a projection

[ZackDaniels]

Low-info voters exist on both sides of the aisle. That's nothing new and it's not the entire make-up of either party.

That quote is also likely made up. It sourced from here: http://thinkexist.com/quotation/ideologies-aren-t-all-that-important-what-s/821889.html nobody has come out and confirmed it but nobody has denied it either... could be because they said it, but more likely it's that they don't bother publicly denying every made up thing on the internet about them.

 

[VMax-Mike]

If or when big money want our guns our guns will be gone. It wont happen over night and if you dont have alot of ammo stocked your gun will do you no good if you dont have ammo on the shelf to buy. Or money to buy it with. Guns dont kill people. People kill people and people dont need a gun to kill. If we piss big money off bad enough about gun control we will just get hit hard in the wallet in other ways. Not that im saying big money wants our guns. Im just saying alot of people in the usa think that big money is going to let them call the shots with the money. Open your eye's and ear's people. Make sure you enjoy your life everyday you can while you still can. Big money has been around the world for a long time and i dont think big money will be going away for a long time......http://churchillcrash1929.wordpress.com/ You might want to read this and think about how we fit in the world of money.

 

[VMax-Mike]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System

 

[VMax-Mike]

DONT KNOW HOW TRUE THE 2ND VIDIO IS BUT I WOULD SAY IT HELP OPEN MY EYE'S AND EAR'S AND IM JUST A SMALL PART OF THE BIG PICTURE. BUT I CAN STILL ENJOY MY LIFE EVERYDAY AND THAT IS WHAT I WILL BE DOING. http://truedemocracyparty.net/2011/09/rothschilds-exposed-500-tril/

 

[Sonoran6]

Obama doesn't really give a **** about gun control. Even after that movie theater shooting when The Dark Knight Rises came out the only statement he made was pretty much 'we should probably enforce the laws we already have'. There have been no statements regarding new legislation, bans, or anything else to get excited about. You guys seriously can relax about this.

The U.N. General Assembly's disarmament committee moved quickly after Obama's win to approve a resolution calling for a new round of talks March 18-28. It passed with 157 votes in favor, none against and 18 abstentions.
The main reason the arms trade talks are taking place at all is that the United States - the world's biggest arms trader accounting for more than 40 percent of global conventional arms transfers - reversed U.S. policy on the issue after Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.

 

[ZackDaniels]

It's not uncommon for international orgs to wait on decisions if there is an election looming. Iran is getting squeezed hard by trade sanctions in hopes that they'll meet up and agree to ending their nuclear program. They're not going to bother to schedule as much as a discussion until after the US election concluded and the upcoming (Jan 2013) Israeli elections conclude.

It's not that they're waiting for somebody who's sympathetic, it's that they're waiting to know who they're going to be talking to.

Would you bother scheduling discussions with a leader who might be gone before anything can come of them?

The treaty itself has been discussed already... so far we've got that it's likely to raise the costs of ammo imported from other countries. That would be a byproduct of the additional cost of oversight and regulation to be sure illegal arms are not moving across borders. The treaty is not about disarming American citizens in any way, shape, or form. Even if it were and we agreed to it, we wouldn't be able to comply with it without first changing the 2nd amendment. There's no 'loophole' in the UN that circumvents US law. Regardless of what we agree to internationally if it involves things on our soil we need domestic laws changed to honor our agreement, and that process is still the same regardless of purpose.

 

[srk468]

It's not uncommon for international orgs to wait on decisions if there is an election looming. Iran is getting squeezed hard by trade sanctions in hopes that they'll meet up and agree to ending their nuclear program. They're not going to bother to schedule as much as a discussion until after the US election concluded and the upcoming (Jan 2013) Israeli elections conclude.

It's not that they're waiting for somebody who's sympathetic, it's that they're waiting to know who they're going to be talking to.

Would you bother scheduling discussions with a leader who might be gone before anything can come of them?

The treaty itself has been discussed already... so far we've got that it's likely to raise the costs of ammo imported from other countries. That would be a byproduct of the additional cost of oversight and regulation to be sure illegal arms are not moving across borders. The treaty is not about disarming American citizens in any way, shape, or form. Even if it were and we agreed to it, we wouldn't be able to comply with it without first changing the 2nd amendment. There's no 'loophole' in the UN that circumvents US law. Regardless of what we agree to internationally if it involves things on our soil we need domestic laws changed to honor our agreement, and that process is still the same regardless of purpose.

Your obviously very intelligent Zack but your putting entirely too much faith in the rule of law... I never would have dreamed I could be fined and imprisoned for not carrying health insurance and having no way to opt out... I'm not saying that to start another debate about healthcare but rather to make a point, the constitution only really seems to matter when they can try to twist its words to suite their needs...

Sent from my HTC Rezound using Tapatalk 2

 

[Sonoran6]

^+1

 

[Rollie]

[QUOTE=ZackDaniels;284984]It's not uncommon for international orgs to wait on decisions if there is an election looming. Iran is getting squeezed hard by trade sanctions in hopes that they'll meet up and agree to ending their nuclear program. They're not going to bother to schedule as much as a discussion until after the US election concluded and the upcoming (Jan 2013) Israeli elections conclude.

Who's to say Bos little overheard conversation with the Russian regarding his " flexibility after the elections " doesn't mean he's willing to let Iran have the nuclear juice if they ' promise " not to pursue it in public ?

It's not that they're waiting for somebody who's sympathetic, it's that they're waiting to know who they're going to be talking to.


Since when , except Reagan , does it matter who they lie to about anything that suits their purpose ? It's Muslim religion that lying to the infidels is correct and should be pursued as well as backing jhad & terrorism all over the globe .

Would you bother scheduling discussions with a leader who might be gone before anything can come of them?

See last response.

The treaty itself has been discussed already... so far we've got that it's likely to raise the costs of ammo imported from other countries. That would be a byproduct of the additional cost of oversight and regulation to be sure illegal arms are not moving across borders. The treaty is not about disarming American citizens in any way, shape, or form. Even if it were and we agreed to it, we wouldn't be able to comply with it without first changing the 2nd amendment. There's no 'loophole' in the UN that circumvents US law. Regardless of what we agree to internationally if it involves things on our soil we need domestic laws changed to honor our agreement, and that process is still the same regardless of purpose.[/QUOTE]

Sure , I trust the U.N. They've been looking out for our best interests for what now , 30 years ?

Healthcare control by the state = Power over the people = Socialism
Gun control by the state = Power over the people = Socialism
Free entitlements to 1/2 the voters = Power over the people = Socialism
Tax / Penalize the rich = Class warfare - Chaos = Communism

 

[Rollie]

Here's a projection for you ref: Bo , the U.N. and his " non interest " in your firearms.

KNOX GUN-RIGHTS REPORT
OBAMA, THE U.N. AND OUR FIREARMS
Jeff Knox paints a scenario that could see Democratic Senate OK global treaty



Jeff Knox is a second-generation political activist and director of The Firearms Coalition. His writing can regularly be seen in Shotgun News and Front Sight magazines as well as on WND.

I’m still reeling with dismay and confusion. How could so many of my fellow Americans choose to re-elect someone who has proven to be totally unqualified for the job, if not downright destructive? It is unfathomable to me. I could offer up a litany of reasons why their choice was such a mistake, but most of you reading this know them all too well.

Even so, I’m still catching flak from some of our hard-line rights supporters for encouraging people to vote for Romney. They insist that since he has taken anti-rights positions in the past, I should have declared a pox on both leading parties and gone Libertarian or some other third party. As I said before the election, this presidential race boiled down to two choices: do something to help Obama get re-elected, or do something to keep Obama from being re-elected. While there were several ways to do the first, the only way to effectively do the second was to cast a vote for Romney, and encourage others to do the same – anything else helped Obama.



So now we’re stuck with Obama for another four years, and somewhere around 11 p.m. Tuesady night, most of us began wondering what that will really mean. What’s next? Those of us concerned about gun-owner rights didn’t have to wait long for that question to begin to be answered. First thing Wednesday morning the United Nations, with U.S. encouragement, decided to reopen discussions on an international arms trade treaty. The treaty talks were derailed in July when the U.S. and several other countries requested more time to work on it.

Many believed that move was politically motivated, with Obama not wanting a high-profile vote in favor of gun restrictions on his record just before the election. New treaty talks are scheduled for late March.

While the treaty was originally supposed to deal only with establishing export and reporting standards for military arms – basically modeled after current U.S. laws – talks quickly shifted focus from military weapons to include common civilian arms and ammunition. If ratified, the treaty could require the U.S. to implement a variety of domestic firearms restrictions and record-keeping requirements. During the Bush administration, attempts to develop the treaty were stymied by Ambassador John Bolton, but shortly after taking office, Obama, through Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, announced that the U.S. supported treaty talks going forward. Now that there are no re-election concerns, there is a danger that U.S. support will tip the scales for adoption of a far-reaching version of the treaty.

That would set the stage for a ratification battle in the U.S. Senate. Ratification requires passage by a two-thirds majority of the senators present. If ratification were successful, it would doubtlessly trigger a court battle over supremacy between the treaty and the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protection of citizens’ firearm rights. Most legal scholars say such a treaty could not override the constitutional protections, but whether it could be enforced would be decided by the nine justices of the Supreme Court, not most legal scholars. By the time this treaty is ratified, Barack Obama could have replaced as many as three Supreme Court justices and completely shifted the Court’s majority philosophy.

The high bar set for passage in the Senate makes many confident that this treaty could never pass, but treaties are handled differently than regular legislation, and the bar isn’t quite as high as it seems.

Once a treaty is agreed to in principle, it is signed by the president or his designee and then sent to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, currently chaired by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. From there, the committee can send it to Harry Reid for presentation to the full Senate. If supporters of the treaty don’t think they can garner the political support needed for passage, Obama, Kerry, or Reid can simply set it aside and wait to send it forward when they have the support. Treaties, unlike regular legislation, don’t die at the end of a session of Congress. They remain “pending” until the Senate votes one way or the other, so supporters of a treaty can bide their time and only move it forward when all conditions favor passage. It is also important to note that unlike other Senate procedures requiring a two-thirds vote of the full Senate (67 votes), treaty approval requires a two-thirds vote of only the senators present.

Obama and his allies could hold onto the treaty in hopes of Democratic wins in the 2014 Senate elections, and then run it through at 3 in the morning on Christmas Eve when two-thirds of the senators present happen to support it. With the advent of a new “Obama Court,” both the method of passage in the Senate and the provisions of the treaty could be expected to receive a SCOTUS rubber stamp of approval.

While such a scenario seems far-fetched, one only need remember the chicanery surrounding passage of Obamacare to realize that far-fetched is the new normal in Washington.

Republicans must work across the aisle to find solutions for the nation’s troubled economy and to ensure security from foreign threats, but all of our representatives in Washington must stand resolutely against further encroachment of the Constitution – and the confirmation of judges and justices who would defend such encroachment. Politicians need to be reminded that they took an oath to defend the Constitution, not to obey their party bosses.

 

[Rollie]

Be Prepared :


?A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.? - Proverbs 22: 3

WHEN THE LIGHTS GO OUT
by " The Coming Attack " Enoch

The soldiers of the global communist conspiracy are on the march. There is tension in the air, a static type of electricity pregnant with meaning to those who can see the malevolent forces lurking beneath the surface.
Some would say this is the most dangerous time in the history of mankind. Over 7 billion people populate the Earth. Technological advances allow for mass brainwashing on a level never before seen in human existence. Psychotic delusion is reaching stratospheric levels.
The few clearheaded patriots in America correctly discern that the nation is teetering on the precipice, gazing out into the abyss beneath us. All it takes is one careful nudge by the appropriate dark forces. All that matters is when.
The United States in late 2012 is not dying, it is dead. It is not going bankrupt, it is insolvent. Two economic prophets in particular have been predicting a devastating crash for years. The fiercely independent financial prognosticator Peter Schiff authored a book entitled ?The Real Crash?, arguing that it is only a matter of time before America undergoes a catastrophic economic Great Depression. Schiff argues persuasively that the recent economic history of the U.S. has been one of the government creating bubbles which subsequently crash and burn.
We are on the last bubble, according to Schiff. The debt bubble. The government currency bubble. This is truly the final stage for any nation, when it is so badly in debt that it?s terrified of balancing its budget and resorts to either destroying its currency or being forced into bankruptcy by its creditors.
Another powerful warning has been sounded by capital markets trader Karl Denninger. Author of Leverage and columnist at The Market Ticker, he writes that the U.S. will soon experience as much as a 40% reduction in GDP growth, 4X the Great Depression. Denninger argues that the economic forces combining to create a perfect storm of destruction have been slowly building in scope for over 30 years.
Once the average American understands just how long these destructive forces have been building, they get that much closer to understanding the terrible judgment hovering over the United States. We have been the children of good fortune. We were pampered, coddled, and spoiled for decades upon decades. And now it is time to pay the piper.
And behind it all lurks the depravity and evil of the communists, corroding the foundations of human civilization, reveling in the creation of new underclasses steeped in suffocating poverty, eradicating morality and virtue in their maniacal dash towards the New Global Hell.
The news from Russia comes with breathtaking speed and devastation nowadays. We hear of bases in Cuba and Vietnam, mobile nuclear missiles stationed in Cuba, attack submarines sitting off our coastline completely undetected for weeks. 20,000 Spetznaz forces, the elite of the elite, have reportedly already infiltrated America?s borders and are patiently awaiting the signal, according to TruNews publisher Rick Wiles, in preparation for a Russian/Chinese attack.


Illumination can be found in Spetznaz, the undisputed authority on the Soviet special forces, written by former GRU officer Viktor Suvorov:
?The overture is a series of large and small operations the purpose of which is, before actual military operations begin, to weaken the enemy?s morale, create an atmosphere of general suspicion, fear and uncertainty, and divert the attention of the enemy?s armies and police forces to a huge number of different targets, each of which may be the object of the next attack.? ? Spetznaz
The overture is the stage at the beginning of the Third World War. Spetznaz forces are primarily used during this stage of the coming attack, in addition to ?mercenaries?, known to Westerners as Islamic terrorists:
?The overture is carried by agents of the secret services of the Soviet satellite countries and by mercenaries recruited by intermediaries. The principal method employed at this stage is ?grey terror?, that is, a kind of terror which is not conducted in the name of the Soviet Union. The Soviet secret services do not at this stage leave their visiting cards, or leave other people?s cards. The terror is carried out in the name of already existing extremist groups not connected in any way with the Soviet Union, or in the name of fictitious organisations.? ? Spetznaz

The Soviet strategists have been patiently biding their time and building up their military forces. The fool who sneers that ?the Cold War is over? would be interested to know that the current President of the country is a former operative of the very same institution that ruled the country with bloody brutality during its most heinous years: the KGB.
The names may have changed, they may stage elections like theater productions for gullible Western ?intellectuals?, but the main institutions and players have never changed.
Contrary to what the clinically psychotic in America believe, U.S. Presidents before Obama have never committed ?false flag? attacks against their own nation. The same cannot be said about Russia and the depraved psychotics that rule it with brutal force. The highly respected KGB defector Alexander Litvinenko stated this truth to the world, before he was hunted down and poisoned in Britain.
In Blowing Up Russia, Litvinenko stated that the FSB, the current incarnation of the KGB, intentionally destroyed Russian apartment complexes and intentionally murdered their own citizens as a false pretense for waging war against Chechnya and passing anti-civil liberties laws.
The premeditated evil that the FSB committed within Russia is the exact same model of propaganda that was disseminated throughout the U.S. by the Russians after 9/11. It was classic projection, but also a pre-emptive strike designed to neutralize the future criticism that will be leveled towards the Obama administration should they move in the direction anticipated. Even at this late stage in 2012, we hear constant reports of planned false flag attacks being planned by the hardcore communists in the White House, spanning the spectrum from the fringe to the mainstream. Clearly something is occurring in America. Even the formerly ?moderate? are realizing that something has gone horribly wrong in their country.
But the vast majority of Americans are still fast asleep. They are brainwashed, neurotic, and addicted. The communists wish for them to remain that way until they are no longer necessary, until they no longer pose a threat to their designs. Let the games continue. Let the immorality roll on. Continue with the pro-drug propaganda in films, songs, and the intelligentsia.
There will soon be a time in America when the lights go out. There is swiftly approaching a moment where the brainwashed Americans will have outlived their usefulness, when all their money has been stolen by the communists, their guns have been confiscated, their liberties destroyed. There is a Damocles sword of economic death and destruction hovering over the sleeping citizenry. Beyond these fragile walls, the hordes sharpen their knives and prepare for the assault.
When the economic crash occurs, the cities will burn with a fervent intensity. Woe to those who have not prepared oil for their lamps, to those who did not foresee the evil approaching. When the food runs out, when the electricity stops, when civil society breaks down, understand that this moment has been in the making for a lifetime. When gangs rule the streets, when the tanks roll in, when the communists begin their ascent to power, you must be prepared and knowledgeable of the facts. You must be armed with the correct construct within which you can place these seemingly disparate actions.
When the lights go out, when the party stops, everything changes. When the violence begins, when the cities riot, the mass population becomes more pliant, more fearful. The entire paradigms of hundreds of millions of people will change overnight to one of simple survival. When the chaos escalates and evil ascends, there will be a great spiritual awakening. But it is in the midst of chaos, fear, and bloodshed that communists have historically made their greatest gains, and every action of theirs will be calculated to play the Economic Crash card to its greatest power efficiency. Their advantage will be that they have known for years what is coming, and have laid their plans accordingly.
The global communist forces and their agent Obama are all aware of the approaching crisis. The Department of Homeland Security sounds as if it is becoming Obama?s personal security service with each passing day. They have certainly not been idle. They are clearly preparing for something, as evidenced by their recent purchases of hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point ammunition.
The average American citizen will need a personal supply of food, water, currency, and protection in order to even have a chance at surviving the coming anarchy. They must connect with likeminded people, but simultaneously be aware of government-paid, communist infiltrators whose mission it is to gain anti-communists? trust and subsequently betray them. The cities are the worst places to be. Some are even leaving the country. Regardless of how the common man reacts, if they refuse to heed the multiple warnings and signs, they will have nobody to blame when the day of reckoning ultimately arrives.

 

[ZackDaniels]

Your obviously very intelligent Zack but your putting entirely too much faith in the rule of law... I never would have dreamed I could be fined and imprisoned for not carrying health insurance and having no way to opt out... I'm not saying that to start another debate about healthcare but rather to make a point, the constitution only really seems to matter when they can try to twist its words to suite their needs...

Sent from my HTC Rezound using Tapatalk 2

Regardless of what you feel about the healthcare bill it had to:

Get written and proposed in the House of Representatives in November 2009 as the Patient Affordable Care Act.

Get adjusted and passed back to the House by the Senate in December 2009.

Adjusted and become the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Actthen passed by the house in March 21, 2010 and passed back to the Senate.

Passed by the Senate on March 25, 2010.

Signed into law by the President on March 30, 2010.

Upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional on June, 28, 2012.

Won't go into effect to significant degree until 2014, and won't go into full effect until 2020. There's room along the way for provisions that don't work out so well to be adjusted before they're even effective.

Anything else is subject to this same very public process, regardless of it being purposed for a UN treaty or not. Getting excited about scheduling a UN discussion that involves weapons is premature at the least.

Muslim religion that lying to the infidels is correct/communist takeover/Socialism

If you still believe Obama is a secret Muslim, and that there is a pending communist takeover... well by all means feel free to believe there's some secret initiative to take away guns too. I have no argument for why that should be taken off the table if that's the context it's in. All I can say is I hope you're pleasantly surprised in 4 years when none of this stuff happens. I can't fault you for being prepared I guess.

 

[srk468]

Regardless of what you feel about the healthcare bill it had to:

Get written and proposed in the House of Representatives in November 2009 as the Patient Affordable Care Act.

Get adjusted and passed back to the House by the Senate in December 2009.

Adjusted and become the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Actthen passed by the house in March 21, 2010 and passed back to the Senate.

Passed by the Senate on March 25, 2010.

Signed into law by the President on March 30, 2010.

Upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional on June, 28, 2012.

Won't go into effect to significant degree until 2014, and won't go into full effect until 2020. There's room along the way for provisions that don't work out so well to be adjusted before they're even effective.

Anything else is subject to this same very public process, regardless of it being purposed for a UN treaty or not. Getting excited about scheduling a UN discussion that involves weapons is premature at the least.

You just reinforced my point, the government in it's entirety is completely corrupt and forgotten what true liberty means.. It's been heading this way for quite a while now (waaay before Obama) and Obama isn't the source but he is throwing gas onto a firebomb that's about to explode anyway.. I could honestly give two ***** what religion a president has or if he's getting a ******* under his desk as long as he's doing his job protecting our borders (OUR borders, NOT being the policemen of the world!!) and even more importantly our constitution.. The problem isn't Obama per say, it's the entire corrupt government and truth be told 80% of these *******s would be drug out and shot on the white house lawn by ANY of our forefathers...

 

[ZackDaniels]

Fair enough, my point with all that was really this though:

Getting excited about scheduling a UN discussion that involves weapons is premature at the least.

Keep an eye on it if it's an interest to you, but it doesn't suggest an agenda and it doesn't circumvent the typical process which is very public.

Personally I don't see the Supreme Court upholding anything that's straight up against an amendment. They would have to first change the amendment like they do from time to time (see: the addition and removal of prohibition). The NRA and others would be allllll over this and it would be extremely public and hotly contested. It would require a serious amount of political drive to get it done, and there's nobody in this administration with that sort of passion regarding gun control.

 

[Klatuu]

It's ok fellas really. The economy is recovering and will recover nicely over the next 4.

Health care has it's problems but it's moving along at least. It doesn't even go into large effect until 2014 and it's pending a lot of adjustments before then. Mark my words you will actually save money as a result of Obamacare.

That's a load off, thanks. Call up some of these folks and get the to share in your revelry:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/how...gs-or-lay-offs-since-obama-won-a-second-term/

Insurance premiums are already up across the board since Obamacare was passed, and it hasn't even taken full effect.

 

[ZackDaniels]

A lot of those companies have been getting their ***** kicked for years and years and shedding jobs is nothing new or the result of politics.

The biggest factor behind businesses hiring and firing is decidedly not whether labor is cheap or expensive, it's whether that labor is necessary to create products to be sold to willing customers. If businesses are selling all of the products which they are currently creating, but couldn't sell any more products than what they're already making, then they're not going to hire more people. If those businesses are selling all of the products they can produce, they're also not incentivized to cut labor, because less labor means less output means less income.

Consumer demand, and a surplus or lack thereof, is pretty much the single most important driver of whether firms are hiring or firing. Consumer demand is still the single biggest problem with the economy as it stands, and smart businesses are going to let consumer demand drive their decision instead of issues on the margins like health care costs. The only employment change you may see as a direct result of Obamacare are some full time positions becoming part time or hourly positions getting reduced to 30 hours per week so the employer can skirt around having to provide healthcare. This will only apply to employers that currently don't provide health care, and can't afford to now that it's being required of them to.

Healthcare premiums go up every single year, the question has never been if they go up... it's how much will they go up. That's a big part of the problem and a big part of why household wages have been stagnant (when figuring for inflation) for the last 50 years despite the average household now having 2 incomes instead of 1. They've never gone down, even if you adjust for inflation into the rates they still increase every single year. This is part of what Obamacare aims to change by making the insurance pool much larger. The result of a bigger insurance pool is cheaper premiums, and this is why in the long run Obamacare will save you money. People having more money means they buy more things which means consumer demand increases which means employment increases.

 

[Klatuu]

I'm a self-employed accountant. My wife is a programmer with a company that employs 10,000+. We use the health plan from her firm. It's better than most. I've tracked the rate of increase in premiums for the last 12 years. The last 2 years have seen that rate of increase jump 20% for this year, and 30% fo next year. In addition, the co-pays are almost double, and now we required to get physicals ever year instead of every 2.

Until the cost drivers of healthcare are addressed, and they are not under Obamacare, all we've done is shifted the cost of some people's healthcare to other people, at the point of a gun.

I am mystified that there are people in the world that actually believe that a process can be made cheaper by adding multiple levels of government bureaucracy. That paradigm is antithetical to logic and reason, and the only real explanation I can see for holding that idea in one's head is an unreasoning blind faith in identical to the one held by religious zealots.

"Have you ever noticed how statists are constantly "reforming" their own handiwork? Education reform. Health-care reform. Welfare reform. Tax reform. The very fact that they're always busy "reforming" is an implicit admission that they didn't get it right the first 50 times. "– Lawrence W. Reed, economist

 

[ZackDaniels]

I am a programmer and I used to work for a company that merged gap insurance providers with big time providers to offer a dual insurance package to employers at a cheaper rate than a single provider. The concept was simple: a cheap plan with low coverage (10k max for the year) + a cheap plan with high coverage but high deductibles (10k out of pocket before they paid anything). When you gave our card at your doctors office or hospital we would act as a middle man to be sure the correct insurance company was billed while the other was notified of the billing.

The first 10k of your medical expense for the year was covered by Joe Bob insurance while a big player like Blue Cross was notified of the bill and that they didn't have to cover it, but it did add to your out of pocket. The next $1 of your expense was covered by the big player as Joe Bob had been tapped out but since you had met your deductible for the year the bigger policy was in effect. Buying 2 policies like this was cheaper than buying 1 all inclusive policy from a single insurance company.

We had roughly 50 small businesses with us and I watched every year as those rates went up no matter what for all 50, even with those that didn't make any claims. It was not uncommon to see rates for a business that had a lot of claims go up over 100% from one year to the next. The biggest difference there was the pool size and claims-to-premium ratio.

My time at that company (and ultimately the reason I quit) taught me 1 thing. On the whole, nobody understands health insurance. The patients would give their long expired old card instead of ours alllll the time, and we wouldn't be notified of the claim and be able to work our magic. They would go to ER for head colds because... well I still don't know why people do that. The providers would constantly bill simple visits with the wrong procedure codes which would cause visits to fall outside the scope of insurance. The insurers would constantly refuse to cover ops that were coded correctly and should have been covered. Hospitals especially were a train wreck because from a single hospital visit there would be 6 different bills as each doc ran their own billing instead of using the hospitals billing system. When I worked there if I wasn't literally yelling to myself on my way home about how ****** up something or somebody was that day it was a good day. Friends and family took note that I was a totally different person when I was with that company because I couldn't leave the office ******** at the office.

The entire industry top to bottom is completely retarded. A bigger insurance pool won't fix that, you're absolutely right. It does remove one variable from the cost equation though, and as to the added government paper work... this is one industry that is so absolutely backwards and loaded with it's own red tape that government involvement has a real chance to streamline it. It can't possibly get any worse.


:edit:
Summary for those that don't want to read all that. As a former employee of the medical insurance industry that was tasked with making heads or tails of claims, policies, and attempting to make it all cheaper and sensible... I am telling you that fed insurance can't possibly hurt. Health costs will never go down if the current system stays as-is. I'm the first to admit that Obamacare is far from perfect in fixing it, but it has forced the national conversation and efforts to reform to get started, and that is a very very good thing for every single American. Rich/poor, black/white, gay/straight... everybody needs this to get fixed and the talking heads on the TV that say otherwise haven't the first clue what they're talking about.

 

[VMax-Mike]

I say go shoot your guns and enjoy them while you still can. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvpjM0rkAu4&feature=related

 

[ZackDaniels]

I haven't worked for that company in almost 10 years... and yet thinking about this topic and making that post has me all worked up now :rofl_200:

I'm going to elaborate further on health care as it works pre-Obamacare in America. If you're not interested I apologize and ask you just keep scrolling. If you're interested in why your health care costs have gone up every year in your lifetime read on here's a small part of why.

Part 1 : Specific companies can get suddenly hammered with huge rate increases.

I've tracked the rate of increase in premiums for the last 12 years. The last 2 years have seen that rate of increase jump 20% for this year, and 30% fo next year. In addition, the co-pays are almost double, and now we required to get physicals ever year instead of every 2.

Identical to how your car insurance goes up dramatically after you make a claim medical insurance is the same. You can see a small increase 1 relatively dormant year, and a huge increase after an accident, DUI, etc. The cost of the insurance is based on complicated formulas involving risk of the insurance company needing to pay out + the need to re-coupe costs if they did have to pay out. The same way odds for gambling can be 10:1 payouts etc.

The difference is that the amount of money a car insurance company has to pay out is relatively static. The average cost of a car on the road goes up a little every year but not anymore than anything else. 10 years ago you could get a cheap car for 10k and now you can get one for 12k. It costs more but not dramatically. Thus the car insurance stays roughly the same because the cost of replacing that car is about the same. The cost of paying out for a 10 car pile-up isn't a great deal more than it was years ago. The baseline for 'best case' and 'worst case' from the insurance companies perspective doesn't need to be aggressively evaluated every year.

Compared to group insurance where you have for the sake of simplicity 1000 employees (qualifying for large group insurance). You can't evaluate the collective risk of 1000 people the same way you do a household for auto insurance. There's entirely too much data and room for unexpected costs. The baseline isn't the cost of a car but it's rough demographics of the employees of that company (age/sex/ethnicity and average medical care uses for those demographics) averaged into the expected cost + recouping costs if they used it. So if the demographics suggest low risk, but ultimately that group of 1000 people ended up being higher than expected, the cost of insurance for that company can go up 50%-300% because they used the insurance a lot.

That's not to say a year-over-year analysis is a bad one. Just recognize that it's incomplete and impossible to draw a solid conclusion on 'why'. Going back to the car insurance, and if you see for 2 years in a row car insurance spiked but can't look at the number of claims made on the policy or anything other than the end result of a rate increase... it's impossible to definitively say why. It can be ObamAutocare increased the risk or it could be that there was a DUI and that increased the risk. There are a couple things employers can do when the cost increases. As with auto insurance when rates spike you can take a class (medical parallel: physicals and employer sponsored weight-loss and/or wellness programs) or get cheaper liability only insurance (medical parallel: higher co-pays, deductibles, lower maximum coverage limits). Though since risk is higher even with the crappier insurance the cost may still be higher than what you used to pay for the good stuff. That's the risk calc of insurance of all varieties, and in states where there is no mandatory auto-insurance you can be outright dropped from all policy levels regardless of coverage. It's a virtual guarantee that any coverage would result in a loss for the insurance company due to your risk and nobody will sell you any policy (medical parallel: preexisting conditions).

Part 2 : All medical insurance rates increase every single year regardless of risk.
Now that's why rates can go up in a big way for a specific group of people to insure. Why does it go up every year for groups that haven't made any claim at all?

Well unlike cars medical costs are anything but static. The overall cost of medical care increases well above inflation every single year. Thus the cost of your medical insurance increases well above any 'cost of living' raise you may or may not be getting. Next year you will have to pay more for health insurance, have less coverage, or no insurance. That's a 100% guarantee in our current health care system. Next year you may or may not make more money to make up the difference of that alone, and aside from that everything else gets a little more expensive too. The net result, next year your buying power will be less than it is this year, and the year after that, and the year after that.

Why does it go up? There are 100 different correct answers to this question. Research and development for advanced care is cited all the time, and that's true, but it's not the only and probably not even the biggest reason. R&D exists in every other industry and it doesn't raise the cost anywhere close to health care. Even in other cutting edge and high cost industries.

Since we're talking insurance I'll focus on some of the reasons it goes up based only on the current insurance system.

The patients would give their long expired old card instead of ours alllll the time, and we wouldn't be notified of the claim and be able to work our magic.

People giving improper proof of insurance doesn't get sorted out for days, weeks, and sometimes months. In the meantime the bills for their care don't get paid and the service provider is holding the bag. The docs that did the work still need to get paid regardless, and the org won't have the money to pay them for a lot longer because they're working it out with the patient and incorrect/correct insurance company or companies.

Result : the org has to build in overhead in all their services to cover their own expenses while they wait to get paid. Medical care cost increases.

They would go to ER for head colds because... well I still don't know why people do that.

For the identical service a doctors office bill : $100, and an ER bill $1000. This is the equivalent to comparing your neighborhood friendly mechanic to a dealership for service charges. The work is the same, but the cost is off the charts.

The insurance companies are on the hook to cover this anyway.
Result: Cost of insurance goes up to cover more ER care than necessary. Medical insurance cost increases.

The providers would constantly bill simple visits with the wrong procedure codes which would cause visits to fall outside the scope of insurance.

The care provider doesn't get paid until this is worked out, re-billed, and re-submitted. Sometimes they don't agree with how it should be coded and this can take months.

Result: More overhead built-in to all billing to cover this. Cost of medical care goes up. If the care provider wins and something is successfully billed at higher than it should have been well... cost of medical insurance goes up too.

The insurers would constantly refuse to cover ops that were coded correctly and should have been covered.

The same side with same results except it's the insurance company screwing the care provider instead of the other way around.

Hospitals especially were a train wreck because from a single hospital visit there would be 6 different bills as each doc ran their own billing instead of using the hospitals billing system.

A lot of docs are not full time hospital employees. They're independent contractors that have a business relationship with the hospital for customers. A hospital may not do enough surgery to justify a full time specialist surgeon, anesthesiologist, etc. They're brought in when needed and scheduled and they all run their own billing out of their own offices. They don't just bill their work to the hospital though like it works in most other industries... they bill the customer directly. They all need to build in their overhead for non-payment and delayed payments as well.

The entire industry top to bottom is completely retarded.

That's how it works bros. I'm only giving a small insight to the inefficiencies I have personally seen. All of this drives cost up, and none of it results in better care, meds, or equipment. It's unparalleled in any other industry and if you take a look at any hospital bills you have personally received you can plainly see it with your own eyes. That's if you're aggressive as hell and ask for a broken out bill they absolutely don't want to (and sometimes can't even) give you.

The $200 band aid you and your insurance company are already paying for is covering uninsured, irresponsible, and businesses shafting each other for cost. You personally are already covering those costs and you're doing it in what might be the most inefficient and therefore expensive way imaginable.

I am mystified that there are people in the world that actually believe that a process can be made cheaper by adding multiple levels of government bureaucracy. That paradigm is antithetical to logic and reason.

Are you seeing where there is some room for government regulation and standards yet? I 100% agree with you that adding layers of government to 9/10 things and expecting it to come out cheaper overall is borderline insanity. The exception I openly make for healthcare is because the current system is already insane.