Post New

As predicted for over 120 days. Sheeple could not and would not express one individual thought on Mamdani and this proved true right up to election night.

Now the Senate 'deal'.

Sheeple - wait for your Masters to tell you what to think and say about it.

Until then, stick to "demolition"! "Epistein"!

Do the Rudy Pardon thing = that will buy you some time before they tell you what to think and say on the shutdown deal


BAAAAAAA

Sheeple - wait for your Masters to tell you what to think and say about it.

I don't have to wait. It's a sucker's deal. The Dems are either incredibly naive, or they threw in the towel, after causing a lot of trouble for the Proles they supposedly represent. The fact that just enough Dems voted for it, just enough to total 60 "aye", makes me wonder if Schumer orchestrated it, so he could climb down off his hill, while still voting "no" himself, to mollify his health insurance industry paymasters.

Steve...it was the wrong hill

Steve...it was the wrong hill

Remains to be seen. I think some Republicans may have gotten messages from their constituencies. Hopefully so, because if not, the bill is ppor or a no go, and we fall back to the old ACA.

STEVE.....

I fully understand you disagree with me --- that ACA subsidies are a killer good issue for Dems.

I just feel that in a 50-50 tribal country where the votes of micro-groups and micro-castes (yes, America has that now) matters..... an issue where pockets of people in swing states are affected by - is something potent.

If I were MAGA.....

And i got whiff that Dems were going to announce the following:

"Illegals - get out. Get out now or ICE raids will look like the Easter Bunny when we take over*

"Shove pronouns up your ass. We won't tolerate disrespect against anyone --but if you got the plumbing, you are a boy or a girl---deal with it"

IF they do that --- and swear to only campaign on WAGES, COST OF LIVING AND.......ACA subsidies.

MAGA would shit kittens. Theyh ave NO plan other than saying 'no' to kitchen table things Americans need.

Then, they shoudl tell repubs "no deal" -- and see you at the mid-terms where you are FOR the hikes in insurance prices, and we are against them.



Trump rode a few bucks worth of egg prices partially to the Oval Office.

Dems --yu got $1000's to work with. I'd have the split screen ads of a white coal worker family fretting over the doctor bill, while MAGA is having steak and lobster in the new ballroom.

Radical, all of this is, i know.

But as a spectator of politics ---man ---i've never seen a gifthorse looked in the mouth like this before

I fully understand you disagree with me --- that ACA subsidies are a killer good issue for Dems.

As offered before, I would have had all the Dems vote "present" instead of invoking a filibuster. Give the regime it's head, and see how the base likes it.

But as a spectator of politics ---man ---i've never seen a gifthorse looked in the mouth like this before

The situation was certainly mishandled. The number of people the Dems were "fighting for" was small, compared to the amount of collateral damage: Federal workers unpaid, SNAP benefits suspended, people's travel plans thrown in the dumpster.

My strategy would be let the regime shred the ACA entirely. People have forgotten what it was like before the ACA. Let insurance companies run wild. The GOP will wear the consequences. Then, in 28, the Dems bring a real national health plan.

Steve

My strategy would be let the regime shred the ACA entirely. People have forgotten what it was like before the ACA. Let insurance companies run wild. The GOP will wear the consequences. Then, in 28, the Dems bring a real national health plan.

!. Things have gotten worse under the ACA, not better. Look at the cost explosions.
2. Insurance companies are richer than ever...thanks to the ACA.
3. A nationwide single payer system would cost north of $2 trillion per year.

Vermont has a population of only ~650,000. They estimated that doing a single payer plan for every Vermont resident would be between $1.6B and $2.5 Billion.

Let's say it's $2billion. That's only $3,077 per resident. Multiply that by 342 million Americans and you get a little over a trillion dollars EACH AND EVERY year. Plus the government seizing control of about 18% of the US economy.

No thanks. The cost estimate is likely off by at least 2x.

!. Things have gotten worse under the ACA, not better. Look at the cost explosions.

Is that due to the repeal of the personal mandate, which took effect in 2019? Proponents of the mandate said that, if it was repealed, young, healthy, people, who require little health care, would withdraw from the system, so the cost for those remaining would increase.

2. Insurance companies are richer than ever...thanks to the ACA.

Of course. The ACA, Medicare Advantage, and Part D, were all written to line the pockets of the insurance companies.

3. A nationwide single payer system would cost north of $2 trillion per year.

That would be a bargain.

From the net sifter:

In 2023, total U.S. healthcare spending reached $4.9 trillion, a 7.5% increase from 2022. This amounted to $14,570 per person and represented 17.6% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The higher growth rate was driven by increased utilization of healthcare goods and services, particularly in private health insurance and Medicare

Steve

50% of all health care dollars are used by 5% of the people. Significant cost savings must focus on those super users.

Let's start with the obese. There is a direct correlation between obesity and higher use of health care dollars.

Let's get all the fatties to emigrate to Canada, Ireland, Iran, and other countries that hate the USA. Also, Uganda, where they may be a useful food source.

Vermont has mostly white people so it might be discrimination.

Total health care is about $5 trillion so about $15000 per person per year.

However per Kaiser foundation, 50% only use 3% of all health care. Probably young healthy people.

45% use 47% of health care.

Then the top 5% of users use 50% of all health care.

The only real cost savings will be among the 5% of super users.

Time to put Granny on an ice floe.

What is it with these old sick unproductive people using up way more than their fare share of health care dollars.

A bunch of selfish boomers no doubt. Going to Disney world every year eating deep fried Snickers bars which they consider health food and voting MAGA.

Getting fatter and sicker every year

Same with the welfare bludgers on SNAP. They should just feed them the excess food from supermarkets and restaurants that gets thrown away every day. What a waste.

In cities like NYC give the poor SNAPPers throw away food from restaurants and supermarkets. This would be no cost to the city and it would be free free free and Mamdani could take full credit

Each SNAPper could be given an official Dumpster Diver ID card. Illegal aliens would not have to out their real names. Instead of kidnapping vibrant immigrants ICE could be assigned to help the SNAPPers locate edible garbage throughout our urban areas

That's a total win for everyone

Things have gotten worse under the ACA, not better. Look at the cost explosions.

Costs are a big problem, but that's not confined to the ACA. All health costs are up bigly.

Coverage for pre-existing conditions is huge for those of us on the ACA. It was a nightmare before the ACA.

Note that employer health plans do not discriminate for pre-existing conditions. It's only fair that privately purchased plans shouldn't, either.

Michelle Obama is posting here.

Wow, congratulations Shrewd.

My strategy would be let the regime shred the ACA entirely. People have forgotten what it was like before the ACA. Let insurance companies run wild. The GOP will wear the consequences. Then, in 28, the Dems bring a real national health plan.

Oh God, a ton of poorer diabetics would die. A charity should have one of the earlier insulin formulas manufactured and distributed for those falling off medical care. Wonder how much that would cost?

All health costs are up bigly.

Coverage for pre-existing conditions is huge for those of us on the ACA. It was a nightmare before the ACA.

Note that employer health plans do not discriminate for pre-existing conditions. It's only fair that privately purchased plans shouldn't, either.

Yah, an average of 18% excluding the increase due to loss of subsidies, and a big chunk of that is healthy people deciding to drop medical care. The individual mandate is necessary to really lower costs IIRC.

No matter how we work it, we end up with a bastard quilt of medical care coverages, with many folks falling into the no health care zone, and others straining to retain health care.

Note that employer health plans do not discriminate for pre-existing conditions. It's only fair that privately purchased plans shouldn't, either.

Actually, they do, if the "JC" wants to discrimiate. Why do you think most employers require a pre-employment physical? When the last Steelcase dealer I worked for went toes up, the dealer that bought the customer accounts hired some of the people. One of the warehouse guys failed his employment physical. He had a hernia. The other dealer refused to hire him.

Steve

50% of all health care dollars are used by 5% of the people. Significant cost savings must focus on those super users.

Already been proposed:

Lamm: we all have a 'duty to die'

Lamm sparked the furor earlier this week when, criticizing the high costs of health care, he said terminally ill elderly citizens 'have a duty to die and get out of the way.'

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/03/30/Lamm-we-al...

Some years later, Lamm died. I notice that he died in a hospital. Seems he was not taking his advice, when it got personal, as he was trying to stay alive.

Steve

Actually, they do, if the "JC" wants to discrimiate. Why do you think most employers require a pre-employment physical? When the last Steelcase dealer I worked for went toes up, the dealer that bought the customer accounts hired some of the people. One of the warehouse guys failed his employment physical. He had a hernia. The other dealer refused to hire him.

Steve
****

Yep.

A mid sized company i owned -- I inherited a small union as part of it. The whole place wasn't unionized, just one section of it. I had clandestine talks with the union President before i bought the place, so I *felt* i could work with him.

And we worked well together for a few years before he retired.

There was this guy with lung issues (heavy smoker, older)....paid dues to this union for 12 years before I got there anyways, the union president came to me and asked me "do you need to get rid of the kid"? The kid referred to this young guy who was in the union, who sucked. Milked every union protection, really caused havoc amongst customers and even employees. I said "sure".....so over a steak lunch at KC Prime..... (his treat)....he told me ....if I get 3 write-ups on the lung guy, he'd make sure 'the kid' goes away. He told me not to make stuff up but, just write up the tardy, the errors, etc that I wasn't writing up because it wasn't worth the union shit. He told me in no uncertain terms "I'm paying claims on this guy every other day it seems. " he referred to the health policy. (Health and Pension fund - partially union gravy money...)

Well, "the kid" was gone in a few months.

And the union was "unable to protect" the lung guy because the write-ups were to the letter of the union rules.

I can't speak for the Fortune 500, but that was *one* instance whre I had a front row seat to a small union shitcanning a fellow over health expenses.

Costs are a big problem, but that's not confined to the ACA. All health costs are up bigly.

And this is the root of the problem, underlying health care costs. Why everyone wants to just throw up their hands and say "there's nothing that can be done short of capping prices" is beyond me. There is plenty that can be done.

Starting with here:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1259860868/?bestFormat=t...

The Innovator's Prescription: A Disruptive Solution for Health Care 1st Edition, Kindle Edition
by Clayton M. Christensen (Author), Jerome H. Grossman M.D. (Author), Jason Hwang M.D. (Author)

Some years later, Lamm died. I notice that he died in a hospital. Seems he was not taking his advice, when it got personal, as he was trying to stay alive.

A home or a hospice, say goodbye, and a morphine drip into oblivion would be my choice. Had a friend who had it arranged with the Hemlock Society. The Doctors talked to him, told the Hemlock society they'd take care of it, set up the morphine drip, then folks said goodbye and left, and he faded off into oblivion. Nice way to go.

He told me in no uncertain terms "I'm paying claims on this guy every other day it seems. " he referred to the health policy. (Health and Pension fund - partially union gravy money...)

In your case, the union had skin in the insurance coverage. Sounds like the union was paying out of pocket, with someone like Blue Cross doing the paperwork? My grandfather's retirement supplemental medical coverage was through the Teamsters, not the truck line he had worked for, with Blue Cross doing the paperwork.

In a non-union shop, the company pays. The last place I worked paid the bills itself, while Blue Cross did the paperwork.

Radio Shack did not have a pre-employment physical. One of the guys in my store hit the company up for a fortune in dental work.

Would an employer care if an employee had medical issues, if the issues were paid for by a national health plan, instead of coming out of the "JC's" pocket? Well, OK, the "JC" might care if the guy was absent a lot, for treatment.

Steve

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.