Disqus - Friends of pancheetah

Re: Obama celebrates fifth Seder at the White House

Ted Fred — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:30:19 -0000

Exodus may well be just a story. It may well have not happened "as told.' But for some of us the Torah is replete with "analogy" power" such as the stories of Abraham and Isacc and Jacob. Stories that stand as light towers on the road to a better life for all. As a "story" - it talks to opression/slavery and the human dignity of freedom.
What is not shared by all as family and friends gather to tell of the search for freedom - free will - and the still present an needed search for inner and inter nation peace. And as the POTUS said - it is the obligation of us all - in Tikun Olam - to work to repair this world. It is encumbent on all of us to try and leave this world a better place on our exit then on our arrival. In this fashion - with its truly universal human story - it is celebrated by this POTUS and his family and some friends. May they enjoy the freedom to do so if that is their wish. May they be free of bigotry and ugly words -- be they ugly words thrown at him for adopting this Jewish Celebration or his color or his political views

Re: Obama celebrates fifth Seder at the White House

Ted Fred — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:31:38 -0000

Philly - read your words and mind your own call for tolerance. Hillel and Rabbi Akkiba and Rambam and others would tell you that is the teaching of the Torah.

Re: Obama celebrates fifth Seder at the White House

Ted Fred — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:36:28 -0000

And - as a scientist - adultsroom you know that Scientists have not proven there was no Exodus. What we know of the studies of Ancient Egype is that what we have found so far lacks mention of the Jews in slavery in Egypt. So be careful in what you say that Sciende says or has proven and what is has not.
When did you stop beating on small kids? How do you answer a biased question? Science has not proven that Exodus did not happen. That simply is not a true statement - even if a logical conclusion of the curretn lack of archeological proof that Jews were slaves to Pharo in Egypt for centuries.

Re: Obama celebrates fifth Seder at the White House

Ted Fred — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:40:54 -0000

And many if not most Jews agree

Re: March QHP Enrollment Projections: Avalere, the House Energy & Commerce Committee and Me

Ted Fred — Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:03:11 -0000

So, Charles, what assumptions did the above make about any potential/expected ramp up in the last two weeks? Is there some change in rate of enrollment - or is this 100% modelled off prior months (that would include the ramp up of December and some slower months)
?
Thanks

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:09:48 -0000

Obamacare coverage is not immediate access to all but well care - the key annual physical and key screeings. After that it is a serious deductible - at least in year one - that insurance put in to make sure they did not get their asses kicked on loss ratio
Obamacare is three seriously important things - that at this point REPS and DEMS should agree on.
1. It is the "card" the prevents bankruptcy. Yes a deductible of 3K will stop a lot of needed care but when you get hit with a 50-500K bill - they do not take away your savings - house - car etc . One might wonder if people who are poor - really poor - receive value from this - but lets say 20 million of that 30-40-50 million WILL. Health care costs are 1 2 3 main reasons for personal bankruptcies that hit the working poor and middle class
2. It is a green light to non emergency hospital admission or the start of chemotherapy and the like outpatient. Yes the hospital would like to get all the billed or negotiated amount - but on a 250K-750K case of care the deductible is a pimple - and the "coverage" with no annual or inner or secret or lifetime caps is what gets you the permission (and courage) to start life saving care.
3. It is the needed answer to a health care coverage system designed around major massive employers in the USA. With the growth of out sourcing and small business - that model does not work. That leaves individuals who earn 100K a year consulting or whatever without coverage if they have a pre existing condition. That leaves the start up company with 25K or income for a family of four with no ability to get affordable coverage but with subsidied in ACA the ability to buy that 5K deductible policy for themselves an family and pay very little - and protect their investment in a start up
The opponents keep talking about taking from the haves to give the have nots. What do they say about homeowners insurance or car insurance? And re the mandate - why sould millions of SMART not STUPID americans get a free ride of free care on my charity or taxes or premium. For my sake lets get them the coverage or it just spills over to me anyway. Both they and I are in the market and making market decisions. I decide to buy coverage. They make a SMART and absolute thinking decision to freeload
If we renamed this the anti - freeloader care package maybe middle america would realize this works

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:14:22 -0000

And besides the below - the Koch brothers disagree with this author. They have spent 500 million or so to advertise stupid and they seem to be doing just fine with their misinformation and emotionaly ugly commercials. How great is it to have two billionaires tell middle america to go bare. So you can teach stupid - you just need to do more and scarier false advertising and buy more elections.
Two REPS warned of this Teddy R and Ike - but today's me party had forgotten the roots and logic of true conservative stewardship. Now it only stands for keep on doing what is good for me and Oil and Big Farms and Big Pharma and stop the stuff that does not help me. While using religion to stop people from the freedom to choose
I love those who argue against a mandate to spend 1000 dollars but legislate - legislate invasive ultrasound on an adult woman - without any input from her doctor

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:17:25 -0000

He started two wars - did not win the key one - and gave us Part D - and a rich person tax cut. Death and deficit - boy those were the good times
And look around history and the country. Where it is bi partisan it is like Chris Christie a REP GOV or PRES and dems in the legislature as we try. Give the power to a DEM GOV and or a DEM president - and they are blamed for not gettting things done after REPS decided DAY ONE not to lift a finger to help him or America out of the nearly Greatest Depression

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:19:02 -0000

it is not more expensive
Just as BO did not make ths sun rise in the EAST - even though it does everyday - there is NOTHING in the ACA that makes costs go up (other then for men 30-45 who now pay unisex permiums about 5% higher so women 30-45 can pay 5% less)

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:20:34 -0000

and that is the employer - not DEMS or WASHINGTON screwing you . Their costs last year in group premiums did not rise in 99% of the country. They just decided to shift more to you in premium sharing or higher deductibles. Understand that such increases have zero to do with the ACA - zero.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:22:34 -0000

Yes I paid some 3.9% on some 50K we received on a K-1 -- should people feel sorry for me - I hope not. I want roads - good education - solid health care at good prices - and I am old enough to know there is no free lunch. I am happy to earn a nice buck and paying taxes is one cost of my success. For others it might be not seeing their kids or an ulcer or a stroke at 40. For me its a few thousand in taxes I can afford

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:23:52 -0000

no - that is not true - the subsidy is conincident with each monthly or quarterly bill - call your carrier or any on the exchange

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:24:41 -0000

Explain to me - what about more health coverage would make it more expensive? v Insurance companies fattening the prices for profit under the cover of the "ACA made me do it"

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:27:15 -0000

I agree - lets allow them the freedom to make smart decisions to freeload off of us. Understand - they are not that stupid. They know we will pay one way or the other (tax - charity - in our premiums) - so they CHOOSE to not pay for THEIR eventual care

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:31:09 -0000

buy something - the highest deductible you can find - but something that protects your home and savings. And know that before the ACA - the spread in price between those 28 and those 58 was 6X and by the ACA regs the insurance company can NOT charge larger then a 3x spread. There is NO way the ACA makes ANY policy more expensive for people over 50 as the law absolutely does not allow the high prices of insurance for those over 55 that we had before. The policies before that said 500K in large letters - often limited hospital payment to 25K or doctor payment to 25K or PER EACH episode of care (think 6 months) to 25K. You get what you pay for and now those over 55 are getting a lower price. People can debate if that is fair to those under 55!!! but no way does the ACA offer equal coverage to people over 55 at a higher price when its apples to apples.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:31:58 -0000

Why did REPS not do something - anything during thier 8 years or 30 years?

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:19:23 -0000

so the ACA is bad ?

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:24:48 -0000

Indeed those who deny that this approach is ROOTED in the right side of the isle are dumb and stupid. This is what was used by REPS to argue against Ted Kennedy single payer. This is what Newt used to argue against Carter and Clinton. It is 100% private and is the last chance for markets to work - by adding regulation so all people must be in the pool and insurers compete by delivering cost effective care and with avoiding sick people and old people. If this does not work I know we will move to a single payer system - for better or worse. The current generation of those 18-40 want more government not less and are less white then today. If high costs (US paying 150% of what the rest of wester nations pay - at minimum for same outcomes) -- then it will be Medicare for all. Fact.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:26:25 -0000

You do know GimMe that if there is any opening in a session in the house to make ONE fix to ACA the REPS will use it to try time #51 to legislate away the entirety. REPS in the house - espcially the me party keep DEMS and moderate REPS from adding fixes to the ACA.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:29:04 -0000

This is long and came from the LA something ----- it presents the facts on deductibles and why they go up and why people who work for large companies may be paying more. Those who want facts - not arguing points - should read it . Then read the testimony by the Canadian expert today as she was questioned (I do not want that system - I want this private sector solution to work)

Here we go - read to not be ignorant

We've remarked before on the
tendency of businesses and others to use the Affordable Care Act as a scapegoat for changes in their
healthcare benefits or in the healthcare landscape that have other causes --
such as their own greed or long-term trends.

Galen Benshoof, a guest contributor at
theincidentaleconomist.com, identifies a good case of what we might call
Obamacare derangement syndrome -- the conviction that everything that happens in
healthcare today must have been caused by the ACA.

Benshoof's example involves rising
deductibles. His jumping-off point is a recent review of a book by Ezekiel Emanuel,
one of the ACA's architects, by David Goldhill in the Wall Street Journal.
Goldhill is a businessman who, judging from his earlier writings, is predisposed
to expect the ACA to fail -- in fact, prefers catastrophic coverage to almost
all other forms of health insurance.

In his review, Goldhill cites "the rapid spread of
high-deductible insurance among employers and on the exchanges" as "one of the
immediate unanticipated consequences of the ACA."

Benshoof calls him on this
misstatement. The truth is that the rapid spread of "high-deductible" health
plans (based on IRS regulations, that's technically any plan with a deductible of $1,250 per
person and $2,500 per family, or above) is very much an artifact of the pre-ACA
healthcare landscape. Indeed, one of the goals of the ACA is to relieve the
economic pressures that prompted employers to jack up deductibles on their
employees toward this level every year.

The evidence for rising deductibles as a pre-existing condition
of American healthcare is incontrovertible. As the Kaiser Family Foundation
reported in 2012, the percentage of workers in employer plans with a single
deductible of $1,000 or higher had risen to 34% from 10% since 2006; in the same
period the percentage with deductibles of $2,000 of higher had risen to 14% from
3%. The average deductibles for all employees had nearly doubled to $1,097 from
$584.

The underlying idea, of course, is
to shift healthcare expenses from the employers to the employees, while
discouraging usage by the latter. There's another driver: the high-deductible
trend, as we
reported back in 2008, owes much to a libertarian insurance entrepreneur
named J. Patrick Rooney, who saw business opportunity in the sale of
tax-advantaged health savings accounts. A Republican Congress obligingly passed
a law providing a tax advantage to HSAs -- if they were paired with qualified
high-deducible health plans (also sold by Rooney).

The point is that calling high-deductible plans as outgrowths
of the ACA is just dead wrong. If anything, the trend to higher deductibles has
moderated somewhat since 2010, when the act was passed.

Moreover, the latest enrollment figures on Obamacare suggest
that there may be some consumer resistance to high deductibles under the new
law. Some 80% of all those who have enrolled in plans nationwide, according to
federal statistics released today, have chosen a silver plan, meaning
deductibles of $2,000 for singles and $4,000 for families, or gold or platinum
plans, which have no deductibles. Only 18% have opted for bronze plans, which
offer lower premiums, balanced by deductibles of $4,500/$9,000.

So there's nothing in Obamacare itself that encourages the
spread of high deductibles; the law actually gives many Americans more options
to avoid them, and a fair percentage are taking those options. The spread of
high deductibles has been encouraged by the insurance industry. Blaming
Obamacare is just scapegoating.

/* Main div */
div.ent-must-reads {
width: 620px;
margin-top: 10px;
height: auto;
overflow: hidden;
}

div.ent-must-reads a{ color:#000000; text-decoration: none;}

/* Picks */
div.ent-pick {
float: left;
margin: 0px auto;
width: 206px;
}

div.ent-pick img{
margin:3px 7px 2px 0px;
height: 105px;
width:187px;
display: inline-block;
float: left;
}

div.ent-pick a img {
border: none;
}

div.ent-pick a {
margin: 3px;
}

/* Headers */
div.article#content h2#title{
font-size: 15px;
font-weight: bold;
padding: 0;
margin-bottom: 10px;
font-style: normal;
}

div.article#content p#ent-hed{
font-size: 13px;
margin: 6px;
width: 192px;
font-style: normal;
}

Reach
me at @hiltzikm
on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ or
by email.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:44:05 -0000

Actually - I encourage you to look at data. For reasons beyond me - very often the "rich vote for the poor" and the "poor vote for the rich" - from the Gallop folks who really are neutral

According to a recent release of the Gallop
basic access index, Republicans have a slight edge on wealth over Democratic
and Independent voters. The basic index includes 13 factors that go into an
individual’s overall wellbeing such as healthcare and shelter.

Referencing Republicans, the poll concluded Democrats and Independents struggled to pay for healthcare 5.7 and 7.3
percent more than Republicans, respectively.
NOTE
An even wider gap is observed when affording food, which the Republicans lead 7.3 and 8.7 percent over Democrats
and Independents.

Gallop has identified 17 states as “high range” or 19.6 percent or more of the population claiming they have had trouble affording food. The majority of them are southern states with the exception of Alaska, Delaware, and West Virginia. Of these, only five have any sort of Democratic leaning.
People wake up !.

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:46:49 -0000

Please tell me you do not believe that ONLY FOX has found the truth on this earth? You do realize how crazy such a belief is - I hope
(and no MSNBC does not hold the truth)
I encourage neutral papers like USA TODAY or the Chrisitian Science Monitor (yes it is a very good paper - despite some portions of their belief structure that are 17th century)

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:47:24 -0000

Same for Medicare !!!

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:49:06 -0000

Yes - I knew that. The "anti ACA vote" has always had two parts - those to the right of it and those to the left of it. When you add those who want even more gov involvment to those who like Obamacare to those who want it with some modest changes - you approach 70% of the population in surveys taken in the last 8 weeks. 30% (hhmm what % of USA is core REP?) want it repealed

Re: Obamacare's problem: You can't fix stupid

Ted Fred — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:50:01 -0000

It has since dropped to the 30s as people learn the lies told about it ...i.e visit the site and find it does not dress them in red or pink and is just a market of familiar and a few new names