductibles then overall costs would come down.  But that's not what is happening.

Since you're complaining about the cost-sharing in your plan, it's very much here and there. Shifting costs onto the backs of the consumer is the primary cost control idea the Republicans have. You pay more out of pocket, you buy less, the aggregate amount for which the insurer is on the hook goes down, premiums rise more slowly (although if you actually need care, that won't matter all that much to you). Granted, people will probably cut back on care they need but that's just how it goes. It's a blunt instrument but it's pretty much the only one they have in their toolkit. Yet you don't seem to like it very much.

As for interstate competition, the ACA allows insurers to sell plans across state lines in as many states as they like. It actually requires that consumers have access to multiple interstate insurance options in the new markets.

Quote

Yeah, I've already got several calls from my insurance company asking about whether I'm at risk or not.  Well, I'm over 35 but not at risk so I can't be pro active which *I* would consider preventative.

If you're over 35 it doesn't matter if you're at risk or not, cholesterol screenings are covered for you without any cost-sharing.