• 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!

U.S. companies hoard record amount of cash

You. Haven't. Seen. Anything. Yet.

for six years I have been posting the quotes of Canadian health economists on Obamacare and no one on the left reads them.

The law was based on a lie, sold by a lie, was amended 22 times and delayed in implementation.

You can cherry pick all the reports needed to "sell" this law two years after the fact, but in the end, you still an over priced, out of reach, bureaucratic nightmare that doesn't even transfer wealth.

It's cool aid friend

The moral of the story is that there are consequences in the US for voting democrat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSobIcSV0Ic


:donkeyfla
 
Sure we have. We've seen about 98% of American hospitals (per the AHA) moving in the direction of the population health management philosophy, not only re-orienting care around keeping people healthy but also extending the reach/responsibility of the hospital beyond its own walls through partnerships with entities in the community.

As a result we've already seen preventable readmissions dropping as people get care (and preventive interventions) when and where they need it, we've seen hospitals get safer as they take a more systematic approach to patient safety, and we've seen hospital prices starting to drop. Performance on quality indicators tracked by the Joint Commission, CMS, you name it is starting to improve. Meanwhile new hospitals are being built to directly embody this philosophy where expensive inpatient care is no longer the most important piece of what the health system delivers.

New models like ACOs are taking off as the amount of the nation's health care revenue in value-based or risk-based arrangements grows. Team-based care and new partnerships across various docs and hospitals are on the rise. Care is getting better, it's getting smarter, and for the first time in a long time the cost curve is starting to bend.

But in a sense you're right. The best is yet to come!



You are very deserving of Obamacare....

:spin:
 
That's the tide being fought.

How many times does it have to be pointed out that it is fundamentally flawed, this 11 hundred page law that had to be amended 22 times? That right there should tell you this is a cannabalized junker with no clutch to start with, the only way to keep it running it to continue to fix it, like a Havana taxi cab.

I repeat, the bad news is only just beginning.

Yep....when the employer mandate is fully implemented, the excrement will hit the oscillating blades very dramatically.

:hitsfan:

At that point....I would normally say the democrats will be toast...however they have already lost control of the house, the senate, state legislatures and governorship quite dramatically.
 
Yep....when the employer mandate is fully implemented, the excrement will hit the oscillating blades very dramatically.

:hitsfan:

At that point....I would normally say the democrats will be toast...however they have already lost control of the house, the senate, state legislatures and governorship quite dramatically.



If you sit back and think about it...every step of the way Obamacare has had to face "adjustment", from the great web site fiasco - how's that $1 billion soft ware working out?, to the 22 single handed "amendments", or what I call "holy ****! we have to fix that!" changes, to the fact 20 plus million people did lose their plan.

And as we deal with these after the fact "holy ****s", absent the debate is the fact that in 2020, the US will still have 50 million people uninsured according to the CBO...more than the populations of Canada, Alaska, Washington and Idaho, and the highest premiums in the universe. Cadillac pricing for a KIA
 
Why the **** would I have a plan for dog ****? I do not care about individual stories or petty complaints.

Your "health plan" is garbage. These things you are now in hysteria about were forecast, we told you this would happen. I have posted hundreds of posts saying this very thing. if I knew, the dumb ****s you support who drafted this waste of pulp should have known and been honest about in the first place.

Instead it was hidden, you were LIED TO, and now the government is trying to use back door regulations to patch work quilt a solution to a problem that is not solvable in that system.

You have the worst system on the planet. Your "friend's" story is one of millions about to happen.



Pay attention:

You have been lied to.

We know you have no plan. We can see you do not care about anyone but yourself. That is not governing, that is failure.
 
Where do you get such faith that the government will keep patching a broken system into perpetuity? At some point the whole house of cards will fall.

Because the doc fix has been passed every year for the last 12 years.

If you know the house of cards will fail because it costs too much, why are you so concerned about the ACA and congressional efforts to move medicare to outcome based reimbursement, which will save a lot of money, even Boehner calls it the first entitlement reform in decades? Why are you opposed to this effort to cut costs, when it is conservative pablum that we need to reign in govt. spending. Your position does not make sense. Your position is very liberal.
 
We know you have no plan. We can see you do not care about anyone but yourself. That is not governing, that is failure.

I'm not sure anyone ought to be concerned that a Canadian is upset the American health care system is getting better and more efficient. Let him have his fun--talking about page counts is obviously more interesting than discussing the ongoing revolution in care delivery in America's hospitals!
 
If you sit back and think about it...every step of the way Obamacare has had to face "adjustment", from the great web site fiasco - how's that $1 billion soft ware working out?, to the 22 single handed "amendments", or what I call "holy ****! we have to fix that!" changes, to the fact 20 plus million people did lose their plan.

And as we deal with these after the fact "holy ****s", absent the debate is the fact that in 2020, the US will still have 50 million people uninsured according to the CBO...more than the populations of Canada, Alaska, Washington and Idaho, and the highest premiums in the universe. Cadillac pricing for a KIA

Greetings, F&L. :2wave:

Apt analogy on the Cadillac/KIA, and an excellent recap of facts in general! :thumbs:
 
Because the doc fix has been passed every year for the last 12 years.

If you know the house of cards will fail because it costs too much, why are you so concerned about the ACA and congressional efforts to move medicare to outcome based reimbursement, which will save a lot of money, even Boehner calls it the first entitlement reform in decades? Why are you opposed to this effort to cut costs, when it is conservative pablum that we need to reign in govt. spending. Your position does not make sense. Your position is very liberal.

ROFL. Not going to touch that one.
 

Interesting article, doesn't really dispute what I said. First most people do not tend to know what the reported inflation rate is. When they go to the store or pay a doctor bill, local taxes or have to sign the next year's lease, like most people they would be surprised to hear that reported inflation is under 2%.

Next, again we are talking averages, and in this article the average of people in the lower quartile. So the 50 year old factory worker that was displaced by outsourcing and now is a security guard or a WalMart greeter, yes they have been killed wage wise. If you are a government worker or a professional with a skill, different scenario.

Also as the article points out, it is only talking about salary. Most large companies pay things like insurance which has accelerated by something like 3X the stated inflation rate for decades. This is a real cost that people like to push aside because it hurts their argument.

After all is said and done a very complicated issue. That is why I have not heard anything from either side that addresses a real concern.
 
Interesting article, doesn't really dispute what I said. First most people do not tend to know what the reported inflation rate is. When they go to the store or pay a doctor bill, local taxes or have to sign the next year's lease, like most people they would be surprised to hear that reported inflation is under 2%.

Next, again we are talking averages, and in this article the average of people in the lower quartile. So the 50 year old factory worker that was displaced by outsourcing and now is a security guard or a WalMart greeter, yes they have been killed wage wise. If you are a government worker or a professional with a skill, different scenario.

Also as the article points out, it is only talking about salary. Most large companies pay things like insurance which has accelerated by something like 3X the stated inflation rate for decades. This is a real cost that people like to push aside because it hurts their argument.

After all is said and done a very complicated issue. That is why I have not heard anything from either side that addresses a real concern.

glad that you brought up health care. i'm for decoupling it from employment entirely, and handling it like other first world countries.

as for wages, you can shift the goalposts all you like, but most of us are still not seeing much in the way of wages. health care costs might be going up, but a lot of that is being passed on to the worker. there are a lot of reasons for wage stagnation including globalization, technology, the gutting of unions, and the fact that we're in the first steps of a post labor economy.
 
Yep....when the employer mandate is fully implemented, the excrement will hit the oscillating blades very dramatically.

:hitsfan:

At that point....I would normally say the democrats will be toast...however they have already lost control of the house, the senate, state legislatures and governorship quite dramatically.

Once again, the employer mandate is a tiny piece that will have little effect. This has been outlined to you in excruciating detail multiple times.

Yet you don't get it. I think we can all be confident that when someone is as wrong as you have been about this issue for so long, your Chicken Little routine is short on substance.
 
glad that you brought up health care. i'm for decoupling it from employment entirely, and handling it like other first world countries.

as for wages, you can shift the goalposts all you like, but most of us are still not seeing much in the way of wages. health care costs might be going up, but a lot of that is being passed on to the worker. there are a lot of reasons for wage stagnation including globalization, technology, the gutting of unions, and the fact that we're in the first steps of a post labor economy.

I to am for delinking employment from HC, which is for me a key reason why ACA was worse than a failure.

Not sure where you see me shifting the goalposts, please point that out.
 
I to am for delinking employment from HC, which is for me a key reason why ACA was worse than a failure.

Not sure where you see me shifting the goalposts, please point that out.

you tried to argue that wages didn't stagnate when you take health insurance into account while ignoring the fact that a lot of those costs were passed on to employees in the form of vastly higher premiums and co pays. the reality is that wages did stagnate, and that if we had a sane, first world health care distribution system, businesses shouldering the burden of being the primary health care provider for employees wouldn't even be a thing.
 
you tried to argue that wages didn't stagnate when you take health insurance into account while ignoring the fact that a lot of those costs were passed on to employees in the form of vastly higher premiums and co pays. the reality is that wages did stagnate, and that if we had a sane, first world health care distribution system, businesses shouldering the burden of being the primary health care provider for employees wouldn't even be a thing.

No I mentioned several factors you cling to one, falsely. While it is true that co-pays and the percent that employees pay for their insurance has gone up, it does not nearly cover the increases that companies have to pay. Also as you will learn that insurance costs are largely fixed. That is regardless of salary the cost to insure is the same. Thus the cost of insuring a low wage person as a % of their income is much higher than a VP.

Fixing HC delivery system would help, but not enough.

It is good that people are passionate about these types of issues. Just wish they actually understood the nuances versus the one line campaign slogans. Would make debating on sires like this much more fun.
 
No I mentioned several factors you cling to one, falsely. While it is true that co-pays and the percent that employees pay for their insurance has gone up, it does not nearly cover the increases that companies have to pay. Also as you will learn that insurance costs are largely fixed. That is regardless of salary the cost to insure is the same. Thus the cost of insuring a low wage person as a % of their income is much higher than a VP.

Fixing HC delivery system would help, but not enough.

It is good that people are passionate about these types of issues. Just wish they actually understood the nuances versus the one line campaign slogans. Would make debating on sires like this much more fun.

many low wage people aren't even offered health insurance by their employers. they are covered by medicaid or not at all. and if not at all, they go to the emergency room for care, and then you and i pay for it in the form of premiums and ridiculously high costs for routine procedures.
 
many low wage people aren't even offered health insurance by their employers. they are covered by medicaid or not at all. and if not at all, they go to the emergency room for care, and then you and i pay for it in the form of premiums and ridiculously high costs for routine procedures.

Instead of wanting to argue, please first read what I said. Everyone who works for a large company (at least the companies I have worked for or know about) has the ability to join the company's plan. There are good arguments on either side of this debate, why not stick to real ones.
 
Instead of wanting to argue, please first read what I said. Everyone who works for a large company (at least the companies I have worked for or know about) has the ability to join the company's plan. There are good arguments on either side of this debate, why not stick to real ones.

because a lot of people don't work for large companies, or they aren't granted the privilege of full time. it's stupid to tie health insurance to specific employment. it's bad for both the employer and the employee. plus, some plans are good, and some are absolute ****. that shouldn't depend on where you work.
 
The employer mandate is coming, without the dire consequences predicted:

3/22/2015

Employers Warm To Obamacare, Stick With Coverage


Five years after employers were considering terminating health coverage due to costs and other issues related to the Affordable Care Act, companies have largely changed their tune as fears have not been realized, according to a new analysis.

Just three percent of employers are now likely to terminate health plans for active employees, according to Mercer, one of the largest employee benefits consultancies and a subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan.

The percentage of large employers that say they are likely to terminate coverage and send employees to the public exchange has fallen each year since the ACA was signed into law – from 9% in 2010 to just 3% in 2015,” Beth Umland, Mercer’s director of research for health and benefits, told Forbes.

“Given that the penalty for not offering coverage under the ACA is far lower than the average per employee cost of health coverage – which hit $11,641 in 2014 – it’s not surprising that nearly one out of 10 employers saw terminating their health plans as a likely option back in 2010,” Umland added. “But in fact, virtually no large employers have jumped ship so far, and today few are even considering it.

Mercer’s survey of employers comes less than three months after employers with 100 or more workers in January were required by the Affordable Care Act to offer 70% of their full-time workers coverage. In 2016, employers with 50 or more full-time workers have to start offering coverage.

Employers see offering health benefits as important to keeping the best workers. “Few employers want to risk being the first of their competitors or in their markets to drop health benefits, especially in an improving economy,” Umland said.
Employers Warm To Obamacare, Stick With Coverage - Forbes

That's what I said a few years back, you can threaten to drop insurance and throw your employees into the exchange, but the deductibles are very high in the exchange and if your competitor still offers health insurance through the company and it is superior (and they pick up the bulk of the cost), you will lose employees. This is a key benefit. Its that important.
 
Last edited:
Now that is a hard nosed aproach and heartless!

What is heartless is setting up an environment that is hostile to business, and pointing people towards government. Not just heartless but perverted. But that is the Socialist.
 
many low wage people aren't even offered health insurance by their employers. they are covered by medicaid or not at all. and if not at all, they go to the emergency room for care, and then you and i pay for it in the form of premiums and ridiculously high costs for routine procedures.

You are forgetting that individual policies have always been available. Nobody has to go through their employer.
 
because a lot of people don't work for large companies, or they aren't granted the privilege of full time. it's stupid to tie health insurance to specific employment. it's bad for both the employer and the employee. plus, some plans are good, and some are absolute ****. that shouldn't depend on where you work.

If we were to end up on single payer....all plans would be ****.
 
You are forgetting that individual policies have always been available. Nobody has to go through their employer.

before the ACA exchanges, most of the employment non-specific plans were hopelessly expensive, and your choices depended on where you live. even after the ACA, that's often still the case. the best plans have always been employer based. that's a poor way to distribute access to health care.
 
If we were to end up on single payer....all plans would be ****.

that's not the case in other first world nations, and i don't see seniors rioting in the streets and demanding to be kicked back to the for profit health care industry.
 
The employer mandate is coming, without the dire consequences predicted:


Employers Warm To Obamacare, Stick With Coverage - Forbes

That's what I said a few years back, you can threaten to drop insurance and throw your employees into the exchange, but the deductibles are very high in the exchange and if your competitor still offers health insurance through the company and it is superior (and they pick up the bulk of the cost), you will lose employees. This is a key benefit. Its that important.

9% to 3%, huh? Big deal. That is an opinion piece posted at Forbes that deals mainly with large employers. Problem is that most Americans are employed with small employers. They are the ones that are devastated by the mandates of Obamacare. They are the one's dropping coverage or restricting new hires to 30 hours or less. Like it or not, Obamacare has been a disaster from the beginning, and the worst is yet to come.
 
Back
Top Bottom