- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:03 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I have to confess that at a quick glance, your thread title looked to have the words Obamacare and Beyonce in it and I pissed for a split second
+1
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:06 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
I think it just depends on the benefits, what they provide and too whom. I know we got a what obamacare means to us webinar, and the end result was - "nothing" but we are a very large multinational that provides really good benefits.
The bigger problem it sets up is that it becomes more and more difficult for those on the lower income levels to climb to higher levels as the more they make, the less subsidies they get (but it's not a strict 1:1 ratio). With the way it's set up and the premium pricings, it's economically more feasible for a the parents in a family of 5 to work shitty p/t jobs and stay in the trailer park than it would be for one (or both) of them to get a college degree and start working at a middle-class level job.
You can't grow the middle class by constantly cutting it off at the knees.
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:09 pm to jamboybarry
quote:
Anyone with even an ounce of understand of ACA knows this is the case re: the employer mandate
It's gonna get reeeeal ugly
This. It will bring new meaning to shite hitting the fan.
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:14 pm to Bard
quote:
With the way it's set up and the premium pricings, it's economically more feasible for a the parents in a family of 5 to work shitty p/t jobs and stay in the trailer park than it would be for one (or both) of them to get a college degree and start working at a middle-class level job. You can't grow the middle class by constantly cutting it off at the knees.
By all means. Move to the Trailer park, quit your job and live off the Govt then. If Govt policies turn you in to a Democrat the problem lies with you, as well as the policy.
quote:
By “beyond rescue,” I mean that the original vision of the law will not be fulfilled -- the cost-controlling, delivery-system-improving, health-enhancing, deficit-reducing, highly popular, tightly integrated (and smoothly functioning) system for ensuring that everyone who wants coverage can get it.
So by beyond rescue, she means it will not be one of the best laws ever written?
This post was edited on 1/22/14 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:25 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
If Govt policies turn you in to a Democrat
This isn't the worry as much as the Govt policies keeping you a Democrat.
As the threshold to get off govt. asst. continues to rise, the higher the effort required to make it on your own. This make Govt. subsistance more attractive.
The person already working like an idiot(30-45k) will unlikely throw the towel in. The lazy arse already on every govt program is unlikely to be motivated to strive for more if his/her lifestyle is largely unchanged unless they reach 55-60k.
This is the concern. People on the margin giving up.
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:37 pm to Oenophile Brah
quote:
As the threshold to get off govt. asst. continues to rise, the higher the effort required to make it on your own. This make Govt. subsistance more attractive.
The person already working like an idiot(30-45k) will unlikely throw the towel in. The lazy arse already on every govt program is unlikely to be motivated to strive for more if his/her lifestyle is largely unchanged unless they reach 55-60k.
This is the concern. People on the margin giving up.
Exactly. This becomes an even larger problem when we look at the Jobless numbers, Unemployment, Labor Participation, etc. The trend is a growing pool of lower-end, lower-skilled jobs so as long as that trend continues that fringe you mention becomes less and less fringe and more and more closer to mainstream.
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:41 pm to Oenophile Brah
quote:
The person already working like an idiot(30-45k) will unlikely throw the towel in. The lazy arse already on every govt program is unlikely to be motivated to strive for more if his/her lifestyle is largely unchanged unless they reach 55-60k. This is the concern. People on the margin giving up.
Maybe. I think those prone to giving up, give up. Those prone to hard work, work hard.
Posted on 1/22/14 at 3:43 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
I think those prone to giving up, give up. Those prone to hard work, work hard.
I thought that too.
Then I had life experiences that tought me there are more then 2 kinds of people. Many (if not all) can be influenced by either positive or negative incentives.
This post was edited on 1/22/14 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 1/22/14 at 4:01 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Maybe. I think those prone to giving up, give up. Those prone to hard work, work hard.
Usually people that are prone to work are also very pragmatic. If someone is working hard and taking home $20k, but if they work hard enough to bring in another $5k but that puts them just out of a subsidy tier so that they are now only bringing home $19k, what does the pragmatist do then? Where's the incentive?
From everything I have seen, this is looking like what is coming down the road.
This post was edited on 1/22/14 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 1/22/14 at 4:16 pm to Bard
quote:
Usually people that are prone to work are also very pragmatic. If someone is working hard and taking home $20k, but if they work hard enough to bring in another $5k but that puts them just out of a subsidy tier so that they are now only bringing home $19k, what does the pragmatist do then? Where's the incentive?
From everything I have seen, this is looking like what is coming down the road.
those problems are fixable IMHO. We have a patchwork of various subsidies in place. What would make a lot more sense to me is one policy - guarenteed basic income, or as nixon branded it negative income tax. You are promised so much, enough to just barely scrape by. If you work and make less than that, you are brought up to that level. If you make more than that, you get nothing.
There will still be a deadzone, where you make just about what you would under the basic income model, so you elect for not working. You would have to incentivize work a bit for those but I think its doable.
We would scrap food stamps, tanf, section 8, unemployment, wic, etc, and replace it with this. If you did it right, you could also include obamacare in there.
We are going to have to do something, as automation is destroying jobs really fast and our current system is too complex, and too variable. Make it simple.
Posted on 1/23/14 at 12:33 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
You are promised so much, enough to just barely scrape by. If you work and make less than that, you are brought up to that level. If you make more than that, you get nothing.
What's the difference between that and someone making minimum wage but getting some government assistance? Also, that government could pay part of an employees salary would incentivize businesses to lower pay in order to reach that threshold and thus save money.
More government intervention to fix problems government intervention caused isn't the answer.
Posted on 1/23/14 at 1:27 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
those problems are fixable IMHO. We have a patchwork of various subsidies in place. What would make a lot more sense to me is one policy - guarenteed basic income, or as nixon branded it negative income tax. You are promised so much, enough to just barely scrape by. If you work and make less than that, you are brought up to that level. If you make more than that, you get nothing. There will still be a deadzone, where you make just about what you would under the basic income model, so you elect for not working. You would have to incentivize work a bit for those but I think its doable. We would scrap food stamps, tanf, section 8, unemployment, wic, etc, and replace it with this. If you did it right, you could also include obamacare in there. We are going to have to do something, as automation is destroying jobs really fast and our current system is too complex, and too variable. Make it simple.
Makes too much sense. Will never get through Congress.
Posted on 1/23/14 at 2:14 pm to ffhouston
quote:
Resolved: Obamacare Is Now Beyond Rescue
quote:
Resolved: OBAMA Is Now Beyond Rescue
FIFY!!!
Posted on 1/24/14 at 7:36 am to Jim Ignatowski
quote:
The bigger problem is that the president stands up there Tuesday night with ObamaCare not a hazy promise but a fact.
People now know it was badly thought, badly written and disastrously executed. It was supposed to make life better by expanding coverage. It has made it worse, by throwing people off coverage.
And—as we all know now but did not last year—the program was passed only with the aid of a giant lie. Now everyone knows if you liked your plan, your doctor, your deductible, you can't keep them.
When the central domestic fact of your presidency was a fraud, people won't listen to you anymore.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 7:54 am to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
I think those prone to giving up, give up.
The problem is these are the most prone to breed.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 8:20 am to Bard
quote:
as the more they make, the less subsidies they get
There it is. Many folk choose their job according to the 'benefits' (company subsidies). In the old days, a State job was a low-pay guarantee for unmotivated/unskilled folk...but the bennies were solid. And productivity did not enter into the equation re getting fired. A lot choose leaning on a shovel, with their healthcare, no-termination guarantee and solid retirement in the bag.
The ACA was never designed to work...that's why they didn't give a rip about the Website. It was designed to crash the private system; which it has done.
Forward...there will be no growing the Middle Class...the Middle Class and the Subsidized Poor go into the same Class...while those who run the show (Party Members) get the cream. Nothing new under the sun.
When responsible folk start dying in the health care rationing/lines, that will be the beginning of the real 'sh*%^storm'.
Earth 2014.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 8:28 am to RCDfan1950
in on page 2 without vegas, spidey, rex (is he really banned?), decatur and the other resident ACA supporters.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 8:39 am to McLemore
ACA had the germ of a good idea but political pressure compromised it so much that it can't work in its current form and with all of the carved out exceptions, imo. The only way, it seems to me, to keep costs down is to make sure the pool is large enough so that costs are sufficiently diluted.
The thing is, I doubt it's ever "repealed", per se, but will be substantially amended. Either that or we end up with some sort of single payer with the option to by supplemental insurance. Something along those lines.
The thing is, I doubt it's ever "repealed", per se, but will be substantially amended. Either that or we end up with some sort of single payer with the option to by supplemental insurance. Something along those lines.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 8:43 am to VOR
quote:
The thing is, I doubt it's ever "repealed", per se, but will be substantially amended. Either that or we end up with some sort of single payer with the option to by supplemental insurance. Something along those lines.
with how much of a disaster this attempt at socialized medicine has been, i seriously doubt there will ever be the political will of the voting populace to institute a bigger socialized system
hell, there hasn't even been that much participation from those this law was targeted to help. ignore the expanded medicaid and the numbers of people who signed up are low as hell...not enough of a voting bloc to matter
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News