Page 93 of 149 FirstFirst ... 43839192939495103143 ... LastLast
Results 921 to 930 of 1482

Thread: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

  1. #921
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    More and more failure and this time at reading. Lets try this again and maybe this time you can read it before you comment. Life in that statement is addressing it in such a way to protect you from outside aggression from others towards your life. This what murder laws are shaped around and what the military serves to protect. Healthcare does not fall under this umbrella. Take a a moment and read every word I wrote here and then allow yourself a moment to ponder over it. After all that is done do what you will.

    And I'm sorry but healthcare coverage would be guaranteed, so yes, you did imply access to the service. Want to try again there too?
    It's all under the same umbrella of preserving life.

  2. #922
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,990
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    It's all under the same umbrella of preserving life.
    No it's not. If it were, it would deal with insanely high health CARE costs, not health insurance.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  3. #923
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    WILL narrow?


    No.

    IS narrowed. We are now, already, a service nation. Retail workers outnumber any other worker, and most other workers, combined. They are the only thing that can't be outsourced. SOMEONE has to stock the shelves of all the made in China/Taiwan products, and SOMEONE has to show their face at a store when a customer has a question/comment/complaint. And those people already outnumber any other sector. We outnumber autoworkers, factory workers, coal minors, public employees, etc.

    Solution? Screw me if I know. I don't think there is one, except to wait it out, which will take our lifetimes, and most of our childrens lifetimes...and then, China, or any other job sourcing nation, will have a work force just as spoiled as us, wanting, expecting, demanding just as much money for service rendered as we do...at which point, the jobs will come back.

    In the meantime, it's retail jobs it is, for most of you/us. Which makes me happy, because once of few more of you have DONE these jobs, maybe you'll be a bit more polite to the others doing these jobs that you encounter while you're shopping. People always decry customer service and retail jobs as not really coveted, not really great careers, etc. And you know why? Because of the A-holes we have to deal with on a daily basis....which is to say, customers. If it weren't for people, customer service fields would be perfectly good jobs, lol. Decent benefits, full time schedule, competitive pay, 401ks with company match, etc.
    I'm not sure who you think hasn't done these jobs. You'd be hard pressed to find a field I haven't worked in my 53 years.

    But I said grow, the gap will grow (between rich and poor with a shrinking middle class). I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or disputing me.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #924
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-24-12 @ 12:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    I love how a topic as "Obama to business owners" gets derailed into the "obama care talk". That being said. I do lean to the left of most issues. Now thats out of the way, I have read about 60 posts bashing Obama care and how unfair it is to "tax" people. Well from what I can see, and I have read this "bill" and I do have an understanding of the arguments for and against it, I say this. This "Obama care" act seems ALOT like the Regan plan back in the 80's and also its sure does remind me of the Romney play I hear all the right wingers(I am married to one) talk about"we dont want to pay for food stamps, welfare.....) now it seems to me then right wing people must by that logic LOVE it when people go to emergency rooms and get free health care and then "we" have to pay for it sarcasim there..... not to mention, we are the ONLY developed country to NOT see healthcare a human rite but as a only if you can afford it. so by those right winger standards we should be happy with having a healthcare standard that equals NigeriaSO here it is, can one of you people whimpering about the "tax" please tell me, how this "mandate" is different from the Regan plan, and how its different from the Romney plan, then also tell me, how, HOW do you feel about paying for other peoples health care? Also tell me how you feel about the USA spending the most per person on healthcare and WE ARE 37th ON THE WHO and other lists, and yes I will respond to what ever you say.......

  5. #925
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,363

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I think the gap will grow because of this. I don't think that is a good thing.
    I also do not think it is a good thing. That being said, if America would back up that sentiment with their pocketbooks more things would be built here.

  6. #926
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,363

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    No, when I say a political party took that stated position, that's exactly what I meant ...


    Republican Senators Pledge To Block All Legislation Until Tax Cuts Are Extended

    Nice try, you are crafty. That was for a specific time to get closure on an issue. We are well past that so it is a bit disengenuous to talk of it as it is in the present case.

  7. #927
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,363

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    It's not a talking point. What you are speaking of is emergency room care. As of 1986 (if I recall correctly), legislation was passed which denies emergency rooms from turning away patients just because they can't afford to pay.

    That is not healthcare.

    Try getting chemotherapy to help combat cancer in an emergency room.

    Try getting an emergency room to provide you with monthly prescriptions for whatever ailment it is which requires them.

    Furthermore, tax payers currently flip the bill for folks who rely on emergency room care for their quasi-healthcare but then refuse to pay for it. Now those taxes will be collected via Obama's healthcare plan.
    Let's not derail this thread on what Obama said into a HC debate. Sorry I took the bait earlier.

  8. #928
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    I also do not think it is a good thing. That being said, if America would back up that sentiment with their pocketbooks more things would be built here.
    That certainly would help.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #929
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    11-08-13 @ 12:55 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by lukek View Post
    I love how a topic as "Obama to business owners" gets derailed into the "obama care talk". That being said. I do lean to the left of most issues. Now thats out of the way, I have read about 60 posts bashing Obama care and how unfair it is to "tax" people. Well from what I can see, and I have read this "bill" and I do have an understanding of the arguments for and against it, I say this. This "Obama care" act seems ALOT like the Regan plan back in the 80's and also its sure does remind me of the Romney play I hear all the right wingers(I am married to one) talk about"we dont want to pay for food stamps, welfare.....) now it seems to me then right wing people must by that logic LOVE it when people go to emergency rooms and get free health care and then "we" have to pay for it sarcasim there..... not to mention, we are the ONLY developed country to NOT see healthcare a human rite but as a only if you can afford it. so by those right winger standards we should be happy with having a healthcare standard that equals NigeriaSO here it is, can one of you people whimpering about the "tax" please tell me, how this "mandate" is different from the Regan plan, and how its different from the Romney plan, then also tell me, how, HOW do you feel about paying for other peoples health care? Also tell me how you feel about the USA spending the most per person on healthcare and WE ARE 37th ON THE WHO and other lists, and yes I will respond to what ever you say.......
    I have also read most of the bill, and I must say, that unless you are a lawyer, I highly doubt you are able to understand most of it. Having said that, let me address a few of your questions. First, it doesn't resemble the Reagan plan all that much really. How it does mimick the Reagan plan is by creating "Co-ops" for PRIVATE insurance companies, or "exchanges" of PRIVATE insurance companies, who compete for the business of the un or under insured. Problem is, the Obamacare plan creates an unfair advantage by punishing (taxing) companies who do not seek health insurance through the government exchanges, or individuals who do not purchase through the government exchanges. This isn't spelled out directly, it's more of an indirect consequence.

    Here's how that works. The government exchange will consist of companies who offer GOVERNMENT APPROVED plans, called "qualified plans". Who approves the plans? A regulatory board of politicians primarily, with a few ex-doctors as well. By utilizing tax dollars, and operating at a sure loss, the government will deeply discount the premiums. So, the unspecified goal is to have private companies ditch their current insurance carriers and opt into the plans only offered through the government exchange. Reagan's plan did not do this. Also, if an individual cancels their private insurance, they are FORCED to buy from the government exchange. After 2014, they will not have the option to choose any other insurance plan OUTSIDE the plans offered through the exchange. That's specifically written into the bill, and Reagan's plan did not do this as well.

    Think of it in steps, not an "all-encompassing" swipe. First step the left is wanting to take, is to get as many people into the exchange as possible. They do this through manipulating the price of premiums that are subsidized by tax dollars (unfair advantage). Second step is to ensure that individuals who either lose coverage, or drop coverage, only have ONE place to purchase health insurance, which is through the exchange (eliminates competition and choice along with individual freedom).

    Now, it may take a decade, but once virtually ALL of insurance is regulated through the public exchange, it will be regulated by a GOVERNMENT board of politicians. In the meantime, it will put large private insurers out of business, because they will have lost a huge chunk of their clients to the cheaper offers through the government exchange (all of which was created by the unfair advantages of pooling tax dollars for plans offered through the exchange).

    Last step will be to nationalize the remaining private companies that offer plans into the exchange. How do they do that? By bailing them out, just like they did GM. They will essentially own those companies doing business through the government exchange. They will certainly "run" them, because it is the government who decides what a "qualified plan" consists of.

    Now, if you think running private insurance companies out of business will help our situation, I urge you to think twice. We are running record deficits now, can you imagine what they would be if the tax payers were on the hook for say, 70% of the entire country's health insurance? It's a systematic approach to universal, single payer health care. You may think that is good, but again, look at countries with Socialized medicine, they do not compare to the quality of care in the US. LIke in England, the most effective breast cancer drug in the world is not covered under their government plans. Why? Too expensive. In Canada, the average waiting period for a common hip replacement is 4 months, in America, it's less than 15 days. Why? Because of the bureaucratic red tape of getting that procedure approved. In Japan, if you are over the age of 70, and are diagnosed with a terminal disease, you don't receive treatment at all. Imagine that kind of policy in America!

    Romney's plan is different because he takes a "State's Rights" approach. Should States be allowed to implement a universal health plan? Sure, as long as the citizens of that State are funding it, and have voted to accept it. I don't recall voting on Obamacare. As a matter of fact, if it were to come up for a popular vote, polls show that it would likely be defeated.....overwhelmingly.

    There are good things about the bill, but like a doctor friend of mine told me last week in a long conversation about Obamacare, is that it's no silver bullett. It's not going to bring costs down. Getting people covered is the most minute problem in the broad sense. The number one reason driving up the cost of care has more to do with Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. The government only reimburses doctors 17 cents out of every dollar on average. That's why doctors and hospitals charge $5 for a cotton swab, just to recoup their "cost". That in turn moves insurance premiums up, which in turn affects the bottom line of businesses, which in turn affects employment numbers, which in turn affects tax revenues, which in turn affects our GDP and deficit problem. It's a vicous cycle.

    So what's the solution? There's not a single solution, but here are some key ideas that we should consider: 1. Ceasing ALL medical care for illegal immigrants. They should not be allowed to cross our borders illegally to receive medical attention. They are not refugees, they are illegal immigrants. 2. Increase the retirement age to 67 or higher. People are living longer now, and Medicare and Social Security were not established to support someone's medical expenses for 20 years; more like 10 years. 3. Anyone under the age of 50, make Social Security and Medicare OPTIONAL. By allowing me to invest in my own retirement, and my own health savings accounts, I can ensure that I have enough money to cover my premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc when I'm older. 4. Entitlement reform. Billions of dollars are simply wasted in Medicaid. Impose stricter guidelines for participants of Medicaid. 5. Create a pro jobs atmosphere. If people are working, chances are, they are working at a place that offers insurance. Keep in mind, that 90% of Americans ALREADY HAVE health insurance. 6. Malpractice reform. Doctors unneccessarily perform too many diagnostic tests just to cover their own butts out of fear of a lawsuit. They prescribe too much medicine. They perform too many unneccessary procedures just to cover the bases of being sued in court. Let doctors treat their patients, and reform malpractice laws. 7. Allow insurance companies to compete in other states. In the highest states, there are less than 10 health insurance providers, in a country with more than 4 dozen insurance companies. Competition drives prices down. In a state like mine, where only 4 companies compete for ALL the business, what affect would it have if 30 companies were competing for my business?

    What too many people refuse to acknowledge, is that Obamacare is bad for business too. Under Obamacare, only a business with more than 50 employees are required to offer health insurance. What does this bill do to companies with fewer than 50 employees? I'll tell you. Say I own a business with 15 employees, and I cannot afford to offer health insurance. But the Supreme Court upheld the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. This means that my employees must purchase health insurance BY LAW. What do you think they are going to do? First, they are going to come to me and say, "hey boss, we have to get health insurance, aren't you going to purchase it for us seeing as how you are our employer?" When I tell him that I cannot afford to purchase health insurance for all my employees, he's very likely to quit, and go find a job were health insurance is offered, so he doesn't have to pay for it out of his own pockett. Now, multiply that scenario times 5. My company only has 15 employees. What if 5 of my best employees quit me because I cannot afford to purchase their health insurance? Good for my business? Absolutely not.

    What about a company with 54 employees. Think they'll purchase health insurance for everyone, or simply lay 5 people off in order to get under the requirement? What about a company that sells goods or a service? Think they'll happily eat the cost of providing insurance for their employees? OR is it more likely they will increase the cost of doing business with them on to their customers in order to recoup some of that cost?

    It has negative affects. Real ones. I run a business, and these questions are already being asked by employees. "When Obamacare fully kicks in, and we have to purchase insurance because of the indidual mandate, are you going to purchase insurance for us because you are our employer?"

    And if I don't, or cant, what will I do if they quit to go work somewhere that does and can afford to offer benefits? How effectively will I be able to attract new hires when they will be forced to have insurance, but my company simply cant afford to purchase it for them?

    Think about that. It's horrible for business. It really IS a jobs killer. And frankly, it's my opinion that a JOB is far more important than Insurance. Especially when we are only dealing with 10% of the ENTIRE population of this country.

  10. #930
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    11-08-13 @ 12:55 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    But back to the original thread, and how it does relate to Obamacare, is the fact that Obama, and most of his advisors from the far left, simply don't understand business. They've never owned businesses, they've never had to meet a payroll, they've never had to balance a budget for a business, and they've never had to stress over a company and the employees working there. Therefore, they simply don't understand HOW this bill affects businesses of all sizes.

    Instead, what they focus on is "social justice". To them, destroying jobs in order to cover 10% of Americans who are uninsured is a good trade off. If insuring just 10% of the population results in several hundred small businesses going out of business, well, that's just a small price to pay to ensure that EVERYONE has an insurance policy. It's the same old thing time after time with far left liberals, they never study the unintended consequences of their policies, they simply demand that everyone praise them and support them because they have good intentions. And when you try to explain these things to far lefties, they either ignore you, call you a liar, or they simply don't understand a word you are saying. Owning a business is foreign to these people. They must think that small businesses have basements full of money and can afford to to all this crap. Here's my trade off, I have 15 employees. I've done the math. I can offer NO insurance, and run the high risk of losing key employees. Or, I can downsize my company by 5 employees, and afford to pay for insurance for 10. Either option is a lose lose for me, and what really irritates the business people in this country, is that men like Obama don't even think about scenarios like that because they are simply ignorant to the facts or reality, OR they simply don't care if I have to lay 5 people off just so I can afford insurance for my employees. Remember, those 5 employees I just laid off are still required to purchase health insurance, but guess what, they just lost their job, how are they going to afford it now? Which brings me back, JOBS are far more important for the welfare of this nation than insurance is.

    Silly liberals......will they ever learn to think.....????

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •