Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2013
So... folks... let me just throw something out about ObamaCare:
Mary (my beloved bride) works for a small professional firm.
Mary's firm provides ACCESS to their small-group plan, but the total financial contribution they make to each employee's "employer provided" insurance is $150/mo.
OUR CASH PREMIUM... OUR OUT OF POCKET PREMIUM... $1,327/mo.
And again... this is with lousy vision coverage and NO DENTAL COVERAGE whatsoever.
This is for two adults in pretty good physical condition!
So... about ObamaCare...
Mary's firm has an insurance broker. He does "insurance shopping" for the firm. Each year he provides the firm and its employees with their options.
Although the firm's current insurance contract doesn't expire until this coming summer, the firm's broker has already done the legwork researching ObamaCare.
For Mary and I... we'd have a choice of three plans here in New York. Two of these plans don't include our doctors.
Costs? Turns out we'd "win the battle but lose the war" if we were to sign up with ObamaCare.
Mary tells me that according to the broker... we'd save a few hundred bucks a year... A YEAR... if we were to join one of the plans. (I believe this includes all three plans... including the one plan offered that would allow us to retain most of our present doctors.)
HOWEVER...
By switching from a small business group plan to an ObamaCare Exchange we'd LOSE our cafeteria plan and the tax benefit of being able to use "pre-tax" dollars to pay our premiums!
THEREFORE...
We'd actually end up PAYING MORE OUT OF POCKET for ObamaCare than for what we have now!
Nice, huh...?
Not that I want to be subsidized... but where's my $2,500. in savings Obama and the Democrats promised Mary and I?
Why is it that we WOULD be forced to get new doctors if we were to sign up for either of the two (of three) ObamaCare Exchange choices which don't have our doctors "on the payroll?"
Back to the subsidies...
I'm serious! I wouldn't want a subsidy! While what Mary and I pay is truly outrageous, having other taxpayers subsidize the outrageousness wouldn't make the outrage any less - all it would do is further rob Peter to pay Paul and all the while adding to the federal debt!
So who is getting these ObamaCare subsidies?
Are people who own houses getting them? WHY...?!?! Mary and I DON'T own a house and yet I have no doubt our tax dollars will be funding ObamaCare subsidies to people who do own their own homes. How is that fair...???
We had one child because we knew we could AFFORD to raise one child responsibly. Does anyone reading this have ANY doubt that parents who make MORE MONEY than Mary and I and who own their own homes yet have three children or four or five children will get subsidized health insurance which Mary and I will involuntarily subsidize via our tax dollars and ObamaCare premiums...?!?!
Folks... forget for a moment the disasters which have been in the news concerning ObamaCare... just switch to looking at the bigger picture! Even if the website worked... even if the website was secure and trustworthy... how is it that I'm supposed to be grateful for ObamaCare?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
http://www.people-press.org/2013/12/03/public-sees-u-s-power-declining-as-support-for-global-engagement-slips/
Growing numbers of Americans believe that U.S. global power and prestige are in decline.
* WOW... IMAGINE THAT...
(*SNORT*)
The survey of the general public, conducted Oct. 30-Nov. 6 among 2,003 adults, finds that views of U.S. global importance and power have passed a key milestone. For the first time in surveys dating back nearly 40 years, a majority (53%) says the United States plays a less important and powerful role as a world leader than it did a decade ago.
The share saying the U.S. is less powerful has increased 12 points since 2009 and has more than doubled – from just 20% – since 2004.
* AS ALWAYS... FOR EVERY BUSH FUCK-UP YOU HAVE OBAMA DOUBLING DOWN... MAKING THINGS WORSE!
An even larger majority says the U.S. is losing respect internationally. Fully 70% say the United States is less respected than in the past, which nearly matches the level reached late in former President George W. Bush’s second term (71% in May 2008).
* YES... BUT WE'RE NOW FIVE AND A HALF YEARS PAST MAY 2008! (NICE TRY, PEW; BUT NO CIGAR.)
Early last year, fewer Americans (56%) thought that the U.S. had become less respected globally.
* AGAIN... "LESS RESPECTED THAN..." THE NUMBER WAS 56% LAST YEAR. WE'RE NOW TALKING THE LACK OF RESPECT FROM THE BUSH ERA EXPANDING IN THE OBAMA ERA!
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/10982920-more-americans-disability-people-greece
The total number of people in the United States now receiving federal disability benefits hit a record 10,982,920 in November, up from the previous record of 10,978,040 set in May, according to newly released data from the Social Security Administration.
The 10,982,920 Americans taking disability benefits in November outnumbered the total population of Greece, which is 10,772,967, according to the Central Intelligence Agency.
(*CLAP...CLAP...CLAP*)
The record 10,982,920 total disability beneficiaries in the United States in November also exceeded the total number of people in Portugal (10,799,270), Tunisia (10,835,873) and Burundi (10,888,321).
November was the 202nd straight month that the number of disabled workers in the United States increased. The last time the number decreased was January 1997.
* FOLKS... NO KUDOS TO BUSH! BUT IF YOU COMPARE THE BUSH TRAJECTORY TO PAST YEARS AND THEN MOVE TO EXAMINE THE AGE OF OBAMA... WE'RE TALKING EXPANSION BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS UNDER OBAMA! WE'RE TALKING DELIBERATE PADDING VIA DELIBERATELY LESSENED SAFEGUARDS AND ROADBLOCKS TO FRAUD. WE'VE COVERED THIS BEFORE!
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/12/03/felony-shrub-trimming-san-diego-man-criminally-charged-pruning-plants/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
The San Diego County District Attorney’s Office filed felony vandalism charges against 46-year-old Ocean Beach, California, resident Juvencio Adame for “defacement, damage and destruction” of public property in excess of $400.
Felony charges can result in significant prison time.
(*NOD*)
His “crime”? Trimming shrubbery next to his home.
What would possess Adame to do such a thing? Adame told neighbors that the overgrown shrubbery, which is technically on public land, became a haven for homeless people who slept under it and littered the area. Thus, he engaged in self-help — clearly not a malicious act.
To be sure, citizens pay to maintain public property, so it’s appropriate to fine those who damage it. But charging someone with a felony under these circumstances?
* INSANE!
The criminal law contains the harshest penalties that the state can impose upon citizens. Criminal sanctions should be reserved for those who do things that are morally blameworthy and that a reasonable person would recognize as a criminal act.
Adame’s conduct is not morally blameworthy, nor would a reasonable person in Adame’s position have realized that such a harmless act of beautification would subject him to criminal sanctions.
Sadly, it’s not unusual to see public-spirited citizens being threatened with criminal penalties. We wrote several months ago about Washington, D.C.’s “Phantom Planter,” who dared to make one of the city’s Metro stops more aesthetically pleasing. He, too, was threatened with fines and jail. Metro officials settled for destroying the flowers he had planted.
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
One of Adame’s neighbors, Glenn Goss, points out that Adame was, in effect, doing the city’s job: “Here’s somebody who’s going out of his way (to trim the trees). It’s not his job, it’s the city’s job. Then they do this ridiculous thing. It’s mind-boggling.”
(*NOD*)
Mind-boggling is right. Thankfully, officials eventually came to their senses, and the charges were dropped. But it’s important to emphasize that prosecuting people like Adame is not only a waste of taxpayers’ money—it’s an egregious misuse of the criminal law.
The felony charges never should have been brought in the first place.
* BUT THEY WERE... AND THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE SHOULDN'T BE IN POSITIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY... AT LEAST NOT WITHOUT RETRAINING AND A LEASH!
Post a Comment