• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Florida Blue cutting 300K policies

I don't suggest everyone does. I do suggest in the competitive market place having education is better than not. And while your personal story may well reflect how you see it, it's not a large enough sample to make a larger case.

View attachment 67155706

Published: January 9, 2013

Young adults have long faced a rough job market, but in the last recession and its aftermath, college graduates did not lose nearly as much ground as their less-educated peers, according to a new study.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/10/e...rees-value-during-economic-downturn.html?_r=0

thanks for the info, I put very little stock in any info published by the NYT.
 
thanks for the info, I put very little stock in any info published by the NYT.

Yes, as, I know, facts have a liberal bias. :roll: However, the source is the study. And there are many, many studies showing much the same thing. Overall you do better with a degree than without. Having more without has to increase this gap.
 
Yes, they do kick people off their insurance policy when they get very sick and start costing the insurance company too much. Why wouldn't they?

Why are you having such a hard time understanding that $4,200 in dues over 1,190 years only yields $4,998,000. 1,190 years is too long to wait for a return on investment. Most people don't pay premiums for 1,190 years. How could an insurance continue to exist if they made completely mathematically absurd decisions?

I can't comprehend this kind of thinking.

Businesses should go broke because it's nice. Businesses shouldn't make a profit because it is mean.


Do people really believe this stupidity? Surely not.

vasuderatorrent

I think the point us that there is a human cost. Not good or bad so much, as a cost that us rather large for many. Because if this, maybe this profession doesn't lend itself to the business model as readily.
 
In order for you to assert that the profit of the private health ins. industry is more important to our national health system than the lives of the people that it is supposed to serve, you would have to prove that a private health ins. industry is even NECESSARY. England and Canada have shown that it is not even necessary to have a private health ins. industry.

Does a health insurance company provide any actual CARE to sick people? No. Why do we need them if they are harmful to the poor and the very sick when it comes to accessing the healthcare that they need, if other countries do the job WITHOUT private health ins. at all, and they do it at 11% of GDP while the US pays 17% of GDP? Answer, we don't need them as part of our national health system. Therefore, their profit motive cannot be deemed superior to saving the lives of the sick that really need healthcare and are only being rescinded because they cost a lot. It is immoral to allow corporate america to let people die like that, and it is a prime example of the inappropriateness of putting private industry in charge of setting the rules via their death panels, on who gets to live and who has to die, based on their profit requirement to Wall St. The military is not for profit, nor should healthcare be for profit. Life and death is a moral issue, not a profit issue.

Wait! Is your point that Single Payer Insurance is superior to a capitalistic model for health care?

or

Is your point that companies should lose money?

vasuderatorrent
 
Yes, as, I know, facts have a liberal bias. :roll: However, the source is the study. And there are many, many studies showing much the same thing. Overall you do better with a degree than without. Having more without has to increase this gap.

I agree overall, but I do not everybody needs to go. People that go into massive amounts of debt for education should be held accountable for their choices.

Electricians, plumbers, mechanics, carpenters, and masons are all a big part of our society and all pay as good or better than a business major.
 
Wait! Is your point that Single Payer Insurance is superior to a capitalistic model for health care?
Define superior.

vasuderatorrent said:
Is your point that companies should lose money?

No. Do you believe it is necessary to dump sick people in order for the health ins. companies to make money? If that was true, the health ins. industry would not have played as big a role as their lobbyist did in writing the Obamacare legislation. It is not true that if you insure the sick people you must lose money; do you think that is the only way the industry can be structured, and if so, please explain that.
 
I agree overall, but I do not everybody needs to go. People that go into massive amounts of debt for education should be held accountable for their choices.

Electricians, plumbers, mechanics, carpenters, and masons are all a big part of our society and all pay as good or better than a business major.

For the record, those require education as well. ;)
 
No. Do you believe it is necessary to dump sick people in order for the health ins. companies to make money? If that was true, the health ins. industry would not have played as big a role as their lobbyist did in writing the Obamacare legislation. It is not true that if you insure the sick people you must lose money; do you think that is the only way the industry can be structured, and if so, please explain that.

Who "dumps" more people, insurance companies or the government and their Medicaid program? Sick or healthy, a person ends up making one cent more than allowed and the government kicks them to the curb. They still will with Obamadon'tcare. But that's all part of the plan by Democrats to keep and control people on their plantation.
 
None of those jobs "require" a degree:roll:

I didn't say degree. I said education, however I can show degrees for each. I'll start with one:

Electrician Colleges

Electrician majors learn how to maintain, install, operate and repair electrical wiring and electrical machines in factories, businesses, construction sites and homes. Classroom instruction includes skills in installing wiring systems, reading blueprints, installing telecommunications equipment, repairing electric equipment, repairing transformers and assessing the safety of equipment.

Electrician Schools - Find Electrician Degrees, Colleges and Programs
 
I didn't say degree. I said education, however I can show degrees for each. I'll start with one:

Electrician Colleges

Electrician majors learn how to maintain, install, operate and repair electrical wiring and electrical machines in factories, businesses, construction sites and homes. Classroom instruction includes skills in installing wiring systems, reading blueprints, installing telecommunications equipment, repairing electric equipment, repairing transformers and assessing the safety of equipment.

Electrician Schools - Find Electrician Degrees, Colleges and Programs

Most electricians, plumbers, carpenters and masons learn their trade starting as laborers. They work their way up and eventually leave to start their own busineses.

A guy I went to high school with will be retiring next year from his plumbing business and he is not even 50 yet.
 
Most electricians, plumbers, carpenters and masons learn their trade starting as laborers. They work their way up and eventually leave to start their own busineses.

A guy I went to high school with will be retiring next year from his plumbing business and he is not even 50 yet.

Not sure that's true. Under Wiki answers, one reported that today most go to school. But I'd be interested in any numbers you have.
 
Define superior.



No. Do you believe it is necessary to dump sick people in order for the health ins. companies to make money? If that was true, the health ins. industry would not have played as big a role as their lobbyist did in writing the Obamacare legislation. It is not true that if you insure the sick people you must lose money; do you think that is the only way the industry can be structured, and if so, please explain that.

It is common philosophy in business to take care of your pennies and nickels. The dollars will take care of themselves.

If you see an opportunity to save 1 cent, then you take it. If you see an opportunity to save your company $5,000,000 you take it. Giving someone an insurance policy that cost $50,000 per month to a customer that will cost you $5,000,000 is a bad business decision. I can't explain every possible scenario that is encountered in the insurance industry. It is a very complicated business.

I guess I don't totally understand what argument you are making. Are you saying society should shoulder the expense to care for the sick and injured? Are you saying that the insurance companies should shoulder the expense to care for the sick and injured? I agree with the first one. I disagree with the second one.

You seem to be pretty intelligent. Suggesting that a company should factor in altruistic motives into their business model is completely ludicrous. Surely I am misunderstanding your comments.

vasuderatorrent
 
Not sure that's true. Under Wiki answers, one reported that today most go to school. But I'd be interested in any numbers you have.

No degree required:

3 Ways to Become a Licensed Electrician - wikiHow

no degree reuired:

Brick Masons: Employment Info and Requirements for Starting a Career in Brick Masonry

on the job training:

Construction: Educational Requirements for Becoming a Plumber

on the job training again, damn I thought everyone knew these things:

Carpenter Career Education and Training Requirements
 
Who "dumps" more people, insurance companies or the government and their Medicaid program? Sick or healthy, a person ends up making one cent more than allowed and the government kicks them to the curb. They still will with Obamadon'tcare. But that's all part of the plan by Democrats to keep and control people on their plantation.

If a medicaid recipient begins to earn more, above a predefined standard, then they can afford to pay for their ins. That's only proper. Of course the private ins. company death panels used to have the right to refuse to cover them, which was immoral, and that has been corrected by Obamacare.

What do you think should have happened when people worked and earned more money and they exceeded the income level that was set to qualify for medicaid???
 
K

Never said required.

Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning (HVAC)
Principles Heating/Ventilating/AC/Refrigeration
Heating
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Electricity and Electronics for Heating / Ventilating / AC
Controls/Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning
HVAC System Design
Appliance Repair
Machine Tool Trades and Technology
Machine Tool Process
Mathematics for Machine Trades
Blueprint Reading/Machine Trades
Controls/Computer Numerical Controls
Welding Technology
Basic Welding
Blueprint Reading for Welders
Carpentry
General Carpentry
Electrical
General Electrical
Plumbing
General Plumbing
Green Trades and Renewable Energy
Energy Auditing and Weatherization
Solar Power
Renewable Energy
Sustainability
- See more at: Pearson - Building & Technical Trades
 
K

Never said required.

Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning (HVAC)
Principles Heating/Ventilating/AC/Refrigeration
Heating
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Electricity and Electronics for Heating / Ventilating / AC
Controls/Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning
HVAC System Design
Appliance Repair
Machine Tool Trades and Technology
Machine Tool Process
Mathematics for Machine Trades
Blueprint Reading/Machine Trades
Controls/Computer Numerical Controls
Welding Technology
Basic Welding
Blueprint Reading for Welders
Carpentry
General Carpentry
Electrical
General Electrical
Plumbing
General Plumbing
Green Trades and Renewable Energy
Energy Auditing and Weatherization
Solar Power
Renewable Energy
Sustainability
- See more at: Pearson - Building & Technical Trades

no degree required
 
Again, no one is debating that. I said many are getting them anyway, and nothing about being required.

so why are you still talking about it?:roll:
 
Just making sure you understood the point. Your post put that in doubt.

My original post was degrees were not required to be successful, evidently I was the only one that understood that.
 
It is common philosophy in business to take care of your pennies and nickels. The dollars will take care of themselves.

If you see an opportunity to save 1 cent, then you take it. If you see an opportunity to save your company $5,000,000 you take it. Giving someone an insurance policy that cost $50,000 per month to a customer that will cost you $5,000,000 is a bad business decision. I can't explain every possible scenario that is encountered in the insurance industry. It is a very complicated business.

I guess I don't totally understand what argument you are making. Are you saying society should shoulder the expense to care for the sick and injured? Are you saying that the insurance companies should shoulder the expense to care for the sick and injured? I agree with the first one. I disagree with the second one.

You seem to be pretty intelligent. Suggesting that a company should factor in altruistic motives into their business model is completely ludicrous. Surely I am misunderstanding your comments.

vasuderatorrent

We need a healthcare system that meets the needs of the people and does not let private company profit motives ahead of saving peoples lives. That's immoral. The health ins. companies have demonstrated for years they are immoral and their death panels have allowed thousands of citizens to die prematurely on an annual basis by rejecting their application for health ins. or rescinding their policy, based on the death panels assessment that the person will cost them too much. That's immoral and that is what they do. The system has to be changed and it has by federal law. The health ins. companies said the way to do this is if they have to cover all the sick people, then the way to minimize the premiums is that everyone has to be in the system, hence the individual mandate. I am not specifying the nature of the system. We can do it with the individual mandate and private health ins. companies, or we can go single payer, but what we cannot do is allow the profit motive of private corporations and the rules THEY set for the system which primarily have been set up to guarantee their profit, to condemn thousands of sick people who have the money to pay for a normal health insurance premium to be denied coverage and go off and die prematurely. It's wrong, and enough people saw that, so they elected enough people in congress and the white house to change the old immoral system so we have a healthcare system that actually meets the needs of the people, all the people including the sick and the poor.
 
My original post was degrees were not required to be successful, evidently I was the only one that understood that.

Understood that completely, but that fact had nothing to with what I said.:roll:
 
Understood that completely, but that fact had nothing to with what I said.:roll:

Moving the goal post to get away from your posts may work on your side of asile but not here.:lol:

I would love to see the number of those without degrees who have been that successful today. Can you show me those?
 
We need a healthcare system that meets the needs of the people and does not let private company profit motives ahead of saving peoples lives. That's immoral. The health ins. companies have demonstrated for years they are immoral and their death panels have allowed thousands of citizens to die prematurely on an annual basis by rejecting their application for health ins. or rescinding their policy, based on the death panels assessment that the person will cost them too much. That's immoral and that is what they do. The system has to be changed and it has by federal law. The health ins. companies said the way to do this is if they have to cover all the sick people, then the way to minimize the premiums is that everyone has to be in the system, hence the individual mandate. I am not specifying the nature of the system. We can do it with the individual mandate and private health ins. companies, or we can go single payer, but what we cannot do is allow the profit motive of private corporations and the rules THEY set for the system which primarily have been set up to guarantee their profit, to condemn thousands of sick people who have the money to pay for a normal health insurance premium to be denied coverage and go off and die prematurely. It's wrong, and enough people saw that, so they elected enough people in congress and the white house to change the old immoral system so we have a healthcare system that actually meets the needs of the people, all the people including the sick and the poor.

Here is a true story.

Back in 1984 my father had a brain tumor at age 28. He had no insurance. He had brain surgery to remove the tumor. The total cost out of his pocket was $3,000. He kept his house and his credit remained immaculate. The insurance company didn't pay for his medical expenses. My dad didn't pay for his medical expenses. Society didn't throw my dad out in the cold to die. This happened 26 years before the Affordable Health Care Act was signed into law.

I'm sorry. I don't see what the problem is. My dad is still alive. He's broke too but it's not because of his medical bills. He paid all of those. He paid all $3,000 of his medical bills. I don't know what brain surgery did cost in 1984 but I bet it cost more than $3,000.

Are you accusing insurance companies of being heartless? or Are you accusing society of being heartless? An insurance company is a business. Society is comprised of people that care about each other.

When you continue to talk about the immorality of the insurance company I get really confused. Morals are irrelevant when you are focusing on surviving. A company has to make a profit in order to survive. Otherwise they will shut down their insurance company and nobody will get coverage. Is that less moral to deny coverage to every single human being by shutting your doors? or Is it more moral because nobody would have evidence of your heartless death panels?

I hate it that you don't understand the purpose of an insurance company. It has nothing to do with saving lives. The hospital does that part. Insurance is a financial product. This is my last attempt to explain to you what the purpose of an insurance company is. If you refuse to understand or cannot understand I am not the proper person to teach you to think.

This is my last post on this issue. You win.

vasuderatorrent

vasuderatorrent
 
Back
Top Bottom