Results of Government Interference

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mopar Dude, Nov 18, 2019.

  1. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Active Member

    I own a small business. In 2007 I started offering health care insurance to my employees as a benefit. My premium was under $3000.00 a month. Once the Affordable Health Care act was passed, my premiums rose in a three year span more than $2000.00 a month and have continued to rise each year thereafter. I just received my renewal letter and I am incurring another $900.00 a month hike in premiums to almost $7000.00 a month starting January 1st.

    Here I am a small businessman. I want to do what I feel is right for my hard working staff. How is a small businessman supposed to reason this? Just simply accept a 12k decrease in annual earnings? Who could accept that? And it is all attributed to federal interference...... You want a lesson in government efficiency? Go visit your local Social Security office or Department of Highways office..... This is precisely why I do and will vote conservative until the day I leave this earth. Affordable Health Care??? My backside!!
     
  2. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    The answer is even more simple than you will believe. UNIVERSAL-HEALTH-CARE. Take employers out of the health care business.

    By the way, health care costs have been rising every year for decades and long before the Affordable Care Act ever came along. In spite of the fact that health care costs have been rising year-after-year for decades, now it is the ACA's fault. The ACA was never intended to immediately make health care costs nosedive. It was supposed to happen once the savings mechanisms built into the law kicked in. Guess what, it IS working. Time to expand the ACA.


    Name the much-criticized federal program that has saved the U.S. $2.3 trillion. Hint: it starts with Affordable

    Even before the Affordable Care Act became law, about 90 percent of the conversation and criticism of it was about coverage. Little has been said about its ability to control costs.

    March 23, the ninth anniversary of the ACA’s passage, presents a good opportunity to examine its legacy on cost control — a legacy that deserves to be in the foreground, not relegated to the background behind the exchanges, Medicaid expansion, and work requirements.

    One month after the ACA had passed, the Office of the Actuary of the Department of Health and Human Services projected its financial impact in a report entitled “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protections and Affordable Care Act’, as Amended.” The government’s official record-keeper estimated that health care costs under the ACA would reach $4.14 trillion per year in 2017 and constitute 20.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).


    Fast forward to December 2018, when that same office released the official tabulation of health care spending in 2017. The bottom line: cumulatively from 2010 to 2017 the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion.

    In 2017 alone, health expenditures were $650 billion lower than projected, and kept health care spending under 18 percent of GDP — basically a tad over where it was in 2010 when the ACA was passed. It did all of this while expanding health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

    Compared to the 2010 projections, the government’s Medicare bill in 2017 was 10 percent ($70 billion) less, and spending for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program was a whopping $250 billion below expectations (partially — but only partially — due to the failure of some states to expand the program). The actuary had predicted in 2010 that employer-sponsored insurance would cost $1.21 trillion in 2017, but it came in at $1.04 trillion, a difference of $170 billion for that year.

    Put another way, health care spending in 2017 was $2,000 less per person than it was projected to be. And for the 176 million Americans who have private employer-sponsored insurance, their lower premiums averaged just under $1,000 per person.

    Barack Obama pledged on the campaign trail and as president that he would sign a health care bill that lowered family health insurance premiums by $2,500. Conservative politicians and pundits roundly mocked him. Yet the ACA has more than delivered on that promise, saving about $4,000 per family. And these lower health care premiums probably contribute to the recent rise in workers’ wages.

    One reason the ACA’s enormous success in cost control goes unappreciated is that no one experiences the difference between projections and reality. What could have happened is intangible. All we feel is what actually happens.

     
  3. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Active Member

    This discussion is much like discussing bio fuels replacing fossil fuels. If Universal health care is a viable proposal, there is no way the huge wheels of government could enact such a sweeping revision for a minimum of a decade. I have to worry about my company's bottom line today. Reality tells me that health insurance premiums will be my concern far into the foreseeable future.

    Well Joe, where are these savings being realized? If my insurance company is realizing them, then common sense tells me that there should be a correlating reduction in my premiums.

    A typical reasonably encompassing health insurance plan would cost the average person $1500.00-$2000.00 a month. What average family can afford that? Heck, that is more than my monthly mortgage. I haven't checked figures, but I don't believe my auto insurance has doubled in ten years. I know my company's liability insurance hasn't. Only the health insurance that the fed has chosen to involve themselves in.... So as a businessman that genuinely desires to do right by his employees, I have no choice but to foot this burden...... I'm telling you, Joe. I live in the greatest nation on earth. But my government does not have the ability to do anything efficiently. I am sorry for using the forum to blow this steam off. At least I'll get my money's worth out of it. I was blessed with a darned cancer diagnosis this morning.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2019
  4. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    Oh my God! I think that you have a right to blow off some stream. Not advanced I am praying? I've had two relatives, mother and older sister, both battle cancer. The best advice they got was to think positive in all aspects of their lives and let the doctors do the rest. Hang in there my friend. Nothing else matters right now. Get well.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  5. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Active Member

    I appreciate it. It's the scourge of old aged men, the prostate. Certainly is treatable. Not fun but certainly treatable. Thanks for the well wishes. They genuinely are appreciated.
     
    JoeNation likes this.
  6. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    The prostate cancer diagnosis can be serious but in many, many cases, it isn't. My older brother had to have his removed and the doctors took their sweet time doing it. There didn't seem to be any hurry. Even though it is very treatable, nobody wants to hear the diagnosis. I had two spots on my skin biopsied recently and both were benign but you never get used to waiting for those results. I'm sure that you are going to be fine. Hang in there. :)
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  7. CoinBlazer

    CoinBlazer de omnibus dubitandum

    Very sorry to hear of it. My prayers are with you.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  8. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    I am sorry to hear about your diagnosis. I've had a couple of scares, but it was all negative. My prostate is too big, but it's something I have to put up with.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  9. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Active Member

    I appreciate that. Didn't mean to make it a forum problem. Just was fresh on my mind when I opened my company's health insurance renewal. Thanks for the well wishes.
     
  10. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    When the Federal Government figures out how to fix the VA Hospitals, you can begin to talk about how you can run socialized medicine. Until then, it’s a nonstarter.

    Poor care, long waits and administrators covering their posteriors instead of looking out of patients are all serious problems. National-wide health care would be a far bigger responsibility.

    Many progressives and socialists are out to increase the size and scope of government, but they are not interested in the difficult part, which is administering the programs. That is a lot of work, and it’s boring and not sexy, like promising that everybody will get everything for nothing.
     
  11. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    I'm thinking that you don't have any idea what the difference between a government run hospital like the VA and the multitude of privately run hospitals in the rest of the country is. The government wouldn't take over hospitals, it would simply reimburse them for their services, you know, like private for-profit insurance companies do now. Try understanding an issue before you decide to blirt out a bunch of complete nonsense at least once in this forum.
     
  12. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    The government will take over the hospitals. It's like Obama Care. You get your foot in the door with a start toward socialized medicine, and then you work the rest of your body into the house.

    I can hear the argument now. “Why should we waste money on paying profits to the privately run hospitals? The government can run them without the need to pay a return to investors.” The answer is that the profits keep the operations to on their toes to run more efficient operations.

    Even your idea of having the government pay all the medical bills is suspect. Beyond the huge tax increases to pay for it, and the gigantic burden of putting all of the illegal aliens on the “Medicare for All,” informed voters are well aware of the Medicare fraud that has been a major problem for years. Multiply that by six (14.9% of Americans are 65 and over), and you have an even larger policing problem.

    As I said earlier, progressives are really excited about wonderful, new, compassionate programs like “Medicare for All,” but they are not interested in the unsexy details like how to run it efficiently without waste and corruption.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2019
  13. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    I can't do anything about your fear, mistrust, paranoia about the government. You'll have to see your own doctor about that. You psychological problems are above my pay-grade.
     
  14. CoinBlazer

    CoinBlazer de omnibus dubitandum

    The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
    -Ronald Reagan
     
  15. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    I think that people that believe government is all bad or all good are the most clueless people alive. No government ever does everything right but you couldn't have an infrastructure without one, no roads, no power grid, no national security, no food distribution system, no disaster relief, and endless other collective benefits we all take for granted.

    Absolutist blanket statements that routinely drip out of the mouth of @JohnHamilton are just symptoms of a closed and narrow mind. There are plenty of examples of things the government gets right and there are certainly plenty of examples of things things the private sector fails at. It is neither all one way or the other. A good mix of government and private sector participation is the optimal solution.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  16. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Active Member

    You are correct of course. And I remember that quote by Reagan. It was meant to appeal to those of us that find government interference to be a hindrance and it has played well to that audience.

    The problem with government is that it doesn't posses the necessary elements to make it successful. And by that I mean thrifty. My wife is a technology infrastructure director at a major university (and I have trouble with email).... Her office is fraught with highly compensated managers yet is terribly lacking in skilled laborers. You ever drive by a highway department project? We have all seen it. Five people watching one man dig a hole. It is an undeniable situation. Ever stand in line at the Post Office to mail a letter? I bet you never had to stand in line at Fed-Ex. Privately run business ventures are motivated to be efficient. They cannot afford to have offices staffed with six figure managers. They don't have projects with five people watching one person work. Privately run ventures are thrifty and have a vested interest in pleasing the consumer.

    Yes, government fills invaluable roles. I do like my kids attending nice schools and I like knowing I can call the fire department if I have a fire. But government by its very nature simply does not have the ability to be thrifty and place the needs of the consumer ahead of the fatted calf. No, government is not all bad. But then again, they aren't as efficient as privately held corporations either.
     
    JohnHamilton likes this.
  17. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    And a lot of what you post is a reflection of narrow and closed gullible mind. You believe that government is the solution to just about every problem.

    For example, when I pointed to fact that many recessions and depressions are caused by too much debt, your immediate solution was “pass more regulations.” That’s what Dodd – Frank did the banking industry, and it has made life very hard for smaller banks who were not the source of the problem.

    Part of the problem was from banks that made dumb loans who then bundled their grade Z mortgages into grade Z funds that defaulted on their investors. It almost brought down the financial system.

    Another part of the problem was government which passed anti-red lining laws. I am sensitive to the fact the people in minority neighborhoods have been discriminated against because of their color or location. The trouble is if the people do not have income the handle the mortgage, you can’t make good loans to them. Simply forcing banks to make loans to people who can’t pay them is not reform. It’s a recipe for failure.

    The trouble with many politicians who stay in government for too long is that they begin to they are entitled to get rich off the system. Bill and Hillary Clinton are prime examples of this. Biden and his son, Hunter, are another.

    Government salaries are high enough these days. Most of the government employees who are now living in DC, Maryland and Virginia are making 6 figure salaries. They are part of the “deep state” which concerns so many people these days.

    “USA Today” which is a liberal newspaper ran a series of stories years ago about how government employees are making far more than their private sector counterparts. These employees also get great benefits, including health care and generous pensions.

    The same holds true for members of the House and Senate, but too many of them think they deserve more. What they deserve is term limits. They need to find out what it’s like to work in the real world and live with the regulations they create and support.
     
  18. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    The trouble with government is that are too few checks and balances on it. Voting every two, four or six years is hardly check. Many voters are so poorly informed that they don’t know who or what they are voting for.
    Going to court to address grieves is expensive and very time consuming. When you are going up against the government, they have infinite resources. They can fight the case almost without limit. There are also judges who are “in the tank” for the government. They are government employees, and they are not going to act against their own interests.

    In the private sector, you make your customers happy or you perish. Customers make decisions every day, not every few years for most products. Even durable goods manufacturers have to please their customers. The American auto industry put out crap products in the 1970s. They lost a lot of their customer base, and they are never going to get it back.

    Most consumers vote with their feet. When a company puts out a bad product, it pays for it. When government puts out a bad product, and there are no alternatives in the private sector, there is not that much pressure to fix it. The only real check is the news media, and when they are in the tank with the government, there are no real checks left.
     
  19. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    So, what is your idea of the “idea system?” Will it be the privately owned corner grocery that sells food produced on the state run farms?
     
  20. SmalltownMN
    Doh

    SmalltownMN New Member

    Randy, have been thinking about you since I read this. Positive vibes coming your way from people you don't even know.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.

Share This Page