more EE Times nonsense
in [Design]
|
From: Joel Koltner on 29 Apr 2010 01:33 <dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:128a9850-22e4-4e33-ba2c-73db2eb27c45(a)i9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... >I heard something funny today--the bill guarantees your kid can stay >on your policy until he's 26. So, people are asking their companies. >Upshot? You can do that, but you'll have to pay more, of course--the >insurance companies are allowed to charge you. The law's freebies >aren't free. Hopefully this doesn't surprise anyone (nor should significant tax rate increases in the next few years...). Exactly how much the upcharge is will be interesting though; 21-26 years old are generally quite healthy and often see a doctor no more than a few times a year -- if at all. The parents will still be saving significant bucks relative to having to go out and buy the kid insurance on the open market, though -- parents who were already doing the later are likely to see some hundreds or even thousands extra in their pockets now. ---Joel
From: dagmargoodboat on 29 Apr 2010 01:43 On Apr 27, 4:38 pm, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > On Apr 27, 3:40 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > Sorry Joseph, I wasn't barking at you, but indirectly at Bill. I'd > > given him plenty enough info to go on, and didn't feel obliged to > > answer his accusations. He should do his homework before calling > > someone else a liar. > > But you are a liar - inadventently, because your political prejudices > blind you to a lot of what is going on, and persuade you to post the > kind of arrant nonsense that claims that > > "Barack Obama is the closest thing to a dictator this country has ever > had." Absolutely true. Just a few examples: bailouts, the health insurance mandate, GM, regulating CO2 (via the EPA), and home renovations (by the same), all are illegitimate, and illegal under our law. We're to be surveilled in our financial transactions, homes, medical records, and so forth, categorized and tracked to an extent unprecedented in our history. The President has compromised more civil liberties, seized without right more private property, gone farther beyond our Constitution than any President, ever. He actively uses his office to pursue, slander, oppress, punish, and vilify any number of private citizens, opponents, private companies, and entire industries. It's unseemly. And under the theories he operates, there is no limit to his power. Barack Obama is the closest thing to a dictator this country has ever had. -- Cheers, James Arthur
From: dagmargoodboat on 29 Apr 2010 02:07 On Apr 29, 12:33 am, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > <dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:128a9850-22e4-4e33-ba2c-73db2eb27c45(a)i9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... > > >I heard something funny today--the bill guarantees your kid can stay > >on your policy until he's 26. So, people are asking their companies. > >Upshot? You can do that, but you'll have to pay more, of course--the > >insurance companies are allowed to charge you. The law's freebies > >aren't free. > > Hopefully this doesn't surprise anyone (nor should significant tax rate > increases in the next few years...). Taxes will have to increase >60% to sustain the budgets Mr. Obama currently projects. > Exactly how much the upcharge is will be > interesting though; 21-26 years old are generally quite healthy and often see > a doctor no more than a few times a year -- if at all. In the one case I know of so far, 'S' called her insurance company and tried to get her 24-year old on her policy. Insurance company: 'No'. S: 'But you have to, they passed that. It's the law." Insurance company: "Well, umm, we're not doing that. We don't think that's a valid law." > The parents will still be saving significant bucks relative to having to go > out and buy the kid insurance on the open market, though -- parents who were > already doing the later are likely to see some hundreds or even thousands > extra in their pockets now. On balance the new policies have to cost more--the new coverage has to cover all the things previously covered, plus more conditions, with fewer limits, by law with lower deductibles and co-pays. Inexpensive high-deductible policies are now illegal. That simply costs more. There's no way around it, and there's no free lunch. Here's how you /really/ improve health, and it has nothing to do with government anything-- http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/study-mortality-risk-spikes-for-those-with-4-bad-habits/19451118 -- Cheers, James Arthur
From: Joel Koltner on 29 Apr 2010 12:22 Hi James, <dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:330479dd-9c17-4190-8757-d0a4f6a0ace9(a)i9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... > Taxes will have to increase >60% to sustain the budgets Mr. Obama > currently projects. That strikes me as likely to be high, but I guess we'll just see... > S: 'But you have to, they passed that. It's the law." > Insurance company: "Well, umm, we're not doing that. We don't think > that's a valid law." I'm surprised an insurance company would take that stance ("we're just not going to play") rather than beginning to play while simultaneously challenging the ruling -- it's much riskier in terms of the punishment they might face if they don't prevail. Obama will likely toss their CEO in jail to serve as an example... ;-) > On balance the new policies have to cost more--the new coverage has to > cover all the things previously covered, plus more conditions, with > fewer limits, by law with lower deductibles and co-pays. Agreed, although they did make an effort to try to minimize that increase. > Inexpensive > high-deductible policies are now illegal. Yeah, I kinda see the reasoning that caused this, but I think they could have done a better job with it. The diminution of HSAs (and probably their eventual elimination) doesn't please me either. >That simply costs more. There's no way around it, and there's no free >lunch. In some cases a 21-26 year old might be best off (strictly from a financial expenditure point of view) declaring themselves as independent and then just taking the "standard" government benefits policy. > Here's how you /really/ improve health, and it has nothing to do with > government anything-- > http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/study-mortality-risk-spikes-for-those-with-4-bad-habits/19451118 Basically: Don't smoke, eat your fruits & veggies, exercise, and don't drink too much. Good advice that's pretty timeless, certainly... although then you find other articles where, at least when it comes to cancer (which of course is very expensive to treat) the fruits & veggies don't seem to play much of a role: http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/study-fruits-veggies-have-little-effect-on-cancer/19431580?icid=sphere_aolnews_inline .... Odd... ---Joel
From: Bill Sloman on 29 Apr 2010 14:16
On Apr 29, 7:43 am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Apr 27, 4:38 pm,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > > On Apr 27, 3:40 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > Sorry Joseph, I wasn't barking at you, but indirectly at Bill. I'd > > > given him plenty enough info to go on, and didn't feel obliged to > > > answer his accusations. He should do his homework before calling > > > someone else a liar. > > > But you are a liar - inadventently, because your political prejudices > > blind you to a lot of what is going on, and persuade you to post the > > kind of arrant nonsense that claims that > > > "Barack Obama is the closest thing to a dictator this country has ever > > had." > > Absolutely true. > > Just a few examples: bailouts, the health insurance mandate, GM, > regulating CO2 (via the EPA), and home renovations (by the same), all > are illegitimate, and illegal under our law. Illegal under your law? I haven't seen anybody bothering to sue. And Obama was a hot shot lawyer before he became a poltician, and should be able to work out how to get things done the way he wants without breaking any law, which is more than Dubbya could manage. > We're to be surveilled in our financial transactions, homes, medical > records, and so forth, categorized and tracked to an extent > unprecedented in our history. Funny that you didn't complain when Dubbya did this for real after 9/11, and reintroduced torture as a method of interrogation - but I suppose that since he is a right wing idiot, anything he did was okay .. > The President has compromised more civil liberties, seized without > right more private property, gone farther beyond our Constitution than > any President, ever. Any non-right-wing president. > He actively uses his office to pursue, slander, oppress, punish, and > vilify any number of private citizens, opponents, private companies, > and entire industries. It's unseemly. That funny. I thought Karl Rove worked for Dubbya. > And under the theories he operates, there is no limit to his power. Whereas Dubbya just reserved the right to ignore bills he disagreed with > Barack Obama is the closest thing to a dictator this country has ever > had. He's as close to middle of road as any president that you've had since Clinton, and you find this terrifying, you one-eyed partisan nitwit. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |