Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[Spexxvet]

I'd vote for Mu.... twice

[infinite monkey]

I'd totally vote for Mo.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

I'd totally vote for Mo.

Me too!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mo_Mowlam

[TheMercenary]

Nemo is da bomb!

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Nemo is da bomb!

Wow! The end of the world must be near! For once I am in complete agreement with you, Merc. Nemo is my role model! He is way cool! He'd be a great politician too, because he'd forget all the stupid arguments and go off on a tangent and vote to pass something completely irrelevant to whatever was going on. What a politician doesn't know he can't hurt the country with.

[TheMercenary]

Another example of my long term argument that employers will dump their insurance onto the backs of the government. The only downside may be that people will not be able to retire early and will work well into their 60's, 70's, or until death.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Employers are getting out of the retirement insurance business. This could be worrisome for American workers who want to retire, before hitting the Medicare-eligible age of 65.
A majority of large employers today offer some form of retiree insurance -- both to early retirees and to retired workers who are Medicare eligible.
But a new survey of 250 large companies by Towers Watson shows that many of them have pared back on their retiree insurance plans and others are planning to discontinue them permanently.
Stuart Alden, Towers Watson's senior health care consultant, said these changes are "significant"
47% of employers polled for the Towers Watson's annual retiree benefits survey said they've already made changes to retiree insurance plan designs.
These include reducing coverage and shifting more of the cost-sharing to early retirees.
When asked what alternatives to early retiree plans employers were considering, 42% said they're considering terminating early retiree plans and will encourage workers to consider buying health insurance through "health exchanges" instead.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/28/pf/e...nt_healthcare/

[SamIam]

Well, I figure I'll be working either to the day I die or else until the alzheimer's starts to become too irritating.

Tango on, my fellow boomers! Just keep following Nemo and all will be well.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

Well, I figure I'll be working either to the day I die or else until the alzheimer's starts to become too irritating.

[TheMercenary]

The intentions of Democrats are only the best. They want all of the old to have lavish retirements, all of the young to have scholarships, verse-penning cowboys to have festivals funded by government, and everyone to have access to all the best health care, at no cost to himself. In the face of a huge wave of debt swamping all western nations, this is the core of their argument: They want a fair society, and their critics do not; they want to help, and their opponents like to see people suffer; they want a world filled with love and caring, and their opponents want one of callous indifference, in which the helpless must fend for themselves. (“We must reject both extremes, those who say we shouldn’t help the old and the sick and those who say that we should,” quips the New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg.) But in fact, everyone thinks that we “should” do this; the problem, in the face of the debt crisis, is finding a way that we can. It is about the “can” part that the left is now in denial: daintily picking its way through canaries six deep on the floor of the coal mine, and conflating a “good” with a “right.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articl...te_576909.html

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

The intentions of Democrats are only the best. They want all of the old to have lavish retirements, all of the young to have scholarships, verse-penning cowboys to have festivals funded by government, and everyone to have access to all the best health care, at no cost to himself. In the face of a huge wave of debt swamping all western nations, this is the core of their argument: They want a fair society, and their critics do not; they want to help, and their opponents like to see people suffer; they want a world filled with love and caring, and their opponents want one of callous indifference, in which the helpless must fend for themselves. (“We must reject both extremes, those who say we shouldn’t help the old and the sick and those who say that we should,” quips the New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg.) But in fact, everyone thinks that we “should” do this; the problem, in the face of the debt crisis, is finding a way that we can. It is about the “can” part that the left is now in denial: daintily picking its way through canaries six deep on the floor of the coal mine, and conflating a “good” with a “right.” http://www.weeklystandard.com/articl...te_576909.html

Canaries, my ass. Those are the bodies of your fellow Americans. Soaring unemployment? Food? Medical care? And the Republican response is to stop assistance to Americans impacted by the worst economic crisis since the Depression? And your commentator would have us believe that it's all about "can"?

No. It's all about greed. God forbid that those in the highest percentiles of income go back to paying the same amount of taxes that they were before W. came along. I noticed all those rich people on street corners with signs that read, "Will actually do some work (as long as my hands don't get dirty) to pay my taxes." Yeah, right.

Oh, and God forbid that anything resembling a "transfer of wealth" occur in the good old USA. Well, I take that back. It's OK to transfer wealth to continuous wars, defense contractors like Halliburton, and the Generals at the Pentagon. No one mentions that almost half the US budget goes to the military (and thus half of everyone's taxes). Dick Chaney can bloat himself with the tax payer's dollar, but a family hit with unemployment better not get a few food stamps.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- One in six Americans is receiving help from the government, just as fiscal austerity threatens to reduce some of that aid.

Soaring unemployment during The Great Recession has driven tens of millions of people to the dole. Enrollment in Medicaid and food stamp programs are at record highs, while unemployment insurance rolls remain at elevated levels. Many people depend on more than one program.

But as President Obama and lawmakers fiercely debate budget cuts to reduce the country's $14 trillion-plus debt, some of those lifelines could be at risk. House Republicans are looking to revamp and slash funding for many programs, including Medicaid and food stamps.

[DanaC]

But what about the Job Creators? Won't somebody think of the Job Creators!

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by DanaC

But what about the Job Creators? Won't somebody think of the Job Creators!

They're busy creating jobs for 12 year olds in factory sweatshops in Rwanda.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

They're busy creating jobs for 12 year olds in factory sweatshops in Rwanda.

Blame Clinton, he signed that bill.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Blame Clinton, he signed that bill.

Ah well. As long as we can ascribe blame then that's alright.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Ah well. As long as we can ascribe blame then that's alright.

Well if you don't think we can assign blame for the movement of jobs overseas to a Free Trade Agreement, then that's cool. There are certainly enough people around here blaming everything else on other people and groups they perceive as the souce of our problems, so, as you say, "then that's alright".