When THEY Run Everything.

[Larry L.]

So which is better, having the FDIC after your rump or a really annoyed Russian mobster?

The FDIC. Russian mobster will kill you, your wife and kids, and your dog...whereas it's likely you'll only wish you were dead if the FDIC (or the IRS) comes after you.

....oh...wait a second...the govt does have those hunter/killer drones now, doesn't it...

 

[Pat]

Thank you Jeff for the correction and my apologies for my lack of precision. I should have said some banks in Cyprus are LARGELY owned by the government and MOST U.S. banks are largely owned by shareholders. The point being, the taxpayers are LARGELY on the hook as the Bank of Cyprus is the one being disolved. This is not unlike the U.S. government's 73.7% ownership in Ally Bank, formerly GMAC. And similarly, the taxpayers will be on the hook in the end.
Ironic for a company that received numerous bailouts exceeding $17 billion dollars in total, it takes some gall to run ads promising to "treat your money like it's actually yours." Well... it WAS...
As for the Russian mobsters, we may soon read about someone having an automobile with "an explosive starting problem", a sudden heart attack, "allergic reaction," or a dioxin/polonium-210 sandwich.

 

[Bob Fechter]

Another thing that happens when THEY take over is the inevitability of prices going up.

Sebelius: Yep, ObamaCare is raising insurance costs

 

[Larry L.]

Another thing that happens when THEY take over is the inevitability of prices going up.

Sebelius: Yep, ObamaCare is raising insurance costs

Uuuuuuuuuuuh huh...yet ANOTHER lie from Obama & co. exposed. Remember how many times we were told Obamacare would lower our ins. prems.? Just like we were CONTINUALLY told that those manditory Obamacare premiums weren't a TAX? 'That we could KEEP our present doctor(s)/ins. plans, etc., etc?

 

[Jim Craik]

Mr Fechter's data comes from a group called "Human Events", they call themselves: "a powerful concervative voice"

Does anyone think that data is not twisted by their agenda?

Would anyone believe data from a group called "A powerful Liberal Voice"?

*******************
This is from FACTCHECK.ORG:

FactChecking Health Insurance Premiums

Republicans exaggerate an increase caused by the new law.

Summary

Health insurance premiums for employer-sponsored family plans jumped a startling 9 percent from 2010 to 2011, and Republicans have blamed the federal health care law. But they exaggerate. The law — the bulk of which has yet to be implemented — has caused only about a 1 percent to 3 percent increase in premiums, according to several independent experts. The rest of the 9 percent rise is due to rising health care costs, as usual.


Furthermore, the increase caused by the law is a result of the increased benefits it requires, a factor Republicans generally ignore. So far, insurance companies have been required to do the following:

• Cover preventive care without copays or deductibles.
• Allow adult children to stay on parents’ policies until age 26.
• Increase annual coverage limits.
• Cover children without regard for preexisting conditions.

Analysis

The potential impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on insurance premiums has been a source of dubious claims since the legislation was being debated. Republicans said premiums would go up; President Barack Obama said they would go down – compared with what they’d normally be without the law. The Congressional Budget Office said they wouldn’t change much at all, at least for those on employer-sponsored plans. The individual market, where individuals buy their own policies, would see an increase, though many of those plans would also be purchased with the help of subsidies.

 

[Pat]

The potential impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on insurance premiums has been a source of dubious claims since the legislation was being debated. Republicans said premiums would go up; President Barack Obama said they would go down – compared with what they’d normally be without the law. The Congressional Budget Office said they wouldn’t change much at all, at least for those on employer-sponsored plans. The individual market, where individuals buy their own policies, would see an increase, though many of those plans would also be purchased with the help of subsidies.

Jim, employers are ditching their in house plans. In February, the Congressional Budget Office said that 7 million will likely lose their employer coverage thanks to ObamaCare — nearly twice its previous estimate. That number could be as high as 20 million -CBO.


Study: Health law to raise claims cost 32 percent

 

[Bob Fechter]

" Sebelius: Some Could See Insurance Premiums Rise
Some people purchasing new insurance policies for themselves this fall could see premiums rise because of requirements in the health-care law, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told reporters Tuesday. Ms. Sebelius's remarks come weeks before insurers are expected to begin releasing rates for plans that start on Jan. 1, 2014, when key provisions of the health law kick in (Radnofsky, 3/26)."


This from the virulent Right Wing Organization/Propaganda Rag The Kaiser Health News.

Sebelius: Some Insurance Costs Could Increase When Law Is Implemented - Kaiser Health News

I just used the previous link to give the Distortionists a bone to chew on. :~)

 

[Jim Craik]

So now it's

"Some insurace costs could increase when law is implemented".

"SOME........COULD"....................


Guys, now Mr Fechter says this:

"I just used the previous link to give the Distortionists a bone to chew on. :~)"

So he post a distorted, untrue, one sided hit peice and then has the nerve to call those who disagree with him "DISTORTIONISTS".

Truth and facts will never come from Mr Fechter!

 

[Larry L.]

"Furthermore, the increase caused by the law is a result of the INCREASED BENEFITS IT REQUIRES, a factor Republicans generally ignore."

Uuuuuuuuuuh huh. "BENEFITS IT REQUIRES". That's just ONE of the mandates of Obamacare that's causing the hikes. People who don't want that coverage are forced to buy it anyway. So much for "keeping your own plan". Those are factors LIBERALS "ignore".



"The law — the bulk of which has yet to be implemented — has caused only about a 1 percent to 3 percent increase in premiums..."

Uuuuuh - that would be an INCREASE then, wouldn't it! Obama & co have said repeatedly that Obamacare would cause a D-E-C-R-E-A-S-E in premiums. And we haven't seen ANYTHING yet! Wait 'til the whole thing is implemented. Buuuuuut then, he also said he'd cut the deficit in 1/2 by the end of his 1st term...unemployment wouldn't go over 8% and would in fact be, what, 5% or so by this time(?)...he'd have the most transparent admin in history...it was "unpatriotic" and "irresponsible" to run up the nat'l debt...blah, blah, and more blah.

 

[Jim Craik]

"Furthermore, the increase caused by the law is a result of the INCREASED BENEFITS IT REQUIRES, a factor Republicans generally ignore." "BENEFITS IT REQUIRES". That's just ONE of the mandates of Obamacare that's causing the hikes. People who don't want that coverage are forced to buy it anyway. So much for "keeping your own plan". Those are factors LIBERALS "ignore".quote]Posted by Larry


Larry, must you distort everything?

First off, you say "People who don't want that coverage are forced to buy it anyway".

Larry, you do realise that when those who "don't want that coverage" are sick, are not turned away, they get medical treatment and those of us who have coverage pay! They want coverage, they just dont want to pay!

I want all people covered!

WHEN DID ENDING FREELOADERS STOP BEING A CONSEVATIVE VALUE?

WHEN DID FIGHTING FOR THOSE WHO WANT SOMETHING WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT BECOME A CONSERVATIVE ISSUE!


Read it again, here is the original Factcheck quote!


Furthermore, the increase caused by the law is a result of the increased benefits it requires, a factor Republicans generally ignore. So far, insurance companies have been required to do the following:

• Cover preventive care without copays or deductibles.
• Allow adult children to stay on parents’ policies until age 26.
• Increase annual coverage limits.
• Cover children without regard for preexisting conditions.

Considerably more coverage for a 1% to 3% increase.

Ask anyone with a preexisting condition, with they think of this?

Ask anyone who has exceeded their annual limit what they think of this?

 

[Larry L.]

Larry, must you DISTORT(?!) everything?

First off, you say "People who don't want that coverage are forced to buy it anyway".

You realise that when those who "don't want that coverage" are sick, are not turned away , they get medical treatment and those of us who have coverage pay! They want coverage, they just dont want to pay!

Parse, nuance, cherry pick, deflect, dance and spin all you want, sir. I "distorted" NOTHING. People are being forced to buy coverage they don't want...and we haven't seen anything yet.

 

[Jim Craik]

Larry,

You do realise that those who "don't want that coverage" STILL GET SICK. You do realize that when they are sick, are not turned away, they get medical treatment and those of us who have coverage pay! They want coverage, they just dont want to pay!

I want all people covered!

WHEN DID ENDING FREELOADING STOP BEING A CONSEVATIVE VALUE?

WHEN DID FIGHTING FOR THOSE WHO WANT SOMETHING WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT BECOME A CONSERVATIVE ISSUE!

 

[Bob Fechter]

Oh, and let us not forget factcheck.org, the Annenberg "tool for distortionists," just as bogus as all those msnbc charts and graphs we so look forward to laughing at. :~)

 

[Bob Fechter]

"Massachusetts has had RomneyCare, the blue print for ObamaCare, in place since 2006. MA is now one of the states with the highest health insurance premium costs in the country. Other states are experiencing dramatic increases as well, especially in the individual market. Even one of the architects of ObamaCare, Jonathan Gruber, is on record for predicting an increase in health insurance premiums of 30% by 2016."

Rising Health Insurance Premiums with ObamaCare | Washington Policy Center

 

[Jim Craik]

Since you love charts so much............................



Your handelers have convinced you that all the increases are due to Obama. Who was responsible for the increases 2002 to 2008?

A person without an agenda might see the recent increases as a continuation of recent trends!

WHEN DID ENDING FREELOADERS STOP BEING A CONSEVATIVE VALUE?

WHEN DID FIGHTING FOR THOSE WHO WANT SOMETHING WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT BECOME A CONSERVATIVE ISSUE!

 

[Tom P]

I was just reading the last page of this thread and was thinking, geeez, Jim has stopped using graphs! But then.....................................

 

[Steve]

Larry,

You do realise that those who "don't want that coverage" STILL GET SICK. You do realize that when they are sick, are not turned away, they get medical treatment and those of us who have coverage pay! They want coverage, they just dont want to pay!

I want all people covered!

WHEN DID ENDING FREELOADING STOP BEING A CONSEVATIVE VALUE?

WHEN DID FIGHTING FOR THOSE WHO WANT SOMETHING WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT BECOME A CONSERVATIVE ISSUE!

Jim,

Since you have coverage, you must have gotten a bill to pay for those who don't have coverage (as you state above). Could you show us a copy of that? 'Cause your insurance premiums wouldn't go up to cover those without insurance so you must be getting billed directly, right?

 

[Steve]

I was just reading the last page of this thread and was thinking, geeez, Jim has stopped using graphs! But then.....................................

Yes, and hell froze over, pigs fly, the pope is catholic.... wait...

 

[Bob Fechter]

Does this mean liberals are anti free health care for illegal aliens? Wow.

 

[Jim Craik]

Jim,

Since you have coverage, you must have gotten a bill to pay for those who don't have coverage (as you state above). Could you show us a copy of that? 'Cause your insurance premiums wouldn't go up to cover those without insurance so you must be getting billed directly, right?

For the one person who does not know who pays for uninsured patients. This is from Time Magazine.

• • Do Your Premiums Help Cover the Uninsured?

• • Follow @TIME

As the U.S. Congress debates health-care reform, American families are already picking up the tab for universal health coverage. That's the finding of a new report released March 24 by the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington-based liberal think tank.
It's a long-established practice for medical providers such as hospitals and physicians to charge uninsured patients higher prices than patients with health coverage for the same care. (Insurers can negotiate cheaper prices through contracts and because of volume.) What the new study suggests, though, is that providers often pass along the cost of treating the uninsured to their insured patients. Its analysis found that families pay, on average, as much as $1,100 extra and individuals $410 extra in health-care premiums each year in order to cover the cost of treatment to uninsured patients who cannot afford to pay their bills. That amounts to as much as 8% higher premiums due to the lack of universal health care in the U.S.

Hospitals also receive Government reinbersments, we pay for that too!