Wow, diversity on the GOP's presidential ticket. An older rich white guy — a member of the 1 percent — running with a younger rich white guy — a member of the 5 percent! Scion of an upper-class family whose wealth comes from finance embracing a regular guy whose family wealth comes from construction. White-collar/blue-collar social unity at its best.
Mitt Romney's net worth: hundreds of millions. Rep. Paul Ryan's: only millions. That's building bridges.
Both know what it's like to pull themselves up by other people's bootstraps. And both have trust funds — this means somebody trusts them, right? They promise to fix our economy based on their financial acumen and vast experience in the private sector. For instance, Romney raised funds for Bain from El Salvadoran oligarchs tied to death squads. Only Romney could take that kind of money and do good with it — such as buying companies and then bankrupting them.
And Ryan's vaunted budget cleverly defunds social programs, turns Medicare into a voucher system — but protects preferential tax treatment for oil companies. It's uncanny.
I'm sure Romney is hiding nothing in his tax returns, but if he were, are people even smart enough to understand? For me, it's enough to know that men with foresight, intelligence and compassion will have power and the glory that goes with it if they win. Given their history, it is obvious that they would use this power only for good — returns.
DAVE MOFFATT Winston-Salem
"Assange accused"
As tensions rise among Sweden, Ecuador and the United Kingdom over the antics of Julian Assange, one has to wonder what motivation would be so intense as to have nations protect or seek to arrest a single man. It's a sexual offense.
Recently Assange, better known as the founder of WikiLeaks, spoke from the balcony of the Ecuadorean Embassy in London within which he is hiding to claim that his extradition to Sweden is really about his actions in regard to revealing the secrets of the United States military and the actions of government officials in this nation, even going so far as to call it a "witch hunt." This is an insulting red herring. Assange has been accused by two women of sexually assaulting them while on a trip to Sweden, and this is what Sweden wants him arrested for, not for his actions while at WikiLeaks.
Furthermore, the United States has nothing to do with his extradition to Sweden; the United States wants only to try him on an unrelated charge pertaining to the things WikiLeaks spread about the world. I believe the fact that he would be willing to take asylum in an embassy is indicative of his guilt.
Assange would have us believe that he is a victim of some mass conspiracy to put him in jail for protecting the freedom of citizens the world over. He is a slippery liar, and he is using this absurd fiasco to garner more support from other gullible nations.
The letter "Individual responsibility" (Aug. 24), defending Paul Ryan's Christianity and his budget, quite misses the point.
The important thing isn't who gets credit; it's helping the poor. It's putting food in mouths and roofs over heads.
Individuals and churches aren't getting the job done, nor have they ever nor will they ever. Maybe if they did, there'd be no need for government to intervene. But are we really supposed to let people starve because government isn't the "proper" entity to care for them? Government represents all of us, not just the church-goers. It has more resources and potential for accountability than any church. What entity is more capable of caring for the poor?
I'm sorry, but a politician whose policy is to cut assistance for the poor while giving tax breaks to millionaires is not acting in a Christian manner.
But if I'm wrong and government is not supposed to help, then I don't want to hear any more nonsense about prayers before government meetings, or this being a "Christian nation." Either it is or it isn't, and if it is, it needs to act like it.
RON F. SLATER Winston-Salem
"Beware the GOP'
Those who are seniors or care about seniors should not even think about voting Republican in November. Remember the Republican plan to privatize Social Security during the George W. Bush years? It would have been a disaster for seniors. Well, now they want to turn Medicare into a voucher system, thus privatizing Medicare. AARP is against it because it knows that vouchers are a very bad thing for seniors.
Those who are women should not even think about voting Republican in November. Their platform denies abortion under any circumstances, including rape, incest or even to save the life of the woman. Republicans want women to birth these babies, but their concern ends there. They do not want to support health care or public education for these or any of our nation's children.
Don't be fooled. The GOP is the party of "I've got mine and to heck with you!" Vote Democratic in November.
JO ANN MOUNT
Winston-Salem
"Finish the Thought"
Briefly complete the sentence below and send it to us at letters@wsjournal.com. We'll print some of the results in a few days. Only signed entries, please — no anonymous ones.
Burro wanted me to let you know that he is actually a miniature mediterranean Donkey, looks just like the one in Shrek. So I am calling him "Donkey" now.
The R line is that Obama took $716billion from Medicare to fund Obamacare, which isn't wrong but it doesn't explain the whole story. The money taken from Medicare Advantage programs means that Medicare will no longer pay for my gym membership, massage therapy, or acupuncture, but under ACA now covers more of the pharmaceutical doughnut hole and pays for preventative tests, vaccines, and check ups.
"Big Tent Party". Yes it is. It is not a big commune party. The rest of the LTE is just the same envy and resentment tripe. A long time saying that describes some of the differences between an American and a Frenchman: A Frenchman sees a big fine house on a hill and says "someday I'm going to get that guy". An American sees the same house and says "someday I'm going to be that guy". This LTE writer is brimming with Gallic courage.
Assange accused. Two parts to this. He is wanted for sexual assault and he needs to face these charges and let a trial determine. The other part is a little murky. Much of his wikileaks doc dump is embarrassing disclosure about diplomats and their private thoughts about various counterparts in other countries. This is the world of diplomacy--two faced and back stabbing. The extent of any releases of serious classified info is not fully known. If the info proves minor then probably no harm. But if it is more serious to where innocent but helpful people lost their lives because of it, now that is trouble. Additionally, some info can do great damage to the level of trust and cooperation between nations, especially ones who have uneasy relations publicly while privately cooperating for a mutual need. This world is a dangerous place. Someday we may know more, but this Assange guy seems to be a preening ego.
"Misses the point". "Individuals and churches aren't getting the job done, nor have they ever nor will they ever. Maybe if they did, there'd be no need for government to intervene. But are we really supposed to let people starve because government isn't the "proper" entity to care for them? Government represents all of us, not just the church-goers. It has more resources and potential for accountability than any church. What entity is more capable of caring for the poor"? This is backwards inside out convoluted "logic". Individuals, and churches always have assisted the poor. It was called by its proper name--charity. This writer thinks a government can lift a poor population in total and make it unpoor. We have spent many billions of dollars proving that to be sheer folly. The fact that government stepped in is the problem...they managed to completely overwhelm the capability of traditional charity in the new name of welfare. Government has more resources?! Good God, it's resources are our resources-- the earnings of taxpayers. America the welfare state is an America with no future.
"Beware the GOP". Hysterical. Got news for you, Medicare is pretty much on financial auto pilot to make it easier for Congress not to have to touch that 3rd rail. It as well as SS will be reformed pretty soon because they have to be. The surest way to end either as we know it is to leave them as we know it. Something similar to the Ryan plan for Medicare with an age cut off will eventually be the course of action. SS will gradually follow a similar course. When the Medicare trustees tell us we have a set number of years- maybe 10- those are the "presentable" figures. Gradually less government centric will be the only way out for those under age 45 or so. As far as AARP goes, they are a major enabler and bare a lot of blame in the entitlement mess. I would love to see them put out of business.
"The alternative to 'Obamacare' is...". Something free market centered, consumer centered and extensive choice in coverage to fit the patients needs and budget. It has been decades since this system was even partly available. A government run option should be kept available for some, but it should not be one size for all which is the ultimate goal in 10 or 15 years as Mr Obama has said on numerous occasions before he became President. This will only result in a two tier healthcare system.
Market forces are not well suited for healthcare because one cannot predict when you might need those services like you can say calculate a replacement cycle for a refrigerator.
It's been almost a year since I awoke one September morning and rushed my son to the ER. 11 days later he came home.
Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that when I went to bed that Wednesday night that I would be spending the next 11 days at Baptist hospital.
I had hotel reservations and plane tickets to go the NYC and tickets for the "Book of Mormon" which at that time was sold out a year in advance.
Most other industrial societies have far better outcomes regarding healthcare and spend almost half as much money on it as the U.S. Medicare for all would be the best solution. Ask most seniors and they love their Medicare. Why just them? What about everybody else? What makes people over 65 so special?
Even though we have insurance 2 ERs, ambulance and 2 hospital admissions were a nightmare for insurance claims. I never have any of these problems with my mother's Medicare or with my deceased father's claims which were extensive since he fell ill in Florida and was later transported back to NC where he died.
Market forces are well suited for healthcare insurance policies. Two years ago Mrs WW had an emergency deep vein thrombosis and was taken to the ER immediately upon discovery. It was life threatening and put her in cardiac care for 9 days. We had a private pay policy with a fairly high deductible and this worked well. Seniors over 65 love their medicare because this age was set down as the age to qualify. Parts A and B are no longer sufficient in too many senior households as a supplement is needed because of rapidly rising expense. These supplements are rising in cost as well. Medicare "for everyone" is a good slogan, but not a possible reality in anything but name only. It will say Medicare, but will barely deliver the level of Medicaid service and still costs and use will rise with no end in sight.
Accidently deleted my reply. Do not think I have the brain power to write again. High deductible may work well for the wealthy who effectively self insure small losses, but are not sufficient for most families to avoid economic calamity in the event of a health care crisis.
Wordly, I have done the same thing with delete. I will do a "mind meld" and absorb it from the web. Our deductable was $2500. Not too high a bar but i do understand about affordability. Not too many years ago, we had a low deductable policy and a higher monthly. It cost and it hurt but we had seen too many people who had everything they wanted purchased on credit, but swore up and down they just could not "afford" medical insurance. A couple of them ended up wishing they had their priorities in proper order.
Even with insurance costs were over $6,500.00 which is a financial hit I can withstand since I live debt free and spend much less than what I earn. Most people do not live under these circumstances and many live pay check to pay check. The rode to bankruptcy and job loss begins for many with a health crisis.
You are correct. Many people have never bothered to buy insurance coverage because it seems a low priority. For a lot of younger people, it is not expensive at all and can preserve their finances and credit easily, but the idea of doing it just never comes to them. I know that todays circumstances are dire and the road(s) out of the current predicament are many and difficult. But for people who can still buy some coverage, there should be dozens and dozens of carriers to choose from, not the handful we have in NC. I am told there are several hundred insurance carriers in the US, but not that many are available here. BCBS and United Healthcare control the lion's share and a handful fight over the rest. All should be given access to all states and each state insurance commissioner should review each company who gains access.
Ask yourself this-if most of our entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, are set to go unfunded in just a few years, what irresponsible president would add another entitlement, without fixing the problems associated with those programs first? A liberal Democrat named Barack Obama.
Democratically controlled cities all over America are set to go bankrupt, or are already bankrupted, because they went on a liberal spending sprees over the years. Winston Salem may soon be on the list. Remember that library that we supposedly 'needed' so badly? Or the Prim baseball stadium folly? Sure would be nice to get that money back.
It's time to get somebody in the office of the presidency that can get our spending under control before it's too late.
I think people are starting to realize that because the polls are changing.
70% of San Jose, California voted for Obama. In a recent election to get the city under fiscal control, over 70% voted for Plan 'B' to control spending.
Eventually, people 'get' it. I hope people 'get' it before it's too late in Amerca.
"Entitlement programs" is a misnomer. We ALL pay into these programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc, via payroll deductions and other federal taxes. Those that draw from these funds go through a stringent qualifying process and to label those that draw from the funds they paid into as "entitled" is demeaning. Bucky, if you're not drawing from from these funds now you soon will be, if these mismanaged funds are not dried up by then. Will you call YOURSELF "entitled", then?
AGREED, not only that, there are medicare premiums. If you pay for homeowners insurance and your house burns down, I think most would agree the insurance should cover it.
My Great-great-great-great Grandmother as a Zimmerman, Margaretha Barbara Magdalena Zimmerman (1759-1844). Her parents were from Hof, Nassau-Dillenburg, Germany, and immigrated on the Neptune in September 1751 and settled in Friedberg, NC. Moravian records indicate that Christian and Catharina, her parents, were threatened by Indians shortly after their arrival and were invited by Br. August Gottlieb Spangenberg to take shelter in the fort at Bethabara in 1760 for several months.
A lot of people were threatened by Indians in this area.
During the Seven Years War (which we call the French & Indian War) a man named William Fish and his teenaged son were killed by Indians near the present town of Booneville in Yadkin County.
Daniel Boone led a party of rangers to recover the bodies, which were found near where a small river flows into the Yadkin. The small river was named for the Fishes.
Over the years, it name has been corrupted into Fisher River.
Contrary to popular belief, LBJ did not create welfare. That was done by Congress in 1935 when it established the aid for families with dependent children program.
From 1935 to 1960, the number of recipients grew slowly to about 3 million. LBJ's Great Society program greatly accelerated the increase in recipients, until the number reached an historic high of about 14.5 million recipients in 1994. In fairness, it might be pointed out that the administrations of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush I did nothing to slow the increase.
The numbers had already begun dropping sharply when in 1996 the Welfare Reform Act was passed…a bipartisan effort of President Clinton and Congress. From 1935 to 1996, welfare was considered to be an entitlement program, but that ended with the onset of TANF.
Those who throw around the term "entitlement" might want to do a little research into just what that term means. I don't have the time to do it for you, but I would suggest that Fox "news" and crackpot websites would not be the best place to start.
As LaSombra points out, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are entitlement programs. Other well know ones include most Veterans' Administration programs, federal employee and military retirement plans, unemployment compensation, food stamps and agricultural price support programs.
With the passage of TANF in 1996, welfare caseloads continued to decline to a low of about 1.6 million in 2007. With advent of the CheneyBush depression, the numbers, of course, began a slight rise, but the latest figures from 2011 still have them at only about 2 million.
Since there were 3 million at the end of Eisenhower's administration and the population has almost doubled since then, the effective decrease is more than 60%.
The Founding Fathers assumed that the democracy that they created would be carried out by well informed citizens. Alas, that is no longer the case.
I might add that entitlement programs consume roughly 50% of the US budget. Add interest payments and long term contracts signed by previous administrations and the current President and Congress have only about 25% of the budget to manipulate.
I note that we had a brief debate earlier today about whether "market forces" are suitable to manage health care costs.
The short answer is that there is virtually no "market force" influence in health care in the US today. That is because of a wide array of problems that would require at least a masters thesis to cover. Those problems lead to the US having by far the highest health costs in the world without a corresponding leadership in quality.
There is at least a chance that "market forces" could be used to vastly improve our health care system. But it would require drastic changes that are probably beyond the capabilities of the American people and government.
1. Employers would have to offer their employees multiple, wide (not only HMOs), responsible (the employee who chooses the less costly plan gets to keep the savings), informed, individual choices. To make choices responsible, employers would need to make a fixed-dollar contribution, allowing employees who choose plans costing less than that to keep the savings. Congress could mandate choices and fixed-dollar amounts.
2. Competition would need to be managed. For example, there must be enough standardization in benefit packages, appropriate enrollment processes, and so forth to create price-elastic demand. Sponsors of managed competition must risk-adjust the premiums so that health plans that enroll patients with chronic diseases are not punished for doing so and so that plans that attract bad risks but that would be attractive to consumers at actuarially fair premiums are not driven out of the market.
3. There would need to be a renewed effort to apply antitrust laws to health care, to go after and break up provider monopolies that were created for the purpose of gaining market power.
4. Congress would need to override states’ “any-willing-provider” laws.
5. There would need to be a regulatory overhaul to create a level playing field.
Let's see the critics of other efforts get off their asses and try to implement this.
And, of course, it would still not address the problem of the millions of uninsured. So some sort of program would need to deal with that issue. If the richest nation in the history of the world cannot handle that problem, then it is a pretty poor excuse for a rich nation.
The mayor of the South Texas town of Hollywood Park has died after apparently being attacked by a 500-pound donkey on his ranch, officials said Wednesday.
The body of Mayor William "Bill" Bohlke, 65, was found Monday night during a search by Atascosa County Sheriff’s deputies and relatives, according to the sheriff’s office.
Chief Deputy David Soward told The Associated Press that Bohlke apparently was attacked on Monday morning by an aggressive male donkey on his ranch. A written statement from the family, published on the Hollywood Park town website, said Bohlke suffered “a fatal injury while taking care of his prized cow herd near Pleasanton.”
“Bill, your mayor, dearly loved serving you, our community, and we only wish he was here to continue doing so,” the family's statement said. Bohlke, who was retired from the Air Force and had been a decorated B-52 pilot and squadron commander in the Vietnam War, was found about 50 yards from his truck, the San Antonio Express-News website reported.
“They (donkeys) can become very aggressive, very mean, sometimes triggered by a female in heat,” Soward told the paper. “We'll probably never know what triggered it, but it was evident that this particular donkey was involved, based on the evidence at the scene and what we saw on this donkey.” Soward did not elaborate.
Hollywood Park is a town of about 3,300 people north of San Antonio. Mayor Pro Tem Steve Phillips will step in as acting mayor, according to the AP.
Be very careful Bob. I hear that those little Mediterranean ones can be the worst if you cross them.
Yep. The Greeks invented both...Democracy and Greek women...and you don't want to fool with either unless you know what you're doing.
From personal experience, I know that Greek women do not believe in Greek democracy...they believe in Greek women...in that they were born to rule and you were not.
My kind of man. Bacon, poached eggs, grits, toasted bagels with cream cheese and preserves, shots of espresso, the New York Times, a bit of Bach and thou.
Add Italian-Irish woman to that list. High volatility. Susan is English-Scots, mixes a bit better with my English-Irish-German, seems to work better than my last wife.
"Big-tent party"
ReplyDeleteWow, diversity on the GOP's presidential ticket. An older rich white guy — a member of the 1 percent — running with a younger rich white guy — a member of the 5 percent! Scion of an upper-class family whose wealth comes from finance embracing a regular guy whose family wealth comes from construction. White-collar/blue-collar social unity at its best.
Mitt Romney's net worth: hundreds of millions. Rep. Paul Ryan's: only millions. That's building bridges.
Both know what it's like to pull themselves up by other people's bootstraps. And both have trust funds — this means somebody trusts them, right? They promise to fix our economy based on their financial acumen and vast experience in the private sector. For instance, Romney raised funds for Bain from El Salvadoran oligarchs tied to death squads. Only Romney could take that kind of money and do good with it — such as buying companies and then bankrupting them.
And Ryan's vaunted budget cleverly defunds social programs, turns Medicare into a voucher system — but protects preferential tax treatment for oil companies. It's uncanny.
I'm sure Romney is hiding nothing in his tax returns, but if he were, are people even smart enough to understand? For me, it's enough to know that men with foresight, intelligence and compassion will have power and the glory that goes with it if they win. Given their history, it is obvious that they would use this power only for good — returns.
DAVE MOFFATT
Winston-Salem
"Assange accused"
As tensions rise among Sweden, Ecuador and the United Kingdom over the antics of Julian Assange, one has to wonder what motivation would be so intense as to have nations protect or seek to arrest a single man. It's a sexual offense.
Recently Assange, better known as the founder of WikiLeaks, spoke from the balcony of the Ecuadorean Embassy in London within which he is hiding to claim that his extradition to Sweden is really about his actions in regard to revealing the secrets of the United States military and the actions of government officials in this nation, even going so far as to call it a "witch hunt." This is an insulting red herring. Assange has been accused by two women of sexually assaulting them while on a trip to Sweden, and this is what Sweden wants him arrested for, not for his actions while at WikiLeaks.
Furthermore, the United States has nothing to do with his extradition to Sweden; the United States wants only to try him on an unrelated charge pertaining to the things WikiLeaks spread about the world. I believe the fact that he would be willing to take asylum in an embassy is indicative of his guilt.
Assange would have us believe that he is a victim of some mass conspiracy to put him in jail for protecting the freedom of citizens the world over. He is a slippery liar, and he is using this absurd fiasco to garner more support from other gullible nations.
JOHN BELMONT
Winston-Salem
"Misses the point"
DeleteThe letter "Individual responsibility" (Aug. 24), defending Paul Ryan's Christianity and his budget, quite misses the point.
The important thing isn't who gets credit; it's helping the poor. It's putting food in mouths and roofs over heads.
Individuals and churches aren't getting the job done, nor have they ever nor will they ever. Maybe if they did, there'd be no need for government to intervene. But are we really supposed to let people starve because government isn't the "proper" entity to care for them? Government represents all of us, not just the church-goers. It has more resources and potential for accountability than any church. What entity is more capable of caring for the poor?
I'm sorry, but a politician whose policy is to cut assistance for the poor while giving tax breaks to millionaires is not acting in a Christian manner.
But if I'm wrong and government is not supposed to help, then I don't want to hear any more nonsense about prayers before government meetings, or this being a "Christian nation." Either it is or it isn't, and if it is, it needs to act like it.
RON F. SLATER
Winston-Salem
"Beware the GOP'
Those who are seniors or care about seniors should not even think about voting Republican in November. Remember the Republican plan to privatize Social Security during the George W. Bush years? It would have been a disaster for seniors. Well, now they want to turn Medicare into a voucher system, thus privatizing Medicare. AARP is against it because it knows that vouchers are a very bad thing for seniors.
Those who are women should not even think about voting Republican in November. Their platform denies abortion under any circumstances, including rape, incest or even to save the life of the woman. Republicans want women to birth these babies, but their concern ends there. They do not want to support health care or public education for these or any of our nation's children.
Don't be fooled. The GOP is the party of "I've got mine and to heck with you!" Vote Democratic in November.
JO ANN MOUNT
Winston-Salem
"Finish the Thought"
Briefly complete the sentence below and send it to us at letters@wsjournal.com. We'll print some of the results in a few days. Only signed entries, please — no anonymous ones.
"The alternative to 'Obamacare' is..."
Burro wanted me to let you know that he is actually a miniature mediterranean Donkey, looks just like the one in Shrek. So I am calling him "Donkey" now.
ReplyDeleteThe R line is that Obama took $716billion from Medicare to fund Obamacare, which isn't wrong but it doesn't explain the whole story. The money taken from Medicare Advantage programs means that Medicare will no longer pay for my gym membership, massage therapy, or acupuncture, but under ACA now covers more of the pharmaceutical doughnut hole and pays for preventative tests, vaccines, and check ups.
ReplyDeleteAnd autumn approaches....I do wish it would hurry up though.
ReplyDelete"Big Tent Party". Yes it is. It is not a big commune party. The rest of the LTE is just the same envy and resentment tripe. A long time saying that describes some of the differences between an American and a Frenchman: A Frenchman sees a big fine house on a hill and says "someday I'm going to get that guy". An American sees the same house and says "someday I'm going to be that guy". This LTE writer is brimming with Gallic courage.
ReplyDeleteAssange is a perfect example of a victimizer claiming victimhood.
ReplyDeleteEven though I disagree with what Assange did by releasing all those of those documents, I'm not sure he committed a sex crime in Sweden.
DeleteIt appears to be a trumped up charge just to get him back to the U.S. to me.
He supposedly didn't use a condom, which is against Swedish law.
Deletehttp://blog.sfgate.com/abraham/2010/12/05/wikileaks-julian-assange-rape-charge-for-not-using-condoms/
Assange accused. Two parts to this. He is wanted for sexual assault and he needs to face these charges and let a trial determine. The other part is a little murky. Much of his wikileaks doc dump is embarrassing disclosure about diplomats and their private thoughts about various counterparts in other countries. This is the world of diplomacy--two faced and back stabbing. The extent of any releases of serious classified info is not fully known. If the info proves minor then probably no harm. But if it is more serious to where innocent but helpful people lost their lives because of it, now that is trouble. Additionally, some info can do great damage to the level of trust and cooperation between nations, especially ones who have uneasy relations publicly while privately cooperating for a mutual need. This world is a dangerous place. Someday we may know more, but this Assange guy seems to be a preening ego.
ReplyDelete"Misses the point". "Individuals and churches aren't getting the job done, nor have they ever nor will they ever. Maybe if they did, there'd be no need for government to intervene. But are we really supposed to let people starve because government isn't the "proper" entity to care for them? Government represents all of us, not just the church-goers. It has more resources and potential for accountability than any church. What entity is more capable of caring for the poor"? This is backwards inside out convoluted "logic". Individuals, and churches always have assisted the poor. It was called by its proper name--charity. This writer thinks a government can lift a poor population in total and make it unpoor. We have spent many billions of dollars proving that to be sheer folly. The fact that government stepped in is the problem...they managed to completely overwhelm the capability of traditional charity in the new name of welfare. Government has more resources?! Good God, it's resources are our resources-- the earnings of taxpayers. America the welfare state is an America with no future.
ReplyDelete"Beware the GOP". Hysterical. Got news for you, Medicare is pretty much on financial auto pilot to make it easier for Congress not to have to touch that 3rd rail. It as well as SS will be reformed pretty soon because they have to be. The surest way to end either as we know it is to leave them as we know it. Something similar to the Ryan plan for Medicare with an age cut off will eventually be the course of action. SS will gradually follow a similar course. When the Medicare trustees tell us we have a set number of years- maybe 10- those are the "presentable" figures. Gradually less government centric will be the only way out for those under age 45 or so. As far as AARP goes, they are a major enabler and bare a lot of blame in the entitlement mess. I would love to see them put out of business.
ReplyDelete"The alternative to 'Obamacare' is...". Something free market centered, consumer centered and extensive choice in coverage to fit the patients needs and budget. It has been decades since this system was even partly available. A government run option should be kept available for some, but it should not be one size for all which is the ultimate goal in 10 or 15 years as Mr Obama has said on numerous occasions before he became President. This will only result in a two tier healthcare system.
ReplyDeleteMarket forces are not well suited for healthcare because one cannot predict when you might need those services like you can say calculate a replacement cycle for a refrigerator.
DeleteIt's been almost a year since I awoke one September morning and rushed my son to the ER. 11 days later he came home.
Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that when I went to bed that Wednesday night that I would be spending the next 11 days at Baptist hospital.
I had hotel reservations and plane tickets to go the NYC and tickets for the "Book of Mormon" which at that time was sold out a year in advance.
Most other industrial societies have far better outcomes regarding healthcare and spend almost half as much money on it as the U.S. Medicare for all would be the best solution. Ask most seniors and they love their Medicare. Why just them? What about everybody else? What makes people over 65 so special?
Even though we have insurance 2 ERs, ambulance and 2 hospital admissions were a nightmare for insurance claims. I never have any of these problems with my mother's Medicare or with my deceased father's claims which were extensive since he fell ill in Florida and was later transported back to NC where he died.
Market forces are well suited for healthcare insurance policies. Two years ago Mrs WW had an emergency deep vein thrombosis and was taken to the ER immediately upon discovery. It was life threatening and put her in cardiac care for 9 days. We had a private pay policy with a fairly high deductible and this worked well. Seniors over 65 love their medicare because this age was set down as the age to qualify. Parts A and B are no longer sufficient in too many senior households as a supplement is needed because of rapidly rising expense. These supplements are rising in cost as well. Medicare "for everyone" is a good slogan, but not a possible reality in anything but name only. It will say Medicare, but will barely deliver the level of Medicaid service and still costs and use will rise with no end in sight.
DeleteAccidently deleted my reply. Do not think I have the brain power to write again. High deductible may work well for the wealthy who effectively self insure small losses, but are not sufficient for most families to avoid economic calamity in the event of a health care crisis.
DeleteWordly, I have done the same thing with delete. I will do a "mind meld" and absorb it from the web. Our deductable was $2500. Not too high a bar but i do understand about affordability. Not too many years ago, we had a low deductable policy and a higher monthly. It cost and it hurt but we had seen too many people who had everything they wanted purchased on credit, but swore up and down they just could not "afford" medical insurance. A couple of them ended up wishing they had their priorities in proper order.
DeleteEven with insurance costs were over $6,500.00 which is a financial hit I can withstand since I live debt free and spend much less than what I earn. Most people do not live under these circumstances and many live pay check to pay check. The rode to bankruptcy and job loss begins for many with a health crisis.
DeleteYou are correct. Many people have never bothered to buy insurance coverage because it seems a low priority. For a lot of younger people, it is not expensive at all and can preserve their finances and credit easily, but the idea of doing it just never comes to them. I know that todays circumstances are dire and the road(s) out of the current predicament are many and difficult. But for people who can still buy some coverage, there should be dozens and dozens of carriers to choose from, not the handful we have in NC. I am told there are several hundred insurance carriers in the US, but not that many are available here. BCBS and United Healthcare control the lion's share and a handful fight over the rest. All should be given access to all states and each state insurance commissioner should review each company who gains access.
DeleteHealth care costs = a priceless commodity in a free market. I'm no economist but....
ReplyDeleteAsk yourself this-if most of our entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, are set to go unfunded in just a few years, what irresponsible president would add another entitlement, without fixing the problems associated with those programs first? A liberal Democrat named Barack Obama.
ReplyDeleteDemocratically controlled cities all over America are set to go bankrupt, or are already bankrupted, because they went on a liberal spending sprees over the years. Winston Salem may soon be on the list. Remember that library that we supposedly 'needed' so badly? Or the Prim baseball stadium folly? Sure would be nice to get that money back.
It's time to get somebody in the office of the presidency that can get our spending under control before it's too late.
I think people are starting to realize that because the polls are changing.
70% of San Jose, California voted for Obama. In a recent election to get the city under fiscal control, over 70% voted for Plan 'B' to control spending.
DeleteEventually, people 'get' it. I hope people 'get' it before it's too late in Amerca.
The Zimmerman case just reinforces people's belief that the 'justice' system is out to protect criminals, and punish the victims of crimes.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/us/florida-zimmerman-judge/index.html?hpt=hp_bn1
"Entitlement programs" is a misnomer. We ALL pay into these programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc, via payroll deductions and other federal taxes. Those that draw from these funds go through a stringent qualifying process and to label those that draw from the funds they paid into as "entitled" is demeaning. Bucky, if you're not drawing from from these funds now you soon will be, if these mismanaged funds are not dried up by then. Will you call YOURSELF "entitled", then?
ReplyDeleteAGREED, not only that, there are medicare premiums. If you pay for homeowners insurance and your house burns down, I think most would agree the insurance should cover it.
DeleteMy Great-great-great-great Grandmother as a Zimmerman, Margaretha Barbara Magdalena Zimmerman (1759-1844). Her parents were from Hof, Nassau-Dillenburg, Germany, and immigrated on the Neptune in September 1751 and settled in Friedberg, NC. Moravian records indicate that Christian and Catharina, her parents, were threatened by Indians shortly after their arrival and were invited by Br. August Gottlieb Spangenberg to take shelter in the fort at Bethabara in 1760 for several months.
ReplyDeleteDr. August Gottlieb Spangenberg
DeleteDid your great-great grandmother shoot anybody?
DeleteA lot of people were threatened by Indians in this area.
DeleteDuring the Seven Years War (which we call the French & Indian War) a man named William Fish and his teenaged son were killed by Indians near the present town of Booneville in Yadkin County.
Daniel Boone led a party of rangers to recover the bodies, which were found near where a small river flows into the Yadkin. The small river was named for the Fishes.
Over the years, it name has been corrupted into Fisher River.
If only we had a woman in charge, if only we had a gay......
ReplyDeleteYeah, yeah, yeah........
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/01/ice-chief-staff-resigns-after-allegations-lewd-conduct/
If only we had a Dunce...oops, we already tried that...Dickless Cheney and his dummy Charlie McBush...
DeleteDemocrats say they're upset about Republican lies? When have they EVER cared about their lies? What a joke!
ReplyDeleteContrary to popular belief, LBJ did not create welfare. That was done by Congress in 1935 when it established the aid for families with dependent children program.
ReplyDeleteFrom 1935 to 1960, the number of recipients grew slowly to about 3 million. LBJ's Great Society program greatly accelerated the increase in recipients, until the number reached an historic high of about 14.5 million recipients in 1994. In fairness, it might be pointed out that the administrations of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush I did nothing to slow the increase.
The numbers had already begun dropping sharply when in 1996 the Welfare Reform Act was passed…a bipartisan effort of President Clinton and Congress. From 1935 to 1996, welfare was considered to be an entitlement program, but that ended with the onset of TANF.
Those who throw around the term "entitlement" might want to do a little research into just what that term means. I don't have the time to do it for you, but I would suggest that Fox "news" and crackpot websites would not be the best place to start.
As LaSombra points out, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are entitlement programs. Other well know ones include most Veterans' Administration programs, federal employee and military retirement plans, unemployment compensation, food stamps and agricultural price support programs.
With the passage of TANF in 1996, welfare caseloads continued to decline to a low of about 1.6 million in 2007. With advent of the CheneyBush depression, the numbers, of course, began a slight rise, but the latest figures from 2011 still have them at only about 2 million.
Since there were 3 million at the end of Eisenhower's administration and the population has almost doubled since then, the effective decrease is more than 60%.
The Founding Fathers assumed that the democracy that they created would be carried out by well informed citizens. Alas, that is no longer the case.
I might add that entitlement programs consume roughly 50% of the US budget. Add interest payments and long term contracts signed by previous administrations and the current President and Congress have only about 25% of the budget to manipulate.
ReplyDeleteNot much room for improvement.
Then to put it in the most academic of terms...we're screwed?
DeleteThat's academic enough for me.
DeleteI note that we had a brief debate earlier today about whether "market forces" are suitable to manage health care costs.
ReplyDeleteThe short answer is that there is virtually no "market force" influence in health care in the US today. That is because of a wide array of problems that would require at least a masters thesis to cover. Those problems lead to the US having by far the highest health costs in the world without a corresponding leadership in quality.
There is at least a chance that "market forces" could be used to vastly improve our health care system. But it would require drastic changes that are probably beyond the capabilities of the American people and government.
1. Employers would have to offer their employees multiple, wide (not only HMOs), responsible (the employee who chooses the less costly plan gets to keep the savings), informed, individual choices. To make choices responsible, employers would need to make a fixed-dollar contribution, allowing employees who choose plans costing less than that to keep the savings. Congress could mandate choices and fixed-dollar amounts.
2. Competition would need to be managed. For example, there must be enough standardization in benefit packages, appropriate enrollment processes, and so forth to create price-elastic demand. Sponsors of managed competition must risk-adjust the premiums so that health plans that enroll patients with chronic diseases are not punished for doing so and so that plans that attract bad risks but that would be attractive to consumers at actuarially fair premiums are not driven out of the market.
3. There would need to be a renewed effort to apply antitrust laws to health care, to go after and break up provider monopolies that were created for the purpose of gaining market power.
4. Congress would need to override states’ “any-willing-provider” laws.
5. There would need to be a regulatory overhaul to create a level playing field.
Let's see the critics of other efforts get off their asses and try to implement this.
And, of course, it would still not address the problem of the millions of uninsured. So some sort of program would need to deal with that issue. If the richest nation in the history of the world cannot handle that problem, then it is a pretty poor excuse for a rich nation.
Do any of you watch PBSs comedy series "Yes, minister"? Funny as hell. Tonight they are taking down the EU.
ReplyDeleteI don't watch TV, per se. Don't even have a TV. But I occasionally watch "Yes, minister" online. It's not Benny Hill, but a great show nevertheless.
DeleteThe mayor of the South Texas town of Hollywood Park has died after apparently being attacked by a 500-pound donkey on his ranch, officials said Wednesday.
ReplyDeleteThe body of Mayor William "Bill" Bohlke, 65, was found Monday night during a search by Atascosa County Sheriff’s deputies and relatives, according to the sheriff’s office.
Chief Deputy David Soward told The Associated Press that Bohlke apparently was attacked on Monday morning by an aggressive male donkey on his ranch.
A written statement from the family, published on the Hollywood Park town website, said Bohlke suffered “a fatal injury while taking care of his prized cow herd near Pleasanton.”
“Bill, your mayor, dearly loved serving you, our community, and we only wish he was here to continue doing so,” the family's statement said.
Bohlke, who was retired from the Air Force and had been a decorated B-52 pilot and squadron commander in the Vietnam War, was found about 50 yards from his truck, the San Antonio Express-News website reported.
“They (donkeys) can become very aggressive, very mean, sometimes triggered by a female in heat,” Soward told the paper. “We'll probably never know what triggered it, but it was evident that this particular donkey was involved, based on the evidence at the scene and what we saw on this donkey.” Soward did not elaborate.
Hollywood Park is a town of about 3,300 people north of San Antonio. Mayor Pro Tem Steve Phillips will step in as acting mayor, according to the AP.
Be very careful Bob. I hear that those little Mediterranean ones can be the worst if you cross them.
"I hear that those little Mediterranean ones can be the worst if you cross them."
DeleteTrue. You don't want to piss a Democrat off. Or a Greek woman for that matter.
I know what I'm talking about.
Yep. The Greeks invented both...Democracy and Greek women...and you don't want to fool with either unless you know what you're doing.
DeleteFrom personal experience, I know that Greek women do not believe in Greek democracy...they believe in Greek women...in that they were born to rule and you were not.
Got to love them, though.
"I'm a simple man. I like pretty dark-haired women and breakfast food."
Delete-- Ron Swanson
My kind of man. Bacon, poached eggs, grits, toasted bagels with cream cheese and preserves, shots of espresso, the New York Times, a bit of Bach and thou.
DeletePerfect Sunday morning. Perfect any morning.
Add Italian-Irish woman to that list. High volatility. Susan is English-Scots, mixes a bit better with my English-Irish-German, seems to work better than my last wife.
ReplyDeleteItalian-Irish? My loss. I do love edgy women...they keep you on your toes in more ways than one.
DeleteMaybe the English part cools the Scots in Susan, because my wife is pure Scots and the devil take the hindmost...if he can.