Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't hear you or Democrats complain about Obama's lie about health care plan, the part of keeping your health plan if you like it.
It wasn't a lie, there has never been a time in recent history where you could be guaranteed that you could keep your doctor unless you are self pay, in which case you can still keep your Doctor. Health plans negotiate with providers every year. If your Doctor is part of "group A" and the health insurance company gets a better deal with "group B" then you need to find a new Doctor. When I lived in Reno I had an excellent employer paid health plan. There were two major Hospital affiliated groups in town, Renown and St. Mary's. I don't know of any Doctors that belonged to both groups, if there were any I never found them. So every year when BCBS would negotiate the plan would change so one year I had Renown and the next St. Mary's and every year when it changed I had to find a new doctor - or pay the extra $ for an out of network provider.
Obama's language may have been imprecise but he is correct that there was nothing in the bill that would make you find a different doctor. Since the ACA market place is just a group of private companies offering policies there is no way in the world that anyone could know or guarantee whether the plan which your Doctor is affiliated with would be offered.
It wasn't a lie, there has never been a time in recent history where you could be guaranteed that you could keep your doctor unless you are self pay, in which case you can still keep your Doctor. Health plans negotiate with providers every year. If your Doctor is part of "group A" and the health insurance company gets a better deal with "group B" then you need to find a new Doctor. When I lived in Reno I had an excellent employer paid health plan. There were two major Hospital affiliated groups in town, Renown and St. Mary's. I don't know of any Doctors that belonged to both groups, if there were any I never found them. So every year when BCBS would negotiate the plan would change so one year I had Renown and the next St. Mary's and every year when it changed I had to find a new doctor - or pay the extra $ for an out of network provider.
Obama's language may have been imprecise but he is correct that there was nothing in the bill that would make you find a different doctor. Since the ACA market place is just a group of private companies offering policies there is no way in the world that anyone could know or guarantee whether the plan which your Doctor is affiliated with would be offered.
As much as you like to twisting around. It is a lie that brought down Obamacare. It is a lie that brought people out in force to vote for Trump. Oh wait, I know you are going to write he didn't win the popular vote.
Well enough of the votes that matter for him to be a President elected Trump.
I didn't hear you or Democrats complain about Obama's lie about health care plan, the part of keeping your health plan if you like it.
Of course, they did. You don't listen to the right news outlets. Might behoove you to take 3 hours every morning and listen to C-Span's Washington Journal. Or watch it on video off their website later. Callers from around the country. It's amazing what you hear. Many, many were very angry about this. There was plenty of noise from Democrats on that issue. Plenty of them. Some die-hard Obama supporters who actually worked to get him elected deserted him after that. You just haven't been listening. These callers overwhelmingly predicted the Trump win, as well. Many Democrats - whites and blacks - flipping to Trump.
That said - there is no politician in the past 100 years who can compare to Trump on the sheer number and frequency of lies told. He's won all the awards in that category, for sure - hands down.
We don't need to guess whether the "plan" seems reasonable. Here is the (30 page) analysis of H.R. 6489 and its "estimated financial effects on Social Security" by the Agency's Chief Actuary. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/SJohnson_20161208.pdf
Sam Johnson has been waiting for this moment for a long, long time. I can't wait to see what those posters who earn more than $85,000 (or $170,000 if joint filers) think about this bill.
Enjoy.
We will just take benefits at age 62 as the break even point will move considerably in favor of taking it earlier. Smaller benefit longer time frame. Seems like a no brainer. Could backfire at any rate the accountants will figure it out and advise. Folks will also start withdrawing from workplace investments sooner to avoid RMD's while drawing SS. Pulling 40k out of a 401k creates 40k of income from a after tax account only the part that is capital gains counts as income.
We will just take benefits at age 62 as the break even point will move considerably in favor of taking it earlier. Smaller benefit longer time frame. Seems like a no brainer. Could backfire at any rate the accountants will figure it out and advise. Folks will also start withdrawing from workplace investments sooner to avoid RMD's while drawing SS. Pulling 40k out of a 401k creates 40k of income from a after tax account only the part that is capital gains counts as income.
Not sure if you're talking about the zero COLA but if so, starting at 62 is probably not worth it. You'd be sacrificing the additional delayed credits to get a chained CPI COLA rather than a zero COLA. Anyway, I don't think a zero COLA would ever fly.
Sam Johnson has been on this mission for what seems like a million years. Hell, I wouldn't even have recognized his name if it didn't come up fairly often on various Social Security blogs. He has no other claim to fame except complaining about Social Security.
I am ashamed he is from Texas and shares the same last name as a truly great American politician--Lyndon Banes Johnson...
Thankfully he is not my Congressman and there are enough yuppies in his district that if a decent Republican runs against him, he might get knocked down at re-election time...
It wasn't a lie, there has never been a time in recent history where you could be guaranteed that you could keep your doctor unless you are self pay, in which case you can still keep your Doctor. Health plans negotiate with providers every year. If your Doctor is part of "group A" and the health insurance company gets a better deal with "group B" then you need to find a new Doctor. When I lived in Reno I had an excellent employer paid health plan. There were two major Hospital affiliated groups in town, Renown and St. Mary's. I don't know of any Doctors that belonged to both groups, if there were any I never found them. So every year when BCBS would negotiate the plan would change so one year I had Renown and the next St. Mary's and every year when it changed I had to find a new doctor - or pay the extra $ for an out of network provider.
Obama's language may have been imprecise but he is correct that there was nothing in the bill that would make you find a different doctor. Since the ACA market place is just a group of private companies offering policies there is no way in the world that anyone could know or guarantee whether the plan which your Doctor is affiliated with would be offered.
Doctors did have the choice to contract with various insurance companies under the plans offered by the companies under ACA
The problem happened because people bought insurance and doctors might initially have been contracted with that plan and then dropped out...
Doctors/hospitals had that option...
Individuals didn't--once they were signed up they were stuck with that plan after the deadline passed--
Providers--Drs/hospitals--could drop out after signing up...or they had office people saying yes wectakevthatvins before checking w/the real insurance info person in the practice...
Part of problem came from having insurance companies write policies--ins companies had lot more leeway than individuals
And part of problem that Supreme Court created by allowing states to opt out of ACA and set their own clearing houses...
It was not a perfect system
But GOP had 8 yrs to come up with options to improve mistakes
The GOP had no desire to improve a Democratic President's health plan...
They were too concerned with creating dissention and discord trying to prevent Obama's reelection...
They couldn't prevent that goal...
But they certainly lied and prevented any meaningful revisions to a plan they could not take credit for
I am certain that any health care plan they create to replace Obama care will provide fewer benefits
...and will cost more -- bank on it...
Because modern era Republicans don't really believe in government FOR the people...
They believe in gov't that protects special interests and big business...
Why do you think Trump is considering the Exxon guy for Sec of State???
so he can do away w/sanctions against Russia that prevented Exxon from a billion dollar deal to drill there...and get some serious coinage in return...
Trump would earn a tremendous finder's fee thru the back door...and surely that idea was a major point in Putin's agenda when he promoted hacking for Trump's election...
When I was in college, Reagan raised the retirement age. So for people like me who dont expect SS to be there, it will be a nice surprise to receive anything when I'm 65. But honestly, I don't expect to read through all 22 pages. Yikes.
Why am I not surprised you won't be bothered to read Johnson's proposal nor believe any negative analysis of the damage it would create...
seems par for the course...
This is an excerpt from the LATimes article... Predictably, this plan has already been hailed by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a billionaire’s front group that likes to portray itself as a neutral budget watchdog. (The foundation of hedge fund billionaire Peter G. Peterson, whose hostility to Social Security is well-documented, provided $3.3 million in funding for the committee in 2015; that’s the equivalent of about half the group’s revenue of $7.1 million in 2014)
Once again --GOP working to preserve the obscene wealth of 1% of Americans while screwing over the other 99...
He is on record as favoring privatizing Social Security (which is not Social Security).
It would depend upon how it was privatized. Social Security is nothing more than retirement insurance, so privatizing it as insurance would make more sense than privatizing it as a glorified 401(k) plan.
ENOUGH! Those of you who have dropped in from the 'Politics and Other Controversies' forum need to know that we are a family here. The 'regulars' who post frequently come from many walks of life and many political persuasions. That being thus, we all respect each other and often discuss differences of opinion, but always in a respectful, thoughtful, and honorable manner, (most of the time). We don't abide mudslinging and venom here.
For the most part, this has been a good thread. But, this thread is now closed . . . For awhile anyway . . . At least until things cool down. It may be re-opened later.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
