Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    Look, I think we can all agree that social security is a ponzi scheme. After all, didn't Madoff base his investment strategy upon the same thing Social Security does?
    No, it's not. Just because it transfers money from today's workers to retirees does not make it a ponzi scheme.

    Comment


    • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

      Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
      Health insurers in most states (perhaps all) have to submit their annual insurance premium rates to state insurance regulatory boards. Prices will not change "willy-nilly". As part of that review, they have to be able to justify or explain their rate changes to that board in order to get the new rates approved. Since insurance is now a required product, do you think that state overview will slacken or tighten going forward?
      I understand it happens, but why? Ford Motor does not have to have regulatory review of its prices from each state. Would the public be better served it the insurance companies could offer insurance across state lines?
      CCT '77 & '78
      4 kids
      5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
      1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

      ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
      - Benjamin Franklin

      Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

      I want to live forever. So far, so good.

      Comment


      • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

        Originally posted by unofan View Post
        No, it's not. Just because it transfers money from today's workers to retirees does not make it a ponzi scheme.
        Then why does it make it as such for Madoff?

        Comment


        • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

          Originally posted by joecct View Post
          I understand it happens, but why? Ford Motor does not have to have regulatory review of its prices from each state. Would the public be better served it the insurance companies could offer insurance across state lines?
          Was that part of repealing the Glass-Steagall act a mistake?

          Comment


          • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

            Originally posted by joecct View Post
            I understand it happens, but why? Ford Motor does not have to have regulatory review of its prices from each state. Would the public be better served it the insurance companies could offer insurance across state lines?
            I don't argue for it, because I think the market would self regulate in that if prices get too high, competitors move in and prices correct.

            The reason that these regulators do exist, though, is that people in government think insurance is too complex for people to understand and therefore require a governing body to regulate prices and practices. Or it was just an excuse to create yet another government jobs program.
            "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

            "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

            "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

            Comment


            • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

              Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
              I don't argue for it, because I think the market would self regulate in that if prices get too high, competitors move in and prices correct.

              The reason that these regulators do exist, though, is that people in government think insurance is too complex for people to understand and therefore require a governing body to regulate prices and practices. Or it was just an excuse to create yet another government jobs program.
              I believe a lot of it has to do with the fact that insurance crossing state lines was also supposedly a factor in the Great Depression.

              Comment


              • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                I believe a lot of it has to do with the fact that insurance crossing state lines was also supposedly a factor in the Great Depression.
                That's crap - not your assessment, rather the notion that the ability to conduct interstate commerce in the insurance market was a cause. All it does is to completely remove the ability for insurance companies to take advantage of economies of scale. There's no reason a company in Delaware can't provide a product that comports with the rules of NY and another for MN.
                "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                  Then why does it make it as such for Madoff?
                  Seriously? You can't think of any differences between a gov't program funded by taxes and an "investment" scheme? None at all?

                  Comment


                  • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                    Originally posted by unofan View Post
                    Seriously? You can't think of any differences between a gov't program funded by taxes and an "investment" scheme? None at all?
                    Nope. Not one bit. Although I'm sure you're going to start promoting your favored brand at this point...

                    Comment


                    • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                      Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                      That's crap - not your assessment, rather the notion that the ability to conduct interstate commerce in the insurance market was a cause. All it does is to completely remove the ability for insurance companies to take advantage of economies of scale. There's no reason a company in Delaware can't provide a product that comports with the rules of NY and another for MN.
                      Then why was Glass-Steagall created as part of the New Deal to prohibit banks from crossing state lines?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                        Nope. Not one bit. Although I'm sure you're going to start promoting your favored brand at this point...
                        Go look up the definition of ponzi scheme, then lay out with clarity why you think social security is one.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                          Originally posted by unofun View Post
                          Go look up the definition of ponzi scheme, then lay out with clarity why you think social security is one.
                          "Money from new investors is used to pay off existing investors (with the promoter taking a cut off the top)."



                          I can see the analogy though I'm not sure I agree with it. It is more of an unfunded pension scheme, in which current cash flow is used to pay off prior years' accrued liabilities. That is totally illegal in the private sector and rampant in the public sector.



                          If I could pick two constitutional amendments to add, one of them would be that the legislature cannot exempt itself (the government) from laws it imposes on everyone else.
                          "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

                          "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

                          "Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats

                          "People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom

                          Comment


                          • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                            Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
                            "Money from new investors is used to pay off existing investors (with the promoter taking a cut off the top)."



                            I can see the analogy though I'm not sure I agree with it. It is more of an unfunded pension scheme, in which current cash flow is used to pay off prior years' accrued liabilities. That is totally illegal in the private sector and rampant in the public sector.



                            If I could pick two constitutional amendments to add, one of them would be that the legislature cannot exempt itself (the government) from laws it imposes on everyone else.
                            Out of curiosity, what's the other?

                            Comment


                            • Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

                              Fast-food restaurants have reduced their estimates of how much Obama"care" will cost them, primarily because they expect that many of their employees will decline the employer-offered health insurance:

                              They say many employees will decline company-offered insurance, either because they can get insurance through Medicaid or a family member, or because they prefer to pay the penalty for not having health insurance. The penalty next year will be as low as $95 next year, much less than most employees will be asked to pay through company-sponsored insurance plans.

                              The comments suggest that some people may fall through the cracks in the law and remain uninsured, at least for a time.

                              AFC Enterprises Inc., AFCE -0.22%operator of the Popeye's chain, is among the employers that has few takers for its current plan. Ralph Bower, Popeye's president-U.S., said in an interview that fewer than 5% of employees have signed up for a plan that carries high deductibles and costs $2.50 a week. So he doesn't expect many more employees to enroll next year, when employees likely will have to pay about $25 a week for a plan offering more coverage.

                              "It's just not affordable for employees," Mr. Bower said.

                              Instead of buying insurance, Mr. Bower expects many employees will choose to pay the $95-a-year fine for being uninsured. "Do you want to pay $100 a month for health care, or are you going to pay a $95 fine that comes out of your income-tax return at the end of the year?" he said.

                              So the penalty tax on the choice not to buy insurance is only $95 next year? Yikes.

                              Where is the money supposed to come from to finance the subsidies for insurance that costs 10 times that much!
                              Last edited by FreshFish; 03-28-2013, 12:07 PM.
                              "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

                              "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

                              "Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats

                              "People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by FreshFish View Post
                                Fast-food restaurants have reduced their estimates of how much Obama"care" will cost them, primarily because they expect that many of their employees will decline the employer-offered health insurance:
                                Not sure if this is too "mathy" for our conservative friends, but from your own article: $2.50 a week x 52 weeks is $130 bucks, and you have insurance. Fine is $95 bucks...and you have no insurance. So.....you're saving a whopping $35 bucks by not having insurance? Sounds like Popeye's is either hiring really stupid people, or they need to hold a quick info session with their employees.
                                Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

                                Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

                                "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X