Obamacare, explained.

[NAOS]

Look, I just said it was expensive, that's it. It's a ridiculous and offensive notion that the 'job creators' have some moral obligation to provide the solution. I'm busy trying to keep my businesses going .. for my family and the families of those that work for me .. and I don't have time to also be lobbying for change, personally .. well, unless I give up JazzFanz. lol

We have so many labels and tons of packaged ideals .. when what we need is to have better cost controls. I'm not sure how to do that.

The strong interpretation of this position is that business owners don't have ultimate responsibility to provide for 100% of the care their employees need.

That's either:
(a) bull****
or
(b) an strong statement for the role of government to provide care

Which is it?

 

[Dr. Jones]

add to my other posts:

questioning and criticizing the kinds of care mainstream medicine provides is a key part of this issue. It is tied to costs, but costs will never be brought under control as long as we distrust government (or what govt can do) and continue to cow to huge retailers and insurers. Period.

I would like to see government involvement, but only in a watchdog role in getting costs down. I would rather not see them taking all the money and literally controlling the process, beginning to end. I am not a no-government guy, but I also see big/too involved government as generally inefficient.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Look, I just said it was expensive, that's it. It's a ridiculous and offensive notion that the 'job creators' have some moral obligation to provide the solution. I'm busy trying to keep my businesses going .. for my family and the families of those that work for me .. and I don't have time to also be lobbying for change, personally .. well, unless I give up JazzFanz. lol

We have so many labels and tons of packaged ideals .. when what we need is to have better cost controls. I'm not sure how to do that.

The job creators are the ones responsible for providing health care, under our current system.

If job creators are now complaining about it, and suggesting that is a reason why they are not hiring, or worse- sending jobs overseas, then yes, the job creators are absolutely responsible for helping to find a solution.

Ironically, it's these same job creators who are against the government stepping in and providing health care. Yet, according to you, they are so concerned about providing it themselves that they will actually send jobs overseas so they don't have to provide it themselves.

 

[SaltyDawg]

I would like to see government involvement, but only in a watchdog role in getting costs down. I would rather not see them taking all the money and literally controlling the process, beginning to end. I am not a no-government guy, but I also see big/too involved government as generally inefficient.

So that is basically Obamacare, right?

 

[NAOS]

I would like to see government involvement, but only in a watchdog role in getting costs down. I would rather not see them taking all the money and literally controlling the process, beginning to end. I am not a no-government guy, but I also see big/too involved government as generally inefficient.

this is definitely the buzz of the day. There are plenty of examples you could site to prove yourself right. There are plenty of examples that prove you wrong.

So, this leaves us just where we started.... Forget about "government" as a concept... how do we get together and help people get cared for and help small entrepreneurs start projects that people are excited about without worrying so much about this ****? <-- that's one way to define government

 

[Scat]

The strong interpretation of this position is that business owners don't have ultimate responsibility to provide for 100% of the care their employees need.

That's either:
(a) bull****
or
(b) an strong statement for the role of government to provide care

Which is it?

(c) None of the above

Job creators have a need. Workers. Workers have a need. A job. Many employers offer benefits for various reasons to make their business more attractive to potential employees. Happy employees typically make better employees. The benefits shouldn't be mandatory.

All that aside, why is a business responsible for anything other than paying wages for services provided by a worker?? If offering benefits to potential employees is no longer beneficial they should be able to drop those benefits. And it's not their responsibility to find a solution.

 

[Hartsock]

A lot of good points I appreciate this discussion as I was wondering about a lot of this the other night.

 

[Dr. Jones]

The job creators are the ones responsible for providing health care, under our current system.

If job creators are now complaining about it, and suggesting that is a reason why they are not hiring, or worse- sending jobs overseas, then yes, the job creators are absolutely responsible for helping to find a solution.

Ironically, it's these same job creators who are against the government stepping in and providing health care. Yet, according to you, they are so concerned about providing it themselves that they will actually send jobs overseas so they don't have to provide it themselves.

We can agree to disagree. I do not see how employers are responsible to figure out a system that allows them to hire more people. As I said, I would hire more $20/hr type positions if the number were $20 .. but it's A LOT more than that. Enough on whose responsibility it is .. I think about it almost daily and explore different solutions, but I have never felt any civil obligation to do so.

So that is basically Obamacare, right?

I don't think so. Maybe I've completely misunderstood the bill, but I don't think so.

this is definitely the buzz of the day. There are plenty of examples you could site to prove yourself right. There are plenty of examples that prove you wrong.

So, this leaves us just where we started.... Forget about "government" as a concept... how do we get together and help people get cared for and help small entrepreneurs start projects that people are excited about without worrying so much about this ****? <-- that's one way to define government

As I said, I'm not sure. Would it be easier if I asked you how we do it?

(c) None of the above

Job creators have a need. Workers. Workers have a need. A job. Many employers offer benefits for various reasons to make their business more attractive to potential employees. Happy employees typically make better employees. The benefits shouldn't be mandatory.

All that aside, why is a business responsible for anything other than paying wages for services provided by a worker?? If offering benefits to potential employees is no longer beneficial they should be able to drop those benefits. And it's not their responsibility to find a solution.

This, pretty much. I see healthcare as a commodity .. not much different than having a car. I need employees that have cars .. does that make it my responsibility to pay for their car? It's a nice perk, but I find it difficult to say it's my duty. I want to pay a very fair wage for work performed .. the rest makes it hard to hire. Full circle.

 

[NAOS]

All that aside, why is a business responsible for anything other than offering a job that pays money?? If offering benefits to potential employees is no longer beneficial they should be able to drop those benefits. It's not their responsibility to find a solution.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Above is an example of how capitalism radically reduces things to the exchange of money for labor. Three beautiful sentences. And, we have reached a point where we see no problem with capitalism coding the way people are cared for.

The true costs of production include the injuries and ailments that a laborer suffers. We are working more than any nation in the world, and spending the majority of the rest of our time commuting to work or in our homes, so I think there is a strong claim that could be made that our employers are becoming more and more responsible for our ailments rather than less.

 

[NAOS]

As I said, I'm not sure. Would it be easier if I asked you how we do it?



This, pretty much. I see healthcare as a commodity .. not much different than having a car. I need employees that have cars .. does that make it my responsibility to pay for their car? It's a nice perk, but I find it difficult to say it's my duty. I want to pay a very fair wage for work performed .. the rest makes it hard to hire. Full circle.

What role to do you think intellectuals should play in public discourse and policy making?

The second part is, again, pretty problematic if you don't have faith in govt

 

[Dr. Jones]

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Above is an example of how capitalism radically reduces things to the exchange of money for labor. Three beautiful sentences. And, we have reached a point where we see no problem with capitalism coding the way people are cared for.

The true costs of production include the injuries and ailments that a laborer suffers. We are working more than any nation in the world, and spending the majority of the rest of our time commuting to work or in our homes, so I think there is a strong claim that could be made that our employers are becoming more and more responsible for our ailments rather than less.

I'm just shaking my head at so many that want to penalize entrepreneurs/job creators/growth-minded people. So, you get your way and employers are now responsible to take care of everyone else's problems .. thereby making it far better to be an employee than risking everything to grow your own business. Before long, we're Cuba.














I tried to type that last part without letting you know it's hyperbole, but I couldn't do it.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

so I think there is a strong claim that could be made that our employers are becoming more and more responsible for our ailments rather than less.

I also think people are pointing their fingers in the wrong direction here.
You might want to take a look at our entire medical industry, that is one of the most expensive in the world.
The fact that Americans are more dependent on prescription and non-prescription drugs than any country in the world.
We're fatter than, our money is worth less, and yet we work more hours than almost any other country.
Seems to be paying off eh??

 

[Dr. Jones]

What role to do you think intellectuals should play in public discourse and policy making?

The second part is, again, pretty problematic if you don't have faith in govt

"Government" gets a bad label, imo. I have owned my own companies and I have also been a c-level exec for one of the 10 largest companies in the country. I can tell you the larger company was extremely less efficient. It was maddening trying to keep costs in line and have profitability each quarter. My own, smaller, companies were MUCH easier. When I went into business after leaving the giant company, I essentially created a very similar business model. An apples to apples comparison showed the giant earning 8% pre-tax profits while mine was nearly 40% .. and almost all of it was cost control.

So, when I say government, I mean BIG. I see the government as the largest 'company' in the country. I also see it as generally having inferior business people in relation to its corporate counterparts.

 

[Scat]

The true costs of production include the injuries and ailments that a laborer suffers. We are working more than any nation in the world, and spending the majority of the rest of our time commuting to work or in our homes, so I think there is a strong claim that could be made that our employers are becoming more and more responsible for our ailments rather than less.

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I've already said that a happy (and healthy) employee is a better employee. That said, if the employer does not feel offering benefits do anything to move his business forward there is no obligation for him to offer them.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

I see the government as the largest 'company' in the country. I also see it as generally having inferior business people in relation to its corporate counterparts.

Not only the largest company in the country, but a company with unlimited resources that can monopolize any industry at the drop of a hat.

 

[PearlWatson]

Are we really innovating more than everyone else? I know it's common for people to say this, but then I see Kobe and other sports stars going to South Korea and other nations to get career extending surgeries and treatments that aren't available in the USA.

Plus our heart disease, cancer, and other numbers don't compare favorably with many other western nations.

They aren't available because of FDA regulations. You can ask Hunstman all about these, he complained about them in the debate he was in since he is in the medical/pharmaceutical industry:

The reason Kobe, A-Rod, and other athletes travel to Germany for their biologic treatments involves a vague FDA regulation that mandates that all human tissues (such as blood and bone marrow) can only be "minimally manipulated," or else they are classified as a drug and subject to much stricter governmental regulations. The problem, of course, is figuring out what "minimal" means in the context of biologics. Can the blood be heated to a higher temperature, as with Regenokine? Spun in a centrifuge? Can certain proteins be filtered out?2 Nobody knows the answer to these questions, and most American doctors are unwilling to risk the ire of regulators.

https://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7796225/kobe-bryant-dr-chris-renna-regenokine-knee-treatment

Are you talking our cancer/heart disease rates or successful treatments. I know cancer survival rates continue to go up.

 

[PearlWatson]

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I've already said that a happy (and healthy) employee is a better employee. That said, if the employer does not feel offering benefits do anything to move his business forward there is no obligation for him to offer them.

Hawaii is the only state that requires its employers to provide health insurance, but it is bunch of islands with an extremely high cost of living.

 

[NAOS]

I'm just shaking my head at so many that want to penalize entrepreneurs/job creators/growth-minded people. So, you get your way and employers are now responsible to take care of everyone else's problems .. thereby making it far better to be an employee than risking everything to grow your own business. Before long, we're Cuba.














I tried to type that last part without letting you know it's hyperbole, but I couldn't do it.

What could we learn from Cuban history? What have they done better than we have? What are we doing to stand in our own way of accomplishing these things?

hint: this has a lot to do with literacy and care giving--two things that employers have a lot of interest in.

 

[Dr. Jones]

What could we learn from Cuban history? What have they done better than we have? What are we doing to stand in our own way of accomplishing these things

hint: this has a lot to do with literacy and care giving--two things that employers have a lot of interest in.

I agree with this. I like to do more rather than less .. but as costs continue to rise there are fewer we can care for.

 

[Gameface]

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Above is an example of how capitalism radically reduces things to the exchange of money for labor. Three beautiful sentences. And, we have reached a point where we see no problem with capitalism coding the way people are cared for.

The true costs of production include the injuries and ailments that a laborer suffers. We are working more than any nation in the world, and spending the majority of the rest of our time commuting to work or in our homes, so I think there is a strong claim that could be made that our employers are becoming more and more responsible for our ailments rather than less.

It's getting harder and harder to take you seriously as you go on.