Who else got an insurance rate hike?
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Jock strap recommendations for low hanging balls?
Next: Media buries story about convictions for massive election rigging
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 11 Apr 2010 12:52 On Apr 10, 11:41 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > news:9ed87e95-2a25-455f-8b86-35190ba9f39d(a)i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > On Apr 10, 3:57 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > >news:9138607c-c11e-464a-a732-a609a18938dd(a)y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com.... > > > Or how about you get > > what you can earn...and the govt helps out people in legitimate > > need...but no universality to any entitlement. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > That's the system in place now, Rob. Part D is not an entitlement. It's > > VOLUNTARY. For example, BK chose to not enroll and that's his right. He > > will be penalized if he enrolls later. > > > By having more enrolled, costs are reduced, because the insurance > companies > > have more leverage with the Rx companies. The program is working. > > > -Greg > > Really? Voluntary? So I can pass on medicare...not pay into it, not > collect anything from it? > > You can pass on Part B (medical) and part D. Most people do not pass on > part A (hospital) because there is no premium deduction for it out of their > SS check. As for not paying into it, that's not hard either. Just go cash > with revenue and expenses. > > -Greg I have no choice, and you know it. I have to pay into medicare, even though I am convinced there will be nothing left of it when I retire.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 11 Apr 2010 12:53 On Apr 10, 11:42 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > news:e7aac200-720c-4b5b-a9ae-aecb9d9dfaaa(a)x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com... > On Apr 10, 4:31 pm, "Kommienezuspadt" <NoS...(a)NoWay.com> wrote: > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > >news:0ffe4436-5f36-430d-8832-21372dc1f572(a)b33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com.... > > On Apr 9, 5:27 pm, "Kommienezuspadt" <NoS...(a)NoThanks.net> wrote: > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > > >news:db82085e-9774-4cc7-8569-bed8104d1ed0(a)g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com.... > > > On Apr 7, 7:27 pm, "Kommienezuspadt" <NoS...(a)NoThanks.net> wrote: > > > > > "BAR" <sc...(a)you.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:MPG.2626db0beecff47c989db5(a)news.giganews.com... > > > > > > In article <yP6vn.306035$OX4.117...(a)newsfe25.iad>, > > NoS...(a)NoThanks.net > > > > > > > > says... > > > > >> The nature of the "loophole" doesn't alter the fact that it > > > > >> represents > > > > >> billions in revenue for the various companies. IT was a reduction > in > > > > >> the expense associated with a specific benefit, whose expressed > > > > >> purpose was to sustain the benefit. Now that the loophole is gone, > > > > >> the > > > > >> benefit too will go. > > > > > >> My understanding is that this particular thing was associated with > > > > >> the > > > > >> Bush administrations free drugs for seniors program, and this > program > > > > >> saved them money by maintaining a class of seniors who got their > drug > > > > >> money from another source...it was/is apparently cheaper this way > > > > >> than > > > > >> having the govt directly subsidize the seniors. > > > > > >> This will pull billions from salary expenses from various > businesses > > > > >> and cannot have any other effect than reducing jobs and/or > benefits, > > > > >> depending on how they want to make up the revenue shortfall. > > > > > >> === > > > > >> It was a gift to the large companies that has been closed -- simple > > > > >> as > > > > >> that -- maybe YOU like handing over $$ & then letting them write it > > > > >> off > > > > >> as > > > > >> an expense --- if so - you must be a give it away & borrow type > > > > > > Tax policy should encourage employment rather than discourage > > > > > employment. Screwing the big companies only results in screwing the > > > > > "worker", the guy Obama says he is trying to help. > > > > > > How many people were hired by the poor today? > > > > > Let's give AT&T all of your money then. > > > > I can choose to purchase a product from ATT or not. I cannot choose my > > > health insurance though. > > > > === > > > > true -- but YOU said they were being screwed by them not being able to > > > write > > > off a huge gift to them -- I'm still shaking my head on how you can > think > > > that is a good idea - but you'll howl about paying for insurance with > tax > > > money. > > > I never said the companies were being screwed, just that the > > elimination of the policy will cost them money, and it will, and that > > it is salary money that they will loose. These are simple facts, and > > it is not too difficult to extrapolate the consequences. > > > I agree with you that it is and was a dumb policy. > > > === > > > I stand corrected -- it was BAR who said it was screwing them -- > > > Still -- you are saying that we should give them $$ to buy insurance -- > but > > not regular people --- How can you defend giving money away & then defend > > not giving it for the same end result? > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > > signature database 5016 (20100410) __________ > > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > >http://www.eset.com > > Nope. People should buy their own insurance. Why should health > insurance be different than any other form of insurance? > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > How do you propose to motivate healthy people to buy their own health > insurance? > > -Greg It's called freedom. They can buy or not, and face the music they compose.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 11 Apr 2010 12:55 On Apr 11, 9:33 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <82cuc1F45...(a)mid.individual.net>, d...(a)remove.ipns.com > says... > > > > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > >news:906376a6-c6c2-4ea1-9757-37fea5e6d0b2(a)i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com.... > > > Really? So no one can buy their own meds? No one? That's an absurd > > conclusion. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Rob, > > > In 2006, I signed up about 100 seniors on part D plans. Part of the > > enrollment was reviewing the cost of their meds, so they could choose how > > much coverage they need. Some of these people were easily paying $300 plus > > for medicine and didn't have the means to do it. > > > You really need to wake up as to how much stuff costs out there, beyond > > generic Rx. Enrolling these people was very eye opening to me. > > Maybe the AARP should turn its membership and resources onto the drug > companies and badger them into answering the questions about what the US > consumers are paying the research and development costs of the drugs? > Why isn't that cost fairly born by all of those who use the drugs > throughout the world? I am amazed how many people don't seem to know that AARP is going to pick up a lot of the supplementary insurance for seniors. They in fact are an insurance company at this point.
From: BAR on 11 Apr 2010 13:02 In article <d9cfcc15-9cb1-4097-9159-afdbb05872f1 @u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>, frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com says... > > On Apr 10, 11:39�pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > > > news:906376a6-c6c2-4ea1-9757-37fea5e6d0b2(a)i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > > Really? So no one can buy their own meds? No one? That's an absurd > > conclusion. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Rob, > > > > In 2006, I signed up about 100 seniors on part D plans. �Part of the > > enrollment was reviewing the cost of their meds, so they could choose how > > much coverage they need. �Some of these people were easily paying $300 plus > > for medicine and didn't have the means to do it. > > > > You really need to wake up as to how much stuff costs out there, beyond > > generic Rx. �Enrolling these people was very eye opening to me. > > > > -Greg > > Really? So A guy who pays $6K per year to golf can't pay $300.00 per > month for meds? So who is going to pay then? The govt clearly doesn't > have the money. People who need help should get it, but those who > don't shouldn't. How about people who pay $6K per year to drive a car. > Should we buy their meds too? Well said.
From: John B. on 11 Apr 2010 18:13
On Apr 10, 11:08 pm, Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 10, 3:49 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > >news:73b1da5a-b64d-46e1-9e92-8506b0b2ba4a(a)u31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com.... > > On Apr 9, 1:55 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > > >news:8f9e8c65-f27d-40ce-974a-aca10aca853d(a)y14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com.... > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > People have that choice now and often take it....but it's not the best > > > > choice for everyone. For example...young married couple in their 20's, > > > > having children. Are you expecting them to pony up the first 10k for the > > > > pre-natal and delivery? > > > > > -Greg > > > > People do not have that choice. They get the health insurance provided > > > by their employer, and that insurance is far too often designed to > > > suit the needs of the older (and more powerful within the company) > > > employees. People need to be able to choose their own insurance as > > > much as possible, and certainty don't need the govt. or their > > > employers making those choices. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Employers pay most, if not all, the insurance for the employee, so they > > > ain't complaining. Their dependents have the choice of buying in or > > > acquiring their own plans, which they often do. There are no victims in > > > your scenario. They have choices. > > > > -Greg > > > The money allocated to salaries and benefits is a budgeted item. You > > want to be as competitive as possible. If the money were not spent on > > health insurance, it would go to salary. My advocacy is for the > > employee to get the benefit of what they earn and make their own > > decisions with respect to things like health care, as opposed to have > > the salary paid to the employee reduced and some health insurance > > program imposed on the employee by the employer...or the govt..the > > govt would be worse though, IMHO as it is in fact less responsive to > > the employee and far more expensive. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > IOW, people buy health insurance like they buy car insurance. Fine with me. > > You still have to force people to buy it otherwise only the sick will buy it > > in their time of need. In the scenario you wish for, how do you force them > > to buy? The present system does a fair job of enrolling all, by forcing the > > employees to particpate. Again, how is this accomplished on an individual > > basis? > > > -Greg > > What happens if you buy car insurance after you have an accident? You > pay for the accident. You can pay for your own health care too. One > thing for sure, there is not enough wealth in the system to have the > govt pay for everyone's health care. The govt doesn't pay for everybody's health care and it still won't now that the new law has taken effect. |