Are you better off than you were four years ago?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    In response to miscricket's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    Listening to this idiot Sandra Fluke complaining about the cost of her contraceptives.

    I wear hearing aids have for the past 30 years, every 5 years or so I dole out of pocket for a new set, usually cost me in the neighborhood of 32-3500 bucks.

    Never once have I complained about how unfair life is. I just sucked it up and accepted it for what it was, figuring that I could be much worst off, I have my eyes and great health and consider myself to be extremely lucky.

    The only thing that saved me from accomplishing my education with a hearing loss was my appetite for reading.

    All I ever needed in life to succeed was a job. Wherever I worked I just worked as hard and as often as I could, whatever job I had.And developed a reputation of getting the job done.

    It has always led to better things. Sure there are those who need public assistence, I give a lot to charity.

    But what i see today are just too many gaming the system.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's sad that the health insurance you have..that you probably pay through the nose for with premiums offers you no coverage for the one medical condition you do have.

    I am not going to debate the birth control/preventative services portion of the ACA with you since I've already said everything I can say about it.

    I will say I see the increased coverage regulations as a good thing. When my son was younger, we had pretty bad health insurance but since it was the what the company offered there was no choice. We paid through the nose..at that time..almost $200 a week for the family plan..and it covered basically nothing. When my son had a health issue at 3 years old...I went into major debt paying for health expenses that weren't covered..all the while paying crazy premiums. Thankfully..I now have much better health coverage.

    Refusing to accept a situation that is blatantly unfair and weighed heavily in the advantage of a private insurance company isn't the same thing as expecting a handout..or gaming the system.  It's about making sure you are treated fairly and I am sad for you that you think you deserve to be treated unfairly by insurance companies.

    Trust me..I know what gaming the system looks like. I see people do it on a weekly basis in my line of work..and trust me when I say that when I can bag them and prove it..and get them kicked out of the system..it gives me a great deal of satisfaction.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I never once wrote that the healthcare system didn't need to be fixed.

    That isn't what Obamacare did. All it did was get 30 mil un-insured health insurance paid for by the US taxpayers.

    Healthcare costs need to be curbed, Obamacare has made things much worst.

    The Democrats can say they all want about the Republicans not having any ideas but anyone who followed the debate knows how untrue that is.

    The Republican suggested two ideas that could have brought costs down and were tossed out of the discussion because their ideas icompromised what the Democrats who had a majority in both houses wanted.

    And then they were demonized as the party of no ideas by Pelosi Reid and Obama.

    Two things could have brought down costs and still can if enacted.

    Tort reform and allowing insurance companies to offer policies country wide.

    The massive amount of insurance that in millions of dollars hospitals, clinics and physiciansare forced to carry to protect them against frivelous lawsuits are all passed on down to the patients and the general cost of healthcare.

    Allowing insurance companies to compete nationally will only bring down the cost of premiums.





     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    Furthermore if Obama had worked with the Republicans on healthcare and had incorporated tort reform and allowing insurance companies to offer across state lines I would probably be supporting him 2013.

    I felt he blew it. He had majorities in 2008-2009 he could have been the great unifier.

    He could have been a great president.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    I think the BDC was better four years ago.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    Wingnuts are too ideologically ignorant to admit to reality.

    It's sad really.

    Reality is hard  sometimes but it sure beats the wingnuts alternative of denial.

    Wingnuts are a party of Cleopatras.






    12 angry reds running out of smoke and mirrors.

    poor commie.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    In response to jackbu's comment:

    The stock market is better off and by a wide margin.  There will be a lot of gop members answering the polls as good little soldiers by saying Mitt is king. But when they go in and pull the lever, it will be in favor of Obama.

    Mitt seems to advocate war just like McCain did.  All the country club republicans can figure out how much war adds to the deficit.  They too will pull the lever in favor of obama.



    The stock market price, or more accurately, the price of each stock, is a reflection of its expected future earnings.

    Looks like the stock market is building in a Romney victory.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    In response to miscricket's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    Listening to this idiot Sandra Fluke complaining about the cost of her contraceptives.

    I wear hearing aids have for the past 30 years, every 5 years or so I dole out of pocket for a new set, usually cost me in the neighborhood of 32-3500 bucks.

    Never once have I complained about how unfair life is. I just sucked it up and accepted it for what it was, figuring that I could be much worst off, I have my eyes and great health and consider myself to be extremely lucky.

    The only thing that saved me from accomplishing my education with a hearing loss was my appetite for reading.

    All I ever needed in life to succeed was a job. Wherever I worked I just worked as hard and as often as I could, whatever job I had.And developed a reputation of getting the job done.

    It has always led to better things. Sure there are those who need public assistence, I give a lot to charity.

    But what i see today are just too many gaming the system.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's sad that the health insurance you have..that you probably pay through the nose for with premiums offers you no coverage for the one medical condition you do have.

    I am not going to debate the birth control/preventative services portion of the ACA with you since I've already said everything I can say about it.

    I will say I see the increased coverage regulations as a good thing. When my son was younger, we had pretty bad health insurance but since it was the what the company offered there was no choice. We paid through the nose..at that time..almost $200 a week for the family plan..and it covered basically nothing. When my son had a health issue at 3 years old...I went into major debt paying for health expenses that weren't covered..all the while paying crazy premiums. Thankfully..I now have much better health coverage.

    Refusing to accept a situation that is blatantly unfair and weighed heavily in the advantage of a private insurance company isn't the same thing as expecting a handout..or gaming the system.  It's about making sure you are treated fairly and I am sad for you that you think you deserve to be treated unfairly by insurance companies.

    Trust me..I know what gaming the system looks like. I see people do it on a weekly basis in my line of work..and trust me when I say that when I can bag them and prove it..and get them kicked out of the system..it gives me a great deal of satisfaction.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Each effort to expand coverage comes at a cost, the costs involved do not disappear.  traditionally, the costs get thrown on those most able to pay.  The rich, you say?  No.  the middle class.  that's were the real money is in aggregate.

    I also hear a sense of entitlementin your reply as well, that somehow, you should be guaranteed coverage, no matter what, by force of government.  This cost is reflected in one way or another as well.  Typically, it is reflected in two things, if I read Berwick correctly:  Greater access yet poorer care, and development of a tiered system, i.e. those who can pay outside the system continue to get good care, those stuck inside the system get what ever the government feels it wants to give you at that time.

    You can argue all you want about how good this is, but att he end of the day, you have put a new, bright shiny plaything in front of politicians and government hacks.  They will abuse this to no end, and in the end, you and I will have basic care, and they will have wonderful care, and a pocket full of cash.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harleyroadking12. Show harleyroadking12's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    ^^^^
    +1 and yup

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    Financially, I am sorry to say, I am not better off.  Not by a long shot.  I don't expect that to change any time soon.

    Thankfully, because I was instilled with the saving bug as a kid, I saved money when I was able, and didn't fritter it away or live beyond my means.   

    I accept the economic climate and I accept what has happened in my profession and the projects that are offered.  I can't move out of the area for personal reasons, which may in part facilitate finding a job that better suits me, but I am not footloose, and that's part of the reality.   

    Insofar as a more existential answer, I am better off as a person.  I handle the vicissitudes of life more graciously, I accept the vagaries of the economy as well as the weather; just a part of life.   

    As corny and trite as it sounds: "it's not how hard you fall, it's how fast you get back up".  

    I wish the below were true, but unfortunately, it isn't always the case.   I would add the words "in some way" following "always be better off (inserted: in some way) -- whether it is in body, mind or spirit.   This will mean you are always striving to improve yourself "in some way", even if your job, or economic security is not stable.   :)

     If you work hard you should always be better off --- IN SOME WAY ---  than you were 4 years ago REGARDLESS of who the president is.  

     

Share