Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

As to the ACA. I am surprised that more people in our industry are not if favor of it.

Our industry, live sound, is almost exclusively independent, small business'.
Not only that, but for those of us working in music, and independent music, so are those we provide sound for.
Now we are finally able to get health care at a reasonable rate. And so will those we are working for.
This makes it more financially attractive to be in this business, and not have to work for a larger corporation, who did have the advantage of size and purchasing power in this arena.

As far as I can see the cheapest policy I can find here in upstate NY, it will be at least 50% more expensive than what was available before. Also, Healthy NY stopped offering policies to individuals and sole proprietors. So, looks like I am stuck or fined.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Also to the ACA and the shutdown.
Obama is getting off so easy. The web site has been a mess, and implementation has been much harder than anticipated.

But, because the Tea Party shut down the government on the exact same day as the ACA went live, ostensibly to protest the same,
it has diverted almost all the negative energy towards themselves. Had they not shut it down, and stood by and watched the ACA flounder for a bit, they would have been able to say, "see".
Instead the bugs are being worked out, and again, a lot of negative thoughts towards the ACA not going smoothly are wrongly pinned on government shut down.

With all the ranting about the healthcare.gov website, I had to take it for a test drive.

Starting with the first page load until the moment I could purchase a policy, the total time was just under 2 hours. It would have been shorter if I hadn't made some mistakes that took longer to figure out than to actually correct. Knowing now, I think I could do the whole thing in about an hour or so. I qualified for a tax credit, but if I have to take my late mother's IRA distribution as regular income, I won't qualify for a subsidy in 2014. I may pay the penalty and gamble that in 2014 my current practice of don't get hurt, don't get sick, will continue to be in my favor. In 2015 I won't have her IRA or other taxable income related to her estate and presuming I don't get a big fat raise, will again qualify for subsidy.

The last time I had insurance was about 12 years ago, and I paid $225/month for a very decent policy. The current policy most like my old one is now ~$400/month without subsidy.

But the hand-wringing over the website is much ado about nothing. Folks have 6 months to get insurance, roughly 30m-40m folks. When 5m of them tried healthcare.gov on the first day shit when down. Should it have been better? Sure, who'd argue against that? But consider the million or so folks that lined up (physically or on line) new FruitFones when they ran out of stock... should we trash Apple because orders couldn't be filled? In a high-demand market temporary shortages will occur.

Y'all argue amongst yourselves. The website worked for me (slowly), and I was able to accomplish what I wanted to do.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

I subscribe to Tim McCulloch's line of thought. That most of Washington has been doing it's job, and that this small minority, (manufactured through gerrymandering, and even built/manufactured by very wealthy outsiders) {gerrymandering was ok to give blacks their own districts} that to my mind does not even represent the overall Republican party, can not get their way via the regular process (precisely because they are in the minority), so they are holding the rest of process, and by extension the whole country hostage. Bohener is in a tough spot on this, and I like Obama's current position. Bring it to a vote. And let us, the American people, see exactly who is holding us hostage. Because as bad as the Tea Party looks now (Mike Lee's stock is dropping fast in Utah), it would be even worse for the conservatives politically to have to show it on an up or down vote right now.



To my mind the money has already been spent. The question now is how to pay for it. {well,no,it hasn't been spent,it has been proposed.It's like you plan on buying a new car,but untill you buy it,you haven't spent the money}
The spending was done in the form of two unfunded wars, and more so, that the interest in that decade was higher then than now. {It isn't the wars that will bankrupt us,it is the social programs}

There is also a fair amount of money being paid for the bailout. A lot of that has been repaid from the other end.
This is one of the few things that I do think Bush got right. And went out on a positive note, in a very negative time. As a sitting duck, it looked at first like he would just pass, and let the new guy take it.
But I give him credit for realizing the severity of the situation, and getting going on it. {Nice of you,really}



Here is how I look at this. The money is already being spent to the tune of almost 20% of our GDP. ACA is not free. But, it is better than what we had. {Don't count your chickens until they hatch.It will get worse}
Yes you and I are paying for others health insurance. But we already were paying for their health care, via more expensive ER methods.
If everyone has access to regular visits, and thus more counseling and information about their health, instead of just ER visits when things have gotten to a critical stage, we as a society will save money, and that will translate to us as individuals. My health insurance via my wife has come down in cost this year for the first time in over 30 years.

Also, Social Security tends to get thrown in the "free Sh_t" pile, but it is self contained, and nothing free. Pay in. Save. Withdraw upon retirement. { Here,we agree}Medicade and medicare are two programs that I consider good , but more prone to corruption. {According to the Medicare Trustees,Medicare is scheduled to go broke in 9 years and Obama took $790 billion out of Medicare to fund Obamacare}

Two programs that I do have a big problem with are disability, and the farm bill.
That to me is free sh that is running put of control.


Or at least that is the face that they put forward. To me, the Tea Party constituency has been completely duped by their leaders, and those that founded the party.

This was brought to my attention about seven years ago, before the Tea Party began.
My leaving the Republican party started long ago, and I had never been able to put my finger on exactly what triggered it.
I know lots of the little things, but what was the big thing.

I heard a professor from BYU on the radio (KBYU) go on a rant. And he laid out a lot of things that had disquieted me.
Such as, when he was growing up, conservative meant conserving the environment. And then he lowered the boom on neo-cons. He was mad. {Conserving means many things}
He did not like that his party had grown away from everything it used to stand for, and what was dear to him. He went on with many more examples.
And that it is now run and co-opted by those who's sole goal is money. Profit. { Profit is why I went into business }

And that was it. He said, "Republicans are no longer conservative. We are the party of Wall Street, and nothing about us is conservative."
I thought, there I go, I am no longer a Republican, because the Republican party is no longer conservative.

As an example, I give you military spending. Every budget to come out of the Tea Party (Paul/Ryan) has increased spending for the military.
There is no bigger blow job to big business than military spending. Yes the military employees lots of people. But think of all the money that Halliburton pulled in from the wars.
And that was just a decade of gravy. The whole military spending has been out of control for decades now. { Our military has keep us free since day one.It is more important now than ever since most European countries don't pull their share of the load}

And in an ironic twist, or just to bring this point full circle. There is one person who has been able to curb the military spending.
The president was able to pull off the sequestration, and cut military spending by 10%. And between that and the automatic roll back on Bush era tax cuts, we are now the closest we have been to a balanced budget in over 10 years. Yes,sequester was Obama's idea and the Tea Party went along with it.Then Obama tried to deny that it was his idea.You can't have it both ways}

Yes, the most conservative person in Washington is Barack Obama.{ Hahaha,now that's funny.I don't care who you are.Thanks for the laugh}

Try that on for size. Chew it around in your head a bit. Don't knee jerk reaction. Mull it over while you are driving to the gig.

There you have it.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

As far as I can see the cheapest policy I can find here in upstate NY, it will be at least 50% more expensive than what was available before. Also, Healthy NY stopped offering policies to individuals and sole proprietors. So, looks like I am stuck or fined.

So what's the deal? Is it now illegal to be uninsured?
If I understand the system, you pay for Medicare and Medicaid with your taxes, then you have to have an insurance and a lot of people also have to pay out of pocket because things are not covered or only partially covered?

The really funny thing is that if you look at health spending through private insurance, US, Britain and Norway are not all that different since roughly 75% or more of the money spent does not come from private insurance pay-outs, and when you look at it and ignore the private insurance pay-outs completely, annual spending pro capita is fairy equal. Hmmmm.....
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

So what's the deal? Is it now illegal to be uninsured?
My understanding is I will have to pay a <$100 fine the first year.
If I understand the system, you pay for Medicare and Medicaid with your taxes, then you have to have an insurance and a lot of people also have to pay out of pocket because things are not covered or only partially covered?
If you want to understand the system better come live it. :-) The governments idea of cutting cost for medicare system is to just unilaterally reduce payments for procedures. The result is many doctors refuse to treat medicare patients. While that is a gross simplification it is not far from the thinking. I guess they assume everybody is making obscene profits so they can just mandate lower prices.
The really funny thing is that if you look at health spending through private insurance, US, Britain and Norway are not all that different since roughly 75% or more of the money spent does not come from private insurance pay-outs, and when you look at it and ignore the private insurance pay-outs completely, annual spending pro capita is fairy equal. Hmmmm.....

according to wiki not as funny List of countries by total health expenditure (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US is $8,233 per capita (2010 OECD numbers)
Norway $5,388 per capita
UK $3,433 per capita

We were already spending 50% more per meat sock than Norway back 3 years ago and we are just getting warmed up. We are about to see an unprecedented increase in healthcare spending. (of course I could be wrong).

Oh boy we win again... :-(

JR
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

US is $8,233 per capita (2010 OECD numbers)
Norway $5,388 per capita
UK $3,433 per capita

We were already spending 50% more per meat sock than Norway back 3 years ago and we are just getting warmed up. We are about to see an unprecedented increase in healthcare spending. (of course I could be wrong).

If you take off the private insurance payouts, US still tops the list with over $6000, so you should be able to get by without the private insurance.

Looking at health care spending, Norwegians and Americans are obviously among the sickest people in the world, we really should get more help from WHO :lol:
 
Last edited:
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

If you take off the private insurance payouts, US still tops the list with over $6000, so you should be able to get by without the private insurance.

Looking at health care spending, Norwegians and Americans are obviously among the sickest people in the world, we really should get more help from WHO :lol:
I do not understand what you mean by private insurance payouts? Do you have a link (in english)?

Any money that insurance companies pay out came from the policy holders payments in originally. While the insurance companies presumably invest this money to cover actuarial needs, there is no magic creation of money. My understanding is the data I presented represents the total money spent on healthcare.

Are you suggesting that 3k of the 8k does not actually get spent on healthcare? Or is somehow rebated to policy holders and not actually spent?

Money spent usually come from somewhere and goes somewhere, while only the government can play fast and loose with making money appear from nowhere or disappear.

JR
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

I can't be sure of this since I don't have the research to back it up, but at one point an argument was made in a debate that one of the issues of our healthcare spending was in a large part because healthcare was more expensive in the US than other places. Any thoughts on the validity/impact of such a statement?
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

I can't be sure of this since I don't have the research to back it up, but at one point an argument was made in a debate that one of the issues of our healthcare spending was in a large part because healthcare was more expensive in the US than other places. Any thoughts on the validity/impact of such a statement?

Here is one report. Towards the end there is a % of GDP of nine countries.
International Federation of Health Plans 2012 Comparative Price Report


And here is a health report, showing overall health including life expectancy.
This chart is about one page down.
Population Health Forum - Issues
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

I can't be sure of this since I don't have the research to back it up, but at one point an argument was made in a debate that one of the issues of our healthcare spending was in a large part because healthcare was more expensive in the US than other places. Any thoughts on the validity/impact of such a statement?
Was that a question?

Socialized healthcare has been the holy grail of the left for decades. Hillary tried to get it during her husband's term and was rejected soundly. Obama won the presidency and a super majority in the legislature thanks to a huge political blowback against George Bush and things republican. They did not waste this opportunity to pass the ACA unilaterally. They gave little more than lip service to republican ideas like tort reform and health savings accounts, and more. Even before they finished passing it they had already lost momentum and the super majority in the Senate (when Kennedy died and was replaced by a senator who campaigned on the promise to vote against it). When it came time for the final push they used a procedural (budget) mechanism to finally pass it with only a simple majority in the senate. The supreme court reviewed and blessed it with a creative ruling that said it was a tax so within the purview of the legislature to pass, not "forced commerce" that is not constitutional. I am not being taxed, I am being coerced to buy health coverage, or I will be fined ($95 or so the first year).

The entire western world's healthcare has been rising in lock step due to a combination of demographics (aging boomers like me) and the increasing cost of end of life heroic procedures to buy a little more life (my brother's insurance paid $500k for 5 years of chemo addled extra time). In the US we enjoy world class health care, but it was more expensive than it should be due to the big insurance middle man that thwarts free market forces that would normally invite competition which reduces costs.

ACA was promoted as a way to reduce cost. I won't repeat all the promises of how much money it would save typical consumers, but as we all know the government is not great at actually doing stuff. The early reports are that insurance has gone up a bunch for many. The insurance company middleman has not been eliminated but is now a crony partner with the government and we know how that story plays out.

Of course maybe I'm all wrong...

JR
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

ACA was promoted as a way to reduce cost. I won't repeat all the promises of how much money it would save typical consumers, but as we all know the government is not great at actually doing stuff. The early reports are that insurance has gone up a bunch for many. The insurance company middleman has not been eliminated but is now a crony partner with the government and we know how that story plays out.

Of course maybe I'm all wrong...

JR

For the first time in over thirty years, my costs have gone down this year.
With one exception. Emergency room visits cost me more.

I have not been to the emergency room since last thanksgiving, when I got stitches playing basketball.
I should have taped it and waited a day to go to a clinic that was open.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

For the first time in over thirty years, my costs have gone down this year.
With one exception. Emergency room visits cost me more.

I have not been to the emergency room since last thanksgiving, when I got stitches playing basketball.
I should have taped it and waited a day to go to a clinic that was open.

Jack,
Are you saying that your costs have gone down for the same level of coverage? I hear stories...like my situation...where only high deductible policies are available....without a substantial...like 100%....premium increase.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Jack,
Are you saying that your costs have gone down for the same level of coverage? I hear stories...like my situation...where only high deductible policies are available....without a substantial...like 100%....premium increase.

Yes, but my coverage is not with the ACA. It is a long running policy, through corporate.
I am like Cruz, my wife has a job with a national company.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Are you suggesting that 3k of the 8k does not actually get spent on healthcare? Or is somehow rebated to policy holders and not actually spent?

Not at all, out of the roughly 2.7 trillon spent, only 750 billion or thereabouts comes from private insurance payouts (according to a table I can't find again, so I might have misunderstood). So I'm merely suggesting that the mainstay of your health spending comes from other channels, primarily government/public/out-of-pocket, thus even if the insurance companies were done away with (and you had a situation like Norway or Britain where private insurance were not a significant contribution) you would still be on top of the spending scale.

PS, what I'm going on about is much in reference to:
I wanted a Canadian/French/British styled plan that covered basic wellness care and catastrophic accidents/diseases. Private insurance could be available for elective and cosmetic procedures. Such a scheme, however, does not make robber-barons of insurance companies, for-profit hospitals and clinics, and per-service providers.
 
Last edited:
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Not at all, out of the roughly 2.7 trillon spent, only 750 billion or thereabouts comes from private insurance payouts (according to a table I can't find again, so I might have misunderstood). So I'm merely suggesting that the mainstay of your health spending comes from other channels, primarily government/public/out-of-pocket, thus even if the insurance companies were done away with (and you had a situation like Norway or Britain where private insurance were not a significant contribution) you would still be on top of the spending scale.
OK, I think I now understand your point. The amount of US healthcare spending that is already socialized via medicare and the like is significant. That is an important point as we try to defend our hymen from socialism, that train has already left the station long ago. :-(

My criticism of big insurance goes for the government managed medicare too.

I often talk in passing with my neighbor who is almost exactly 20 years older than me, and an active consumer of healthcare services. He is taking multiple medicinal drug regimens.. Blood thinners (I think to prevent clots because he has an artificial heart valve), blood sugar regulators (pre-diabetic?), pain-killers (for joint deterioration), and probably more I don't know about. He is sensitive to the price he pays monthly for his supplemental health insurance and any co-pays he encounters for prescriptions (co-pays are an attempt to apply price feedback at least to drug selection). I think he encounters co-pays for some the newer pain killers that have their own sub-economy with abusers. It is amusing to hear him recount how they gave him the 3rd degree at the pain clinic to make sure he wasn't abusing the pain killer. He is obviously in a lot of pain. My point about my neighbor is that he does not experience the cost of his many specific healthcare decisions, so has no motivation to shop around or be thrifty in his day to day use of healthcare.
PS, what I'm going on about is much in reference to:

Yes, during the sausage making process to craft (i use that term loosely) the ACA legislation, I spent those couple years looking at several of the different western world's socialized healthcare systems. Believe it or not they are not all the same, but all struggle with a common theme of cost pressure because of limited resources and an aging demographic with increasingly expensive end of life treatments. I just saw an article in the paper yesterday about a new cancer treatment, $120k for a single 3 week treatment. I doubt they are passing those out like lollipops at most taxpayer funded government health services.

The Canadian system was an interesting case. It was actually started in just one province (like one of our states only with more trees). After several years of success the other provinces wanted it, so they took it nationwide. We were on a similar trajectory with MA having a government based healthcare plan that all the other states were watching for it's success or failure. I find it instructive that the senator that broke the super-majority was elected on his promise to vote against ACA and was from MA. Many canadian citizens travel to the US when they don't want to wait in queue for their government healthcare. A classic way to manage the limited resource constraint... slow delayed testing, slow schedules for non-life threatening surgeries, some marginal cases may not be considered worthy of treatment.

Germany has a system that looks interesting where there is a strong privately run free market aspect to the actual delivery of health care, while the government provides a safety net to help the poor afford to partake in the private healthcare system. (probably an over simplification. I can't be an expert on every countries systems).

France IIRC when I looked at it (a few years ago) was struggling with cutting back services (closing facilities) to deal with limited resources and increasing costs. (Again a snapshot from when I looked into it a couple years ago).

I predict we are not going to repeal ACA, so the best we (I) can hope for is some actual reform by amendments (tort reform, health saving account, more competition) but not likely to occur until after the wheels fall off. I do not feel very lucky so this will need to play out on it's current trajectory. I don't think it will take very long for people to get fed up with the poorly planned program and we can start to reform in ernest. In the meanwhile Rome is burning, as doctors take early retirement, and alternatives to ACA fold up shop. I also read in the newspaper about a hospital in Miami that just got converted to a condominium. The hospital was closed because of business consolidation due to declining profit prospects. I find it hard to believe that we don't need hospital beds. Apparently we can expand the number of people using healthcare "and" close hospitals.

Interesting times...

JR
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

I get in many a heated discussions with a close friend whenever I bring up the subject of demographics, Boomers, longer life spans, expensive end of life procedures....and running the numbers on these scenarios. It seems "good intentions" are all that matter. For years we had a local radio talk show host...a former newspaper editor, whom I considered a pragmatist first, regardless of his personal opinions, and he always premised his conversations on "running the numbers!" I miss him dearly!
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

The insurance company middleman has not been eliminated but is now a crony partner with the government and we know how that story plays out.

Of course maybe I'm all wrong...

JR

Just a thought:
I do a lot of corporate events for companies and organizations associated with healthcare. I too think that the middleman takes some of the money (often for little benefit) but if we figured out some way to get rid of (or greatly reduce) the middlemen, where will those people go? Do we have other segments of the economy in which to employ those people? More jobless people means greater financial load on the society as a whole. It seems like we just don't have enough truly productive industries anymore. On a personal level, the corporate AV industry is heavily dependent upon healthcare spending. I might not be called to pin mics to doctor's ties if the industry tightens too much.
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

It seems like we just don't have enough truly productive industries anymore. On a personal level, the corporate AV industry is heavily dependent upon healthcare spending. I might not be called to pin mics to doctor's ties if the industry tightens too much.

One thing I like about being an A/V tech is the future job security it offers. From reading books like Brave New World and watching movies like V for Vendetta, our future totalitarian leaders will spread their glorious oppressive message via omnipresent screens and loudspeakers. Someone has to install and operate them!
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

Just a thought:
I do a lot of corporate events for companies and organizations associated with healthcare. I too think that the middleman takes some of the money (often for little benefit) but if we figured out some way to get rid of (or greatly reduce) the middlemen, where will those people go? Do we have other segments of the economy in which to employ those people? More jobless people means greater financial load on the society as a whole. It seems like we just don't have enough truly productive industries anymore. On a personal level, the corporate AV industry is heavily dependent upon healthcare spending. I might not be called to pin mics to doctor's ties if the industry tightens too much.

The problem is not the middle man per se, but the lack of a competitive open market. The way the healthcare plans are structured and executed insulates the consumers of healthcare from actual procedure costs that thwarts free market forces that would reduce cost and increase innovation through competition. The insurance companies even try to inject free market forces to lower their own costs by using co-pays to discourage expensive brand name drug choices. The whole concept is to make the customer aware of price when making drug brand selections. Of course the big drug companies counter the co-pays with buy downs of the co-pay amount to encourage the consumers to buy their more expensive drug options.

My largest complaint with big insurance is that they cut private deals with hospitals and providers, to pay deep discounts from the list prices for procedures. They typical insurance user doesn't notice or doesn't care, but when someone outside the system like me, tries to buy healthcare services al a carte, I get nailed for the artificial high price. The crony deals between big insurance and big providers reduces competition that would pop up, if there was price discovery available to consumers who were spending their own money. If we look at things like optional cosmetic surgery, or Lasik eye surgery not within the big insurance system, we see vibrant competition, innovation, and lower prices.

I guess you could say I am paying for the dead beats that use the emergency room and don't pay... I can image a hundred better ways to deal with that.

At this point I am spinning my wheels whining about this, I will pay my fine to IRS and see how this plays out.

JR
 
Re: Is anyone's business affected by politics?

One thing I like about being an A/V tech is the future job security it offers. From reading books like Brave New World and watching movies like V for Vendetta, our future totalitarian leaders will spread their glorious oppressive message via omnipresent screens and loudspeakers. Someone has to install and operate them!

I really want to believe this. But the continued presence of SM57s on the POTUSi have me nervous.
I think there is another presence at work that we don't know about.