Obamacare costs

[william the wie]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

 

[Oddball]

How can that which is free cost anything?

 

[william the wie]

How can that which is free cost anything?

Reread the bill, it is not free.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

 

[Supposn]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Rshermr]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

And, those making the wild claims may want to put a link or two to prove their claims. I have seen nothing in the area of non-partial sources saying such. But in the con web site area, that is the ongoing buzz.

 

[Rshermr]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

And, those making the wild claims may want to put a link or two to prove their claims. I have seen nothing in the area of non-partial sources saying such. But in the con web site area, that is the ongoing buzz.

 

[william the wie]

OK, a few things I know

30 hours = FTE so @ $1.50/hr will be saved by keeping hours under 30 hours

that means a lot of workers will take about a $8K hit and it will be among those least able to afford it. but what will that do to state and local taxes? Migration patterns? Anyone got a clue?

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

1) there is no cost savings it seems in BO care because it is very stupid and very liberal


2) to cuts costs by 60% all you'd do is make all providers post their prices and give every person a voucher for $3600.

Case closed but because liberals lack the IQ to understand capitalism it won't happen.

 

[Rshermr]

its like asking what will socialism do. Since its based on monopolistic government liberal guessing rather than on millions of individual Republican capitalist choices, it will introduce huge soviet inefficiencies into the economy.

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

And your links to prove these accusations are .......? Oh, yeah, we should believe you, because it is your opinion. dipshit.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Edward & William, some medium and large corporations may net gain or lose if they decide to circumvent the Affordable ccare Act by reducing their full timers and increasing their part timers.
They may lose some critical and/or gernerally many of their employees who choose to work for other enterprises that act otherwise. Rates of employee turnover are among enterprises’ cost factors.

Because so many enterprises had (prior to the introduction of healthcare insurance serious congressional consideration), already eliminated or severely reduced financial support for healthcare insurance, this act will (I believe) of aggregate benefit to USA wage and salary earners. There is certainly an unfulfilled need for such insurance.

If sufficient medium and large corporations act in the manner you suggest, it may be of net benefit to the many small enterprises that cannot provide full time employment but need part timers. Their clients’ almost all require servicing within the same short windows of time.
If many major and medium corporations act in the manner you suggest, this act will reduce those enterprises costs, facilitate more reliable services and increase clients’ satisfaction at lesser prices.

I suppose you’ve been told to beware of what you wish for. I suggest you also should reconsider what you wish to avoid; it may actually be preferable to what you now have.

Within a democratic republic with a free competitive economy, the voters hopefully make the correct choices and regardless of those choices entrepreneurs adjust to their own determinations of their best interests. Time and providence evaluates those choices.

Respectfully, Supposn

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

And your links to prove these accusations are .......? Oh, yeah, we should believe you, because it is your opinion. dipshit.

let me guess you want a link to the NYTimes because it is not biased-right???

Common sense and soviet history will tell you to cuts costs by 60% all you'd do is make all providers post their prices and give every person a voucher for $3600.

Case closed but because liberals lack the IQ to understand capitalism it won't happen and we'll all be victimes of BO's Obamanation.

 

[william the wie]

Ed, with all due respect and not disagreeing with your post, there has been no comprehensive total transition costs data so far posted anywhere I can find. Darden foods, runs Long Horn Steakhouse among other chains, has already begun cutting hours citing the provisions I mentioned in their news release. Five Guys franchisees are being interviewed on Bloomberg and saying the same thing.

The big question is what is being done but not talked about?

 

[Supposn]

William the wie, you do not share my confidence that Romneycare will be of net benefit to our nation.

The question is what will be done by the grants begin with all of a state’s additional costs and over the years it tapers down from all to 90% of the cost. The states are unlikely to refuse federal funds and provide their hospitals with the funds to cover uninsured patience.

Romneycare, will join Social Security retirement and Medicare as invulnerable federal programs. USA voters would not tolerate their elimination. Bush tried to undermine Social Security by privatizing it; he and others will continue fail to do so.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Rshermr]

Ed, with all due respect and not disagreeing with your post, there has been no comprehensive total transition costs data so far posted anywhere I can find. Darden foods, runs Long Horn Steakhouse among other chains, has already begun cutting hours citing the provisions I mentioned in their news release. Five Guys franchisees are being interviewed on Bloomberg and saying the same thing.

The big question is what is being done but not talked about?

Damn. Darden Foods and Five Guys. Hell, we are doomed. Why together they must make up, what, maybe .000001% of the US economy. That does it. The ACA is toast.

Uh, did you ever consider that the US has the highest health care costs of any nation among the 35 industrialize nations of the world? And that our private health care companies were seeing to it that our costs were rising faster than any of those industrialized nations. I mean, I know it is the con dream, to make insurance companies and their ceo's more and more wealthy. But, I am not sure I want them to be that rich on MY health care dollars.

Then there is this whole thing about the uninsured. Even though we do not insure millions, and the rest of the world insured pretty much every one, we still pay at least twice as much as the other nations. And yet we have the lowest life expectancy of any of the industrialized nations. I mean, damn. We are number 51!!!

"The map shows how people are likely to live the longest in developed countries with state-funded healthcare systems like Japan, Canada and the UK, which each have average life expectancies of over 80 years."

Read more: How does your nation rank in the world map of life expectancy? | Mail Online

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Uh, did you ever consider that the US has the highest health care costs of any nation among the 35 industrialize nations of the world?

this is obviously because we have a socialized system controlled by the liberal government. I guess you've never heard of Medicaid, Medicare, VA, Schip, and insurance mis-regulation??? See why we are positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And that our private health care companies were seeing to it that our costs were rising faster than any of those industrialized nations.

of course thats liberal stupidity beyond words!!!!.

Liberals made competition in health care illegal so of course costs are high. Imagine someone who jogs for fun and someone who races in life and death competition? Who would be a faster runner? Now you understand competion and capitalism and how both make us better. Not so hard was it?


To reduce costs in health care 60% all you'd do is give each person a voucher for $3600 and require all providers to post prices in a comparative way. This is called capitalism. Again, its called Republican capitalism.

Talking to liberals is like talking to little children, sadly.

 

[Greenbeard]

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

Everyone benefits from slowing the growth of Medicare spending. Everyone benefits from starting to fix the broken incentives that compromise quality and safety and encourage ever-greater spending. Everyone benefits from investments in public health and prevention. Everyone benefits when broken markets are repaired.

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

Everyone benefits from slowing the growth of Medicare spending. Everyone benefits from starting to fix the broken incentives that compromise quality and safety and encourage ever-greater spending. Everyone benefits from investments in public health and prevention. Everyone benefits when broken markets are repaired.

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

blah blah blah....but here's exactly what to do:

To reduce costs in health care 60% all you'd do is give each person a voucher for $3600 and require all providers to post prices in a comparative way. This is called capitalism. Again, its called Republican capitalism.

 

[Rshermr]

For most people on this board Obamacare will be zero plus. What I find bizarre is that probable victims are part of the Democratic base and it kicks off at the start of the mid-term election 1/1/14. Even if the bill as written were pluperfect the teething problems are going to be huge.

Everyone benefits from slowing the growth of Medicare spending. Everyone benefits from starting to fix the broken incentives that compromise quality and safety and encourage ever-greater spending. Everyone benefits from investments in public health and prevention. Everyone benefits when broken markets are repaired.

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

blah blah blah....but here's exactly what to do:

To reduce costs in health care 60% all you'd do is give each person a voucher for $3600 and require all providers to post prices in a comparative way. This is called capitalism. Again, its called Republican capitalism.

But then Ed is delusional. He thinks he is a health care expert. Pore guy.

 

[Supposn]

Major segments o f USA’ s medical insurance can be described as “semi-socialized”; but our health care provider generally function within an environment of free competitive enterprises.
We have not yet generally agreed upon what future funding methods we should use. Among individual and hybrid methods being discussed and considered are:

Billing per task.

Having first recognized generally accepted practices for treating some diagnosed illnesses), making payments per patient regardless of the specific methods and tasks.

Classifying segments of those covered by the healthcare insurance and monthly billing each of a segment’s clients equally throughout the year without regard of the extent, or lack of services each client received each month.

/////////////////////

I’m covered by Medicare. I have never had reason for to criticize any Medicare service. Those of my age and their families that I’m acquainted with speak similarly of the Medicare services they’ve received.

I do find fault with our methods of funding Medicare.

I do believe inevitably our nation will adopt some form of universal healthcare insurance with a single government payer to e3awqch he3althcare provider. That insurance will be somewhat similar to Medicare and will also permit individuals to privately purchase additional services not generally covered by insurance.

I do not believe that prior to 2014 very many states will decide not to administer their states’ insurance exchanges or expand their Medicaid.
Direct federal administration of states’ insurance exchanges will induce sooner rather than later transformation to universal federal healthcare insurance. Not availing themselves of the generous federal benefits offered for expanding Medicaid will only serve to increase those states’ healthcare costs and provide their citizens with lesser healthcare.

Respectfully, Supposn