Debt Rattle May 8 2018
- This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Franco Fontana Praga 1967 • Emerging Market Currencies Feel The Heat As US Economy Brightens (SCMP) • Two-Thirds Of Americans Believe It’s A Go
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle May 8 2018]Nomi Prins yesterday, and myriad other economists are predicting a crash; but not one can say when. And those who do are invariably wrong.
Classic wolf crying; or should I say braying?.
Also classic ignorance of the very machinery they run.
Two elements of western society will be, mostly, unaffected by what is surely coming; the poorest and the richest. Everybody inbetween will take a devistating hit.
The poorest will survive by their wits; hard learned and hard earned; and the richest by their hubris.
If perchance, the worst is somehow kept at bay; then Orwell’s picture of the future is sure to come; many elements are presently in place:The future is a boot smashing a human face forever
George Orwell.
“Easy credit no more: how shocks from Australian banks’ inquiry may squeeze a nation”
For a more realistic opinion about the “Banking Royal Commission”, try this:
The great Australian screw job.
They will never criticize – let alone sack – the regulators.
” Australia Pledges Millions To Help Save The Koala (AFP) ”
An excellent example of what happens when governments meddle with nature is to be found in Ilargi’s native land. 🙂
Nature’s way? Thousands of starving horses & deer killed in Dutch ‘wild reserve’
Must protect horses and deer from wicked predators
I feel safer knowing the government is protecting me by studying widespread, deadly poison after just 44 years. …Doing nothing about it, mind you, just studying it. Maybe by 2062 we’ll be allowed to know what’s in it.
Funny, I don’t feel safe as a U.S. citizen, living on the other side of the planet.
Until, or unless, I renounce my citizenship; I’m property.
That is the fact of being a U.S. citizen. You’re just a piece of property. Owned and paid for!
There is no place on this planet out of reach for a U.S. citizen, by it’s government, if they so choose.
Think about that! I have for many years…
And yes, I know you were being ironic………….Speaking of endangered (21 minutes):
Now, that’s what I’d call a conspiracy.
I’d love to hear any comments here.
I wonder.
Did those who do not like Trump encourage him to go and actually do something stupid so that he would look stupid.PREMISE:
Medical service providers are just that, service providers. In that regard, doctors are no different in the market than automobile mechanics. Automobile mechanic income depends on the average income of car owners. Doctor income depends on the average income of patients. Every country, though, has figured out some way to pay medical service providers more than automobile mechanics so that the poor get some access to the care only the rich can afford and to minimize public health risks affecting all classes. Calls in the USA for market-based reforms to the health care affordability problem conveniently overlook this basic fact. This is not surprising considering the oligarchic trends within the US economy since health insurance became popular after WWII.Instead of floundering in our traditional economic cynicism we could instead, like every other developed country in the world, undertake simple reforms to keep health care spending down to a reasonably low percentage of GDP . No constitutional roadblocks exist.
SUGGESTED REFORMS:
1. Lower the Medicare start age to 55. This would most efficiently remove the most difficult to insure group from the suggested reform process that will be undertaken by each individual state (as suggested at item #4 below).
2. Simplify the Medicare benefit structure so that there is one simple annual deductible for all parts of Medicare (A,B,and D) based upon a progressive income and asset test; and re-structure the Medicare Part B premium so that it is also based upon a progressive income and asset test.
2.1 Make Health Savings Accounts (HSA) available to anyone on Medicare who still has active employment income regardless of the size of their new Medicare annual deductible and also regardless of the structure of any employer benefits. People will be able to draw on tax-free HSA accounts to pay these deductible amounts.
2.2 A unified income and asset based Medicare deductible would eliminate the need for Medicare Advantage, Medicare Supplement, and Medicare Prescription Drug plans; saving the government and consumers hundreds of billions year in and year out. This would also stop the national torture due to complexity perpetrated upon our seniors.
2.3 Some percentage of current insurance workers could be leased by current insurance companies to the government during a transition phase, while those losing their jobs would get unemployment assistance.
3. Make Medicare the primary payor when coordinating with large employer group plans as it is for retiree plans and small groups today so that large employers would feel encouraged and justified to offer an option to employees to forgo actual coverage in exchange to a company contribution to a HSA.
4. For everyone through age 54 each state individually or in concert with other states could adopt some form of the proven models provided by other developed countries. Large states, who have larger populations and economies than many model countries, have the tax base and economies of scale to easily set up such model systems. If smaller states run into difficulty they can join together with other states, whether regionally proximate or not, to adopt models that work best for them as a group.POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS:
I believe these reforms could be politically viable because they feed into hot button issues of both the right and left. I know “Medicare at 55” is not as powerful a political phrase as “Medicare for all”, but the Medicare for All placards usually also have the catch phrases “Love it” and “Improve it”. But Medicare at 55 could be an attractive compromise since almost no right wingers would suggest doing away with Medicare so implicitly they approve of it and thus extending that approval down to age 55 to preserve the “free market” of healthcare ideas at the state level is a position right wingers could support. The left would be thrilled by the income and asset based unified Medicare deductible so they would feel like they got some extras in terms of love and improvement for Medicare. Right wingers in red states would like the individual state control aspect and enjoy pushing for a return to a cash-based system for the poor and concierge plans for the wealthy; while socialists in blue states will enjoy pushing for public options. Large employers will like having most of the claims of the over 55 group removed from their plans. They will like it even more when the wide establishment of public state plans makes it unnecessary for them to bother to provide health insurance at all. Leveraging the benefits that large business will enjoy into the reforms makes it easier to build political consensus since big businesses are large political donors. Ultimately the state plans that best satisfy consumers, medical service providers, and taxpayers will also best compete for doctors and businesses. Red, blue, or purple then; each state should be able to build an adequate plan.Though insurance companies would be able to offer policies that would cover or lower the unified Medicare deductible, most people would find it simpler and more cost effective to just save most of the premium instead in an HSA . Most middle-income people would have relatively small deductibles and thus would be willing to devote some savings to such an emergency fund. I could imagine most banks/insurance/brokerage companies offering HSA accounts that pay higher than market returns simply as an inducement to use the other services of the company.
Even though big health insurance companies would probably have an advantage over smaller firms as they find a way to profitably downsize to basic employee leasing enterprises that provide administration services to Medicare and the state model plans; they, like all companies in the healthcare market, would be faced with the need to either adapt or die. I believe the big companies seeing the writing on the wall would actually support the reform process since they would be in the best position to morph into profitable survivors of the process.
Big Pharma…well big pharma would take a hit, but so be it…they will just have to deal with bulk discounted sales to Medicare and the state plans who in turn can just have the discounted drugs fulfilled through the existing pharmacy outlets.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.