text:
News & Events
Contact Us
Register Now
Farm Business
Land Management
Ag Policy
Farm Life
Minding Ag's Business
Marcia Zarley Taylor
DTN Executive Editor
Friday 12/13/13
Living at Race Pace
I'll never think of America's elite warriors the same after hearing Navy SEAL Team Six member Don Mann speak at this week's DTN/The Progressive Farmer Ag Summit--and I will certainly never use analogies to war as lightly as I have in the past.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:30PM CST 12/13/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (1)
Thanks Marcia! Good article. We had a friend, who has now left us, not a Seal, a Green Berat. Parachuted behind the lines in Viet Nam. Lost a leg, broke the other, shot in one shoulder. He dug a hole with his helmet to bury himself to survive. he was the only one to survive. After recovering, the best he could, he did not whine or did not complain one bit that we ever heard him. Mr. Mann and our friend are only two of the truely Great Americans.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:33PM CST 12/14/13
Monday 12/02/13
Borrowers' Golden Age
Don't get used to the fantasy of cheap credit. The lowest rates in 63 years are behind us.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 5:05PM CST 12/02/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (25)
Three types of government actions have produced a huge run up in food production costs including land costs. The zirp (zero interest rate policy) has stolen rightful earnings from the elderly and those who save and federal reserve's deflation of our currency policy. Federal crop insurance's mindless actions that have provided insane levels of investment and profit guarantees for growers of select crops. The rfs policy by congress that has driven a extreme amount of acres into corn production. Those who claim that rfs did not affect food prices have no right to complain about lower grain prices when rfs is reduced. Just how is it that government should be driving up food costs up for the poor and driving farmer's food production costs through the roof? Anybody still think that government should be running our health care system?
Posted by W Kuster at 6:51AM CST 12/03/13
Health care is a moral obligation of a wealthy society. It may cost us a little more, maybe we don't need that new $70k turbo diesel pick up.
Posted by Unknown at 8:08PM CST 12/03/13
Denying Americans the private health care policies they were promised they could keep, denying them their doctors of choice, endangering their private personal information on a web site that does not work, forcing them to pay for more make work government employees, forcing them to pay for others health care costs, and forcing them to purchase products that they cannot ever use is not health care but is about big government control. Terrorizing Americans with obamacre hardly helps anyone' s mental health. It is just another government scheme that democrats are using to create more people dependent on government handouts in order to manipulate voters.
Posted by W Kuster at 9:04PM CST 12/03/13
I wonder if Detroit agrees with your comment, Unknown. Add the word"individual" before "private" and I would whole-heartedly agree with your first sentence.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:59AM CST 12/04/13
Why do we have to always leap to abstract talking points, these days? It does not matter if it's interest rates, crop insurance, health insurance, food costs, farm size, RFS or caring for those with less. What is good for one group of people might not good for another group of people - this is nothing new and a fact that we can not ever change. When we over try to correct something like health insurance or food costs, most times we mess it up more because we want to leap to changes rather than correct the system that needs adjusting. One thing for sure - BIG government or more government - can not and never has done any thing well. That is not a leap of abstraction, it is a fact!
Posted by John Finley at 8:48AM CST 12/04/13
Thanks Finley for your abstract talking points.
Posted by W Kuster at 6:24AM CST 12/05/13
Finley, when you say the government has never done anything well, I laugh out loud. You are clearly telling yourself a story. Your perception of government is so far from fact it makes you delusional. Now I agree our current state of government is a complete joke, but at one time our government did many things well that we are still enjoying today. There are some things that private industry cannot effectively deliver to the public, or many things they need to be regulated at because of limited competition, which is where health care comes in at. Our private industry failed us. More competition didn't drive down the price of healthcare. You see, what most normal people realize is that when you are sick, you need to go to the doctor, and you do not care what it costs to make you better. The industry knows this, and takes advantage of it. There is no price discovery, limited competition, hidden costs, and ultimately a service that they know we will use. The government, seeing how this was bankrupting the working poor and middle class, decided that this system need a change and what we have is the PPACA. Is it perfect? Heck no, but it is the start in a fundamental change of healthcare in America. Why should we Americans pay 2-5 times more for similar procedures and products than what they pay in Canada, the UK, and a whole host of other developed countries. Our health care effectiveness is rated 46th in the world, one spot below IRAN! Think about that for a moment.
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 8:54AM CST 12/05/13
Pedro I did comment wrong about the government. They have done good things but always costing more than it needed to cost. During those times we could as a country afford those higher costs which today we can not being in debt some $17 trillion and going higher each day. I understand our current health system, as my oldest 34 year old son has NO health insurance because of a previous health problem. His wife and two children do but he can not find health insurance that will cover him since his sickness 10 years ago. Rather than destroying our current health system, it would make sense to correct the system one issue at a time. That the way we fix our cars, machinery and buildings - we fix the problem - we don't junk them out for something different each time. Does our current health system need fixing - YES - but not with the Affordable Health Care System. Why do I feel that way? For one strong reason - if the folks in Washington DC that passed the bill don't want to be covered by the plan because they know its not a good health plan. There's an old saying - if a fish stinks from the head down, the whole fish is bad. Obama care stinks from the head down.
Posted by John Finley at 10:09AM CST 12/05/13
You are dreaming Pedro if you think obamacare has anything to do with quality health care and if you think obamacare will be anything other than a massiove failur. See http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/04/WH-Calendar-Records-A-Single-One-On-One-Meeting-Between-Obama-and-Sebelius
Posted by W Kuster at 11:25AM CST 12/05/13
Info for you Pedro - Obamacare is Already Rationing Health Care, But the Worst is Yet to Come by Carol Tobias | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 12/5/13 3:57 PM PrintEmail Opinion 72 Share Itâ?s four years overdue, but America is finally beginning to have the debate about Obamacare we were promised. Barack Obama had assured us â? another in his long series of broken promises â? that the meetings held to devise the plan would be televised on C-SPAN. Americans would have every opportunity to know what the law is, and how it would affect them. That never happened. The law was put together behind closed doors. Nancy Pelosi later arrogantly told us â?we have to pass the law so you can know whatâ?s in it.â? Now weâ?re finding out. National Right to Life was a lone early voice exposing how the law would cause rationing of life-saving care. But Obamacare supporters have mocked the claim. Their standard line has been â?the ACA is designed to expand coverage, not reduce it.â? But thatâ?s only one part of the law. Central to this overhaul of our healthcare system is a harsh regime of rationing â? denial of care. And itâ?s finally being admitted. _______________ Americans donâ?t yet realize the law will prevent you from spending your own money to get treatments deemed â?ineffectiveâ? in an Orwellian way by the unelected, largely unaccountable IPAB board. _______________ Last summer, former Vermont governor, Democratic presidential candidate, physician and Obamacare supporter Howard Dean made headlines when he spilled the beans. The Independent Payment Advisory Board set up by Obamacare, Dean said, was â?essentially a health care rationing board.â? Further clarification about the role of this board, known as IPAB, came in a series of interviews and tweets last week by Time magazine Senior Political Analyst Mark Halperin. Coming from an avowed supporter of universal coverage, as Halperin is, the interviews were very instructive, containing insights every American should know. Halperin first discussed rationing on a November 25th Newsmax TV program. â?Itâ?s built into the plan. Itâ?s not like a guess or like a judgment. Thatâ?s going to be part of how costs are controlled.â? Later that day, Halperin clarified in a tweet that his comments were not about so-called â?death panels,â? as the showâ?s host had termed it, but about rationing. This is an important distinction for pro-lifers to understand so we (unlike Obama) are completely clear and honest about what the Affordable Care Act does when we discuss it with others. â?Death Panelsâ? vs. broad government-generated rationing in the ACA The British National Health Service (NHS) has appeals committees to review â?individual funding requests.â? They meet to determine whether treatments in a specific case will or wonâ?t be paid for by the government health care system, NHS. These have sometimes been termed â?death panelsâ? because if a patient needs a treatment to save or extend his life and canâ?t afford to pay for it himself, a verdict of â?noâ? by the committee means the patient could die â? hence, the term â?death panel.â? Obamcareâ?s Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) will not operate this way. It wonâ?t review individual cases; in fact, the law is written to preclude this type of direct rationing. Thatâ?s why some Obamacare supporters protest that the law actually bars IPAB from rationing. But Obamacare actually gives IPAB far more power to ration than if it was acting as judge and jury to individual patients. Broadly speaking, IPAB is given sweeping powers to recommend to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) whether and how whole categories of treatments are to be reimbursed â? and is required to use these powers to prevent overall health care spending from being allowed even to keep up with medical inflation. Thus, they can (in fact, it is their job to) limit reimbursement and ration care from thousands or millions of people at a time. For example, IPAB might decide that a new, promising treatment for breast cancer is not â?cost-effective,â? given the boardâ?s calculation of the number of lives it might save versus the cost to offer the treatment. HHS might then issue a â?quality measureâ? binding on health care providers that does not authorize use of the treatment. Effectively, HHS would have the power to drive most doctors out of business if they ignore its directives to ration. Women who might have been saved by the new treatment would die if the older, cheaper treatments donâ?t cure them. Halperin was open about the lawâ?s intention to ration in a follow-up interview on CNBC last Tuesday. â?Those decisions that are made by that board are going to lead to what I think could be described perfectly reasonably as rationing, â? Halperin said. â?Again, as I said, thatâ?s built into the system.â? â?The Independent Payment Advisory Board, which is a big part of the Affordable Care Act that is central to cost control, is something that hasnâ?t been debated in a real way . . . we need to have that debate in this country.â?
Posted by W Kuster at 7:20PM CST 12/05/13
For those who glossed over WK's "War and Peace" diatribe above, let me shorten it for you: he don't like the Affordable Care Act.
Posted by Unknown at 8:49PM CST 12/05/13
Cheap interest is the only means of financing more government programs. Such hidden taxes as the trillion dollar increase built into Obamadon'tcare package can not be absorbed by what is left of the working, middle class. I am not anti-government.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:48AM CST 12/06/13
Cheap interest is the only means of financing more government programs. Such hidden taxes as the trillion dollar increase built into Obamadon'tcare package can not be absorbed by what is left of the working, middle class. I am not anti-government.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:50AM CST 12/06/13
After more Americans attend funerals of people whose premature deaths are caused by lack of care due to obamacare maybe their eyes will be opened.
Posted by W Kuster at 8:09AM CST 12/06/13
W Kuster, if you think a hospital will refuse to take your money for a procedure because it is not covered under insurance, I have a bridge to sell you. STOP listening to the propoganda the right is spewing and believing it verbatime. Don't believe everything the left is spewing. Do some research on the subject and form a real opinion. Point in case, my parents premium is going from $1200/month to $750/month on Blue Cross Blue Shield plan (the were with BCBS before too) for the same health plan deductible but more coverage. If the PPACA wouldn't have came out, they would have been continued to pay more for less, even though I don't think my Mom will be having a baby anytime soon :). United Health Care, one of the largest providers of insurance in the country just released its next years estimated earnings and they said the PPACA was going to cost them $1 billion in earnings, but it was only going to change the earnings per share from $5.60 to $5.40. I think the insurance companies will be ok.
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 10:33AM CST 12/06/13
I guess you missed this Pedro - if doctors are not available and procedures cannot be done it does not matter how much money you have available to pay the hospital unless you are able to travel far. See Physician says Obamacare is causing 'chaos' for doctors Text Size Published: Tuesday, 3 Dec 2013 | 12:00 AM ET By: Ben Thompson | Senior segment producer for the Kudlow Report Poor situation for Obamacare: Pro Monday, 2 Dec 2013 | 7:25 PM ET Paul Howard, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and Dr. William Grace, assistant professor at New York Medical College and a physician at Lenox Hill Hospital, discuss problems on the Obamacare exchanges. The administration is furiously trying to rectify another Obamacare issue: faulty enrollment data that could soon become a significant headache for consumers and insurers. The latter say much of the information they have received is practically useless, which means some consumers might not be able to get access to benefits on Jan. 1, the date their coverage is scheduled to take effect. Dr. Bill Grace, founder of Grace Oncology in NYC and an assistant professor of clinical medicine at New York Medical College, told CNBC Monday night that the enrollment problems also are causing significant problems for doctors. "Right now that back end is in chaos. â?¦ We don't even know if we should sign up for these plans, because we have a suspicion that many of [them] offer very little reimbursement or offer a loss to the physicians who are going to see these patients," Grace told Larry Kudlow on CNBC's "Kudlow Report". "No physician wants to take money out of his pocket and put it in the government's." (Read more: Obamacare enrollment error rate still secret as more sign up) The Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services, which is responsible for running the federal Obamacare website, has refused to reveal how many sign-ups have software-related errors that could delay enrollees' coverage. The administration released a 50-state report Tuesday morning saying that nearly 1.5 million people had been found eligible for Medicaid during October, far outpacing enrollment eligibility in subsidized private coverage. But as Obamacare puts more people in the Medicaid system, Grace said fewer doctors are treating Medicaid patients. "The problem is, who's going to care for you when you have Medicaid?" he said. "For an hour-and-15-minute evaluation of a cancer patient, I get $6.50. That won't even pay for the electricity. What kind of physician will you get ... what kind of specialist will you get?" Doctors are "already leaving in droves from accepting Medicare," he said. "They're going to concierge practices. They're limiting the number of Medicare patients they take. They're taking only commercial insurance plans, and the premier physicians are taking no insurance at all." (Read more: Insurers claim health website is still flawed) Obamacare's website troubles have resulted in enrollment numbers significantly lower than administration officials had hoped. It's questionable whether the program will reach the 7 million sign-ups the Congressional Budget Office predicted. The sign-up period runs through March. Grace told CNBC that the biggest problem with Obamacare is that patients don't have skin in the game. He offered this health-care fix as an alternative. "I'd give everybody at birth a health savings account, because it makes everybody a capitalist. People make poor health care choices and want somebody else to bail them out. When they own the plan, they begin to make healthy ... choices. " â?â?By CNBC's Ben Thompson. Follow him on Twitter @BenThompson00.
Posted by W Kuster at 12:04PM CST 12/06/13
More reading material for you Pedro- ObamaCare for the Vast Majority By Janice Shaw Crouse ObamaCare was sold to the nation as a compassionate response to the approximately 47 million uninsured Americans. Yet, 30 million Americans will still not be insured even after the frenetic misrepresentation and bribery required to pass the bill and the botched rollout. Plus, the policies of millions of insured Americans are being cancelled and replaced with HHS "approved" policies that have higher premiums. Then, following the wipeout in the individual market, millions of Americans currently covered by employer-provided plans will have their policies cancelled because they are deemed inadequate and unacceptable under the ObamaCare regulations issued by HHS. Health Journal reports, "The ACA will leave tens of millions uncovered. It will do little to alter racial disparities in coverage. It will also perpetuate disparities in access based on state of residence. The ACA, whatever its merits, will fall well short of its stated goal of providing affordable care for all Americans." The situation makes a travesty of the president's oft-repeated promise that the "vast majority" of Americans will be able to keep their current health insurance coverage. Instead, the "vast majority" of Americans will be paying for mandated services they don't need or want; millions will find they cannot access their doctors; and their satisfaction with their health care services will diminish drastically. Instead of "stronger, better, more secure" insurance coverage, there are reports of widespread security issues on the ObamaCare website and sweeping changes that are leaving policy-holders reeling. Politicians have long worried about the financial sustainability of the Medicare/Medicaid programs, but, since employees pay into the programs in order to have benefits in their senior years, most politicians wouldn't dare suggest making cuts to these programs. Drastic changes to Medicare and Medicaid are buried in ObamaCare; its provisions will bring an estimated one-in-five Americans into government-run medical welfare by increasing Medicaid by nearly 16 million individuals. Further, ObamaCare "strips more than 10 million extremely satisfied seniors of their Medicare Advantage." Diane Furchtgott-Roth and other economists have carefully laid out how Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries will inevitably get lower standards of care under ObamaCare. These changes primarily (Who is waging a 'War on Women'?) affect women, who make up 69 percent of Medicaid recipients and will be "disadvantaged" by being required to accept Medicaid rather than a refundable tax credit to purchase a private plan. There were plenty of warnings (see for example my CWA report, Obamanomics: Summary of the Analyses and Commentary Related to the Financial Impact of ObamaCare on Women and Families) that the new law would raise health-care costs substantially and lead to reduced quality of medical services. Now we know that ObamaCare includes $156 billion in cuts to plans and services provided to the seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. One large provider, UnitedHealth Group, claims that it has dropped thousands of doctors because of "substantial funding pressure" from the federal government. These cuts are occurring at the same time that ObamaCare is dramatically expanding enrollment of the poorest and most vulnerable Americans into the Medicaid program. We heard speech after speech about how ObamaCare was going to bend the cost curve down, but it's hard to understand how anyone would fail to see that a massive increase in demand combined with shrinkage in supply would push up costs. Among the "vast majority" who will experience negative consequences from ObamaCare are small business owners. Several economists have pointed out that small business owners, who hire predominantly low-income workers, will be penalized and their employees are "disproportionately likely to be high school dropouts, minority, and female." Further, up to 80 percent of small-business owners could lose their health-care plans because they don't comply with the mandates of ObamaCare. Medium-size businesses -- which we desperately need more of to provide employment opportunities for the millions looking for work -- are instead reducing personnel to get below 50 full-time employees in order to avoid having to provide health insurance. The ramifications don't look good for unemployment figures that are already disastrously low. The "vast majority" of Americans will pay for these ramifications, including an add-on estimated at about $63 per employee that goes into a fund to cover preexisting conditions. Did anyone think that the money for such coverage would come out of thin air? Everyone except those receiving government subsidies will be paying higher premiums while having higher deductibles, fewer options and less coverage. The "vast majority" of Americans view ObamaCare as an unmitigated disaster that will pile on to an already insurmountable debt and cause government to encroach further and further into areas of our lives that should remain personal, private, and under our own control. Unless it is overturned, ObamaCare will strip us step-by-step of the right to make our own decisions. Health care rationing resulting in pain and even premature death will be concealed from public view as long as possible to prevent an outcry; but as in Canada, England, and elsewhere, it is inevitable. ObamaCare carries with it a massive expansion of government bureaucracy, with 159 new commissions, boards, and agencies created by the bill, adding even more barriers between the caregiver and the patient. That such a contrivance could possibly contribute to bettering health care making it more affordable is simply beyond comprehension. The more we learn about ObamaCare's specific provisions, the more we discover that the bill does not reflect our values -- faith, family, and freedom -- nor does it strengthen those principles of personal responsibility, self-reliance and respect for the life and liberty of the individual that are the foundation of a great nation. The politicians in Washington already know what ObamaCare entails and have accordingly exempted themselves from it; we can only pray that the vast majority of Americans will swiftly come to see the actual reality of ObamaCare and refuse to elect any politician who will not vote to repeal it. Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., is Executive Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute.
Posted by W Kuster at 12:29PM CST 12/06/13
Would DTN please consider restricting the length of the comments. I thought this was Marcias" blog.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:45AM CST 12/07/13
Perhaps Bonnie this could remedy your intolerance for just a couple of paragraphs - see http://speed-reading-review.toptenreviews.com/
Posted by W Kuster at 4:42PM CST 12/07/13
I even like a few pages, if it is the Editors and she stays on topic.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:33PM CST 12/07/13
It should be obvious that those in government addicted to spending borrowed money or printed money that has come at no apparent cost are totally enthused about spending trillions more on a still greater government disaster called obamacare. Free money has been free candy for those growing big government.
Posted by W Kuster at 7:44AM CST 12/08/13
Dear Readers: I've been at the Ag Summit this week, not minding the store. This evolved from interest rates into another Obamacare discussion, but stay tuned for a new posting on what you missed soon.--Marcia
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 5:17PM CST 12/11/13
Kuster, if you think doctors don't make money on Medicaid/Medicare, you should take a drive to Florida or Arizona and check out their medical facilities. Do you think it is coincidence that the Mayo clinic has 2 outreach posts in each of those states where they are snowbird havens? Talk all you want about the PPACA being a joke. From my personal situation, and the people I work with, and speaking with other friends about their situation, the ACA has done more good than harm. The other biggest lie out there from the healthcare industry is that they can't make money on the Medicaid and Medicare. It is a flat out lie. Sure it takes them longer to recoup their investment in equipment buildings, but they are not going broke.
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 9:23AM CST 12/12/13
How unfortunate some do have enough integrity to even read and consider the Editors contibution. Marcia, I apologize for the assinine idiots who abuse the opportunity offered by you and DTN.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:25PM CST 12/12/13
Pedro - You are drinking too much of that obama koolaid. Obamacare cheerleaders are on thin ice when they complain about opponents lying about obamacare. See http://www.healthcaretechnologyonline.com/doc/doctors-refuse-to-accept-medicare-patients-0001 See http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottatlas/2012/12/18/lets-be-honest-medicare-is-insolvent-and-doctors-soon-wont-accept-it/ See http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2012/august/06/third-of-medicaid-doctors-say-no-new-patients.aspx
Posted by W Kuster at 6:36PM CST 12/12/13
Friday 11/22/13
Tax Reform Could Get Nasty for Ag
Decades of favorable tax treatment for agriculture could crash to a halt if Congress gets serious about tax reform.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:27PM CST 11/22/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (3)
Correct me if I'm wrong please, but, this sounds to me like the large producers will be better off than the smaller producers under these new proposed tax laws...? I hate the idea of spreading the wealth, but I also dislike the sound of tax laws favoring very large farm operations.
Posted by RJZ Peterson at 2:08PM CST 11/25/13
Like kind exchanges. Another loop-hole for the rich. Removed a lot of pasture land from availability. Created gardens of eden for gophers and thistles with absent owners. The problem is government spending rather than government revenue.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:53AM CST 11/26/13
From a depreciation standpoint it looks like the big operations would loose with a one million dollar sec. 179 and the overrun possibly deducted from the grave (35 years on a combine!). Smaller operations would fit under the million dollar umbrella providing that's what we end up with. For like kind exchanges, no two people agree. Living close to the Cedar Rapids metro area, small landowners and large landowners alike get to use the exchange when urban annexes rural. The money those landowners get usually is exchanged for more land further from town and that benefits anyone with a for sale sign. Bottom line - more smoke and mirrors from BIG government.
Posted by Curt Zingula at 7:01AM CST 11/26/13
Tuesday 11/12/13
Over 65? Turn Off Noise on Obamacare
Seniors, your Medicare coverage exempts you from the health insurance mandate Jan. 1.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 3:45PM CST 11/12/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (23)
I'm four years away from turning off the noise, but doing so would be like sticking my head in the ground. I'm part of a group that will soon be the largest retirement population ever. At the same time, the people paying for government expenditures will become disproportionately small. In addition, 47% (and growing) of our population doesn't pay any taxes. Who will pay for all my "freebies" when the till runs dry?! Will I be able to choose my doctor - reports now indicate that freedom will be lost. I also worry that if I'm to benefit from ACA I will have to enter all my personal information on an unsecure web site. Better stop here while I can still be civil!
Posted by Curt Zingula at 6:29AM CST 11/14/13
The 47% you refer to are net Federal taxes. State, property, sales, fuel, airport, assessments, and FICA are still paid by all who are obligated. We'll cover your and my "freebies'" but it require a little adjustment such as raising the top end limits on SSN taxes. Curt, in all seriousness, when are we going to raise Federal income taxes to pay for the decade + of warfare after 911? I want to make sure I get my mil retirement check as well as USDA insurance.
Posted by Don Thompson at 8:32AM CST 11/14/13
typical baby boomers
Posted by Mark Knobloch at 10:35AM CST 11/15/13
While the grasshopper parties to the tune of "Don't Worry, Be Happy", the ant, painfully aware of higher taxes (what the Supremes call the ACA), must work even harder to pay for their own needs and the needs of the soon to be dependent grasshoppers. No self-respecting senior should expect their kids to pay for their health care so the seniors can spend their retirement accounts on cruises around the world! And Don, get a clue, the freebies I referred to earlier are in regard to the ACA which isn't funded by property taxes, so take that arguement where it applies.
Posted by Curt Zingula at 6:31AM CST 11/16/13
Anyone thinking Obama is concerned about healthcare for the elderly think again. See http://news.yahoo.com/unitedhealth-drops-thousands-doctors-insurance-plans-wsj-030014903--finance.html
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:50AM CST 11/16/13
More evidence that Obama is a fraud. See http://www.nationalreview.com/article/364117/lawlessness-fix-andrew-c-mccarthy
Posted by Sally Benson at 8:04AM CST 11/16/13
November 17, 2013 'Racist' President Says Now You can Keep Your 'Substandard Insurance' By Clarice Feldman In ancient times were a ruler to have mismanaged everything as badly as has Obama, stonemasons would start gathering near the palace in anticipation of being hired to chisel the ruler's name and visage off all public buildings and temples, funerary garb purveyors would be spreading their wares out in the public square, and the top viziers would be stirring a special concoction for him to drink to bring his disastrous reign to a quick end. We don't do things that way, so Obama, his party, and the country if not the world, will watch his power dissolve and the chaos he used to thrive on now overwhelm us all. We have, however, the -- to me -- happy pleasure of watching the arrogant press's favorite party face humiliating and ruinous exposure as know-nothings who lied, covered up, ignored normal legislative procedures, constitutional law, public sentiment, math, technology, and common sense. Just a few days ago the president's defenders were calling his critics "racists" and claiming ObamaCare was merely allowing us to get rid of our "substandard health insurance" for better plans our betters, the Democrat leadership, thought we should have. Thursday he offered up a purported rollback fix announcing, incredibly "we are discovering that insurance is complicated to buy...." His right-hand gal, the party's own Norma Desmond, Nancy Pelosi, about whom Joshua Sharf says: "I *am* big. It's my caucus that got small," is standing firm, though her caucus is running for the hills as waves of angry voters strike out. The purported "fix" to allow voters to keep the insurance that the administration ordered them to cancel is so unworkable, the insurance commissioners of South Carolina and Washington State both turned the proposition down almost as soon as the president made it. Even Howard Dean questioned whether the president can legally do this, though I don't recall him saying a word when this train wreck started down the track through procedures which ignored decades of Congressional practice and procedure and when the president tossed off waivers to his friends and allowed HHS to draft regulations that were directly in conflict with the promises he was repeatedly making to voters and even the clear language of the Act. (This, as his spokesmen were arguing that ObamaCare was "settled law" which could not be altered or repealed.) More weighty than Dean's second thoughts, however, were those of legal scholars like Professor Eugene Kontorovich, a real constitutional law professor from Northwestern University (as opposed to Obama, the part-time lecturer at the University of Chicago). President Obama in his speech on "fixing" the Affordable Care Act today did not specify what statutory authority, if any, he thinks authorizes him to make such dictats. Given the gargantuan length of the ObamaCare statute, he might still be looking. Press reports say the President is claiming a broad "enforcement discretion." It is true that the Chief Executive has some room to decide how strongly to enforce a law, and the timing of enforcement. But here, Obama is apparently suspending the enforcement of a law for a year -- simply to head off actual legislation not to his liking. Congress is working on legislation quite similar to the president's fix, but with differences he considers objectionable. This further demonstrates the primarily legislative nature of the fix. Indeed, the fix goes far beyond "non-enforcement" because it requires insurers to certain new action to enjoy the delay. This is thus not simply a delay, but a new law. The "fix" amounts to new legislation -- but enacted without Congress. The President has no constitutional authority to rewrite statutes, especially in ways that impose new obligations on people, and that is what the fix seems to entail. And of course, this is not the first such extra-statutory suspension of key ObamaCare provisions. UPDATE: Here is the text of the administration's letter describing the fix. The legal problems are no bigger than the practical and political problems of Obamacare and the man who viewed this as his signature achievement: Normally insurance companies take months to set up plans, negotiate with network providers, get state insurance commissioners to sign off on the proposed rates, and then do a bit of marketing. Now they have until December 15 for customers whose plans are cancelled as of Jan 1. But hey, don't blame Obamacare! It has only been the law for three years now; if insurance companies really thought it would go into effect and acted accordingly, well, psych! Experts indicate even the mechanical issue of the website will not -- cannot -- be fixed by Obama's latest promised date, December 1. See: The well-documented critiques of the front-end and back-end software on HealthCare.gov beg the question of whether this critical site was properly designed -- or, even worse, designed at all. It has been reported that the front end was designed with an agile process; unfortunately, most agile processes reject and discourage "big design up front." In a nutshell, many agile processes -- and especially extreme programming -- reject the big design phase as part and parcel of rejecting the waterfall methodology. Agile processes follow more of an "organic" software development, where developers start coding the smallest increment possible and "grow" the working software up, little by little, with constant customer feedback. These agile methodologies call for "user stories" to design each small increment of the system being developed. To be fair, agile can work for some software projects, but I assert that it is the kiss of death for projects with many moving parts, multiple organizations and complex interactions. And then there are the political issues, Pelosi's continued optimistic predictions aside. Kimberley Strassel lays out the devastating political wreckage facing the Democrats: The primary purpose of the White House "fix" was to get out ahead of the planned Friday vote on Michigan Republican Fred Upton's "Keep Your Health Plan Act." The stage was set for dozens of Democrats to join with the GOP for passage --potentially creating a veto-proof majority, and putting enormous pressure on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to follow suit. The White House couldn't risk such a bipartisan rebuke. Moreover, the Upton bill -- while it lacks those GOP joy words of "delay" or "repeal" -- poses a threat, since it would allow insurers to continue providing non-ObamaCare policies to any American who wants one. Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu's version of the bill would in fact (unconstitutionally) order insurers to offer the plans in perpetuity. Both bills undermine the law's central goal of forcing healthy people into costly ObamaCare exchange plans that subsidize the sick. The president's "fix" is designed to limit such grandfathering, but that's why it is of dubious political help to Democrats. Within minutes of Mr. Obama's announcement, several Democratic senators, including North Carolina's Kay Hagan -- whose poll numbers have plummeted in advance of her 2014 re-election bid -- announced that they remain in favor of Landrieu-style legislation. And the White House "fix" doesn't save Democrats from having to take a vote on the Upton bill. A yes vote is a strike at the president and an admission that the law Democrats passed is failing. A no vote is tailor-made for political attack ads and requires a nuanced explanation of why the president's "fix" is better than Upton's. Which it isn't. There remain some diehard believers in the efficacy of an even larger federal role in our lives and health care even if they lightly acknowledge the president just might have "misspoke" or failed to act as a competent executive. For example, the New York Times, whom Professor Althouse flays here. But I believe the president's tardy apology for creating chaos in at least one-sixth of the U.S. economy is about as effective as the Syrian Al-Qaeda members who videoed an apology for beheading the wrong guy. The poor man is dead. The apology is useless, and in that same way, the persons who lost their jobs, whose incomes were reduced, who face periods of time with no health insurance coverage of their choosing, who will face a larger tax burden, or who are committed to pay much higher premiums now, have suffered irretrievable losses. Some may even die as their treatment for serious health issues -- like cancer -- were suspended with the loss of their coverage. Fouad Ajami compares Obama's rise and fall to those of a number of Middle Eastern rulers. He's seen this play about charismatic but incompetent leaders before: Five years on, we can still recall how the Obama coalition was formed. There were the African-Americans justifiably proud of one of their own. There were upper-class white professionals who were drawn to the candidate's "cool." There were Latinos swayed by the promise of immigration reform. The white working class in the Rust Belt was the last bloc to embrace Mr. Obama -- he wasn't one of them, but they put their reservations aside during an economic storm and voted for the redistributive state and its protections. There were no economic or cultural bonds among this coalition. There was the new leader, all things to all people. A nemesis awaited the promise of this new presidency: Mr. Obama would turn out to be among the most polarizing of American leaders. No, it wasn't his race, as Harry Reid would contend, that stirred up the opposition to him. It was his exalted views of himself, and his mission. The sharp lines were sharp between those who raised his banners and those who objected to his policies. America holds presidential elections, we know. But Mr. Obama took his victory as a plebiscite on his reading of the American social contract. A president who constantly reminded his critics that he had won at the ballot box was bound to deepen the opposition of his critics. A leader who set out to remake the health-care system in the country, a sixth of the national economy, on a razor-thin majority with no support whatsoever from the opposition party, misunderstood the nature of democratic politics. An election victory is the beginning of things, not the culmination. With Air Force One and the other prerogatives of office come the need for compromise, and for the disputations of democracy. A president who sought consensus would have never left his agenda on Capitol Hill in the hands of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. [snip] If Barack Obama seems like a man alone, with nervous Democrats up for re-election next year running for cover, and away from him, this was the world he made. No advisers of stature can question his policies; the price of access in the Obama court is quiescence before the leader's will. The imperial presidency is in full bloom. There are no stars in the Obama cabinet today, men and women of independent stature and outlook. I resist amateur psychological analyses but it is hard to ignore the President's narcissistic pathology, and, if this is the case, as he is cornered he is only more dangerous than ever. Iowahawk's nailed it I think: David Burge â?@iowahawkblog "Let's not argue whose idea it was to bring the Jarts and tequila. We need to all work together to fix the hole in this guy's head." Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/11/racist_president_says_now_you_can_keep_your_substandard_insurance.html#ixzz2l02kARDL Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 6:32AM CST 11/18/13
Say Don how does terrorizing Americans by denying their doctors and hospitals of choice, taking away the policies they were promised they could keep, and continually lying to them constitute health care? At least Nixon had the decency to resign. All Obama has done is create chaos.
Posted by Sally Benson at 6:24AM CST 11/19/13
Sally, you do know that if Don replies he will probably say that he cares about the needy - like you don't. I think the worst aspect of the ACA is that legislators exempted themselves from this miracle of health care and not enough people wonder why.
Posted by Curt Zingula at 7:07AM CST 11/19/13
Curt, With all due respect, I don not believe you are completely familiar with the ACA regarding "legislators" participation in the exchanges. This issue was in the news last week. Please study up and report back. For Sally Benson, Wesley W, John Olsen, or whatever you are calling yourself this time around, the ACA will allow private insurance companies to provide medical and mental health coverage. I encourage you to take advantage of these features since any individual's illness or lack of mental stability has proven to be a threat to all of society. Remember your chosen insurance company will contract with individual providers for your health care. The insurer will provide you with a list of their preferred providers. You are free to go to a provider of your choice, however. Your private insurer may cover that cost or may not. That is the decision of your private insurer. Simple enough?
Posted by Don Thompson at 5:54PM CST 11/19/13
Don you still are believing in fairy tales. Check out this- Obamacareâ?s Death Spiral by Richard A. Epstein (Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow and member of hoover ip squared working group steering committee) Striking the law down will be an act of mercy for the American people. It has been a tumultuous two weeks since I last wrote about Obamacareâ?s moral blindness. The Presidentâ?s dismal performance since that date has only confirmed my initial impression. He has refused to take full responsibility for the key policies embedded in that legislation. He has also endorsed naïve short-term fixes that do nothing to correct the fundamental design flaws of the Affordable Care Act. epstein Illustration by Barbara Kelley Those two errors will give way to two larger public debates, one constitutional and one social. First, should the Presidentâ?s new proposals be subject to attacks under the oft-discredited doctrine of substantive due process? Second, will the failures of Obamacare require a massive leap to a single-payer system to avert a return to some status quo ante that is morally and socially intolerable? Itâ?s clear that we need to kill Obamacare and avoid a single-payer system at all costs. The Presidentâ?s Listless Apology The Presidentâ?s November 14 press conference reveals that he is unable to come to grips with the fatal flaws of his healthcare program. He claims that â?in the first month, nearly a million people successfully completed an application for themselves or their families.â? Deconstructed, what that really means is a paltry 27,000 people have been able to get coverage on the federal exchanges and some 79,000 others through the state exchanges. The million-person figure includes the 975,000 people deemed â?determined eligibleâ? for coverage that they have not purchased but, he assumes, they soon will. The President thinks this shows the pent-up demand for his program. But he hasnâ?t addressed the composition of the applicant pool, which clearly attracts individuals with known healthcare conditions who will receive extensive public subsidies to join the ranks of the insured. There is no way that the government exchanges can remain viable without attracting large numbers of healthy young persons, all of whom are well-advised to stay away in droves, until they become sick and can sign up with the plan of their choice, no questions asked. Obamacare can only remain solvent with an enormous public subsidy. But the President compares apples to oranges when he disparages the private plans he considers substandard while he praises the efficiency of the public plan, even though it will require public subsidies. To him, taxpayer costs donâ?t matter. The President fared no better when he claimed he misspoke in saying, repeatedly, that â?if you like your current healthcare plan, you can keep it.â? His tortured explanation had two parts. First, he did not focus enough on the individual market; second, the grandfather protection built into the ACA turned out to be â?insufficient.â? One key difficulty with the individual plan is that its ten categories of Essential Health Benefits are not met by the policies offered in the individual healthcare market. But as the HealthCare.gov website makes clear, â?The Affordable Care Act ensures health plans offered in the individual and small group markets, both inside and outside of the Health Insurance Marketplace, offer a comprehensive package of items and services, known as essential health benefits.â? The small group market covers firms with under 50 or 100 workers depending on the state. But the President never once discusses how Obamacare undermines both markets. Millions now find themselves in a similar bind with group plans. The President is also flatly wrong to assume that the defects in plan structure are confined to the individual market. Nor can he claim that the grandfather provision just turned out to be â?insufficient.â? They were that way by design. From start to finish, the entire exception was a sham. The President has no patience for the â?substandardâ? policies rolled out by the voluntary market, which may lose, or in many cases have lost, their grandfathered status the moment they introduced any material change in their coverage formulas or rate, which they routinely do. In addition, â?most PPACA requirements apply to grandfathered plans,â? including limitations on waiting periods and essential healthcare benefits, which lie at the root of the problem. The tragedy remains that it is far easier to force people out of healthcare plans that they want than it is to enroll them in healthcare plans that they donâ?t. Possible Legislative Fixes Public outrage and Democratic uneasiness has forced the President to back down from his hard-line position that would force millions of individuals with canceled polices to seek coverage on the dysfunctional government website. But once again, the Presidentâ?s unyielding opposition to substandard coverage has made it impossible for him to beat a graceful retreat from his flawed program. The House just passed (with 39 Democratic votes) a Republican legislative plan from Michigan Congressman Fred Upton that would allow all insurers one more year to offer policies identical to those now in effect, without running afoul of the ACA. The logistical difficulties that stand in the path of the implementation of this simple fix are serious. Itâ?s not easy to close the floodgates after the water has raced downstream. The situation is made still worse because the President has vowed to veto this bill on the basis that, gasp, it lets insurance companies sell their â?substandardâ? policies to new customers, who in his view should have their options limited solely to products offered for sale on the dysfunctional exchanges. The Presidentâ?s position raises yet again the thorny legal question of whether any president can suspend the operation of a law that he is supposed to execute. His legal position is ever so tenuous, because his fix doesnâ?t just suspend the law. It also requires insurers to inform consumers â?â?what protections these renewed plans donâ?t includeâ? and alert customers to potentially better and more affordable insurance in the new federal and state marketplaces.â? A major new disclosure program will need to be built from scratch over the Christmas holidays, on top of a reinstatement process that has to overcome huge hurdles within individual companies who have to reprice their revised policies before gaining regulatory approval on a state-by-state basis. No wonder their executives are up in arms. Constitutional Complications The Presidentâ?s adamant position in the face of an industry-wide insurance meltdown ought to force a serious reconsideration of the constitutional issues at play over Obamacare. As everyone recalls, the constitutional challenges raised in the Supreme Court case over Obamacare, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius,were over issues of Congressional power, not of individual rights. Chief Justice Roberts walked an implausible line when he held that Congress did not have the power to enact the legislation under its commerce power, but could do so under its power to tax and spend for the general welfare of the United States. From the outset, no one took seriously the view that the individual mandate posed any threat to the individual liberty protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Our New Deal legacy has left economic liberties to the tender mercies of the national and state governments. The individuals who are bound by minimum wage and mandatory collective bargaining laws have grounds to attack a statute that proclaims it protects patients and supplies them with affordable health care. One real price of the first generation challenges under the tax and commerce powers is that they focused exclusively on a small slice of the overall legislation, thereby ignoring its most coercive and corrosive effects. But the extraordinary claims for government domination over individual rights comes front and center when the President announces that he will protect the fundamental right to healthcare by barring ordinary folks from acquiring coverage in the voluntary market, in order to force them to seek coverage they donâ?t wantâ?like treating maternity care for men as an essential minimum benefitâ?in a nonfunctional government market that serves none of their personal needs. The Obamacare fiasco now flunks Justice Holmesâ? extreme rational basis test in the 1905 decision of Lochner v. New York: â?I think that the word liberty in the Fourteenth Amendment is perverted when it is held to prevent the natural outcome of a dominant opinion, unless it can be said that a rational and fair man necessarily would admit that the statute proposed would infringe fundamental principles as they have been understood by the traditions of our people and our law.â? In the light of day, Obamacare is that bad, even if the minimum wage law is not. Even the most ardent defender of government power must concede that it is sickening when a president tells people without healthcare insurance that they must navigate his government websites or go without. If â?the right to healthcareâ? is fundamental, Obamacare violates it. Delay here is no option. If left in place, every single structural problem that besets Obamacare today will continue to wreck innocent lives a year from now. Striking it down is an act of mercy for the American people. Single Payer: From the Frying Pan into the Fire Ironically, the incorrigible supporters of Obamacare have learned the wrong lesson from this debacle. Both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi run up the progressive flag and fault Obamacare for not going far enough in its refusal to adopt a â?Single-Payerâ? healthcare system that would get rid of all those pesky remnants of individual choice that are now sinking Obamacare. But this proposal is sheer delusion. No sane person who has watched the government bollix its effort to implement Obamacare could tolerate the prospect of the government displacing the existing system of private healthcare insurance subject to state regulation. What would that solve? It would not fix the expanded website that would function as the only portal into the healthcare system. It would not trim the outsized package of essential minimum benefits that have now turned the system upside down. It would not eliminate the immense network of cross-subsidies that has driven private plans to insolvency. And most certainlyâ?with both Medicare and Medicaid in placeâ?it could never implement the Canadian system in which national government makes block grants to the provinces who then have to allocate those dollars to various medical services consistent with budget caps on federal support. Politically, it seems clear that the American public will not tolerate yet another round of healthcare reforms that cannot shoot straight. The real question is whether the Democrats in Congress will come to their senses and realize that Obamacare is DOA. It is possible to think of all sorts of mid-level fixes that might moderate the damages, but none has a prayer of success so long as this president remains in office. Deregulation and tax cuts are dirty words to Obama, but they are the only source of relief to a nation. The ACA has already done enough harm. The time to start over is now. Richard A. Epstein, Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law at New York University, and senior lecturer at the University of Chicago, researches and writes on a broad range of constitutional, economic, historical, and philosophical subjects. He has taught administrative law, antitrust law, communications law, constitutional law, corporate law, criminal law, employment discrimination law, environmental law, food and drug law, health law, labor law, Roman law, real estate development and finance, and individual and corporate taxation. His publications cover an equally broad range of topics. His most recent book, published in 2013, is The Classical Liberal Constitution: The Uncertain Quest for Limited Government (2013). He is a past editor of the Journal of Legal Studies (1981â?91) and the Journal of Law and Economics (1991â?2001).
Posted by Sally Benson at 6:54PM CST 11/19/13
Sorry "Sally", I do not read your stuff - too long and delirious.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:07PM CST 11/19/13
Say Don is your real name Nancy Pelosi?
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:14PM CST 11/19/13
No. She is a wonderful Lady I must say. She can teach us all a thing or two about having class. Thanks for the question.
Posted by Don Thompson at 8:23PM CST 11/19/13
I want what Mass. has, ROMNEYCARE!!!
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 5:45AM CST 11/20/13
Its obvious to the honest that obamacare is not about healthcare but all about government control. See http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/364362/some-dc-exchange-plans-cover-elective-abortion-not-hearing-aids-betsy-woodruff
Posted by Sally Benson at 5:53AM CST 11/20/13
I want what Don is smoking! Who in their right mind would use the exchanges after the testimony from several hacking experts that the web site isn't remotely safe and may not be safe for a long, long time?! And it was obvious to the Supreme Court that the ACA is a tax first, healthcare second (wolf in sheep's clothing). Regarding the legislator's participation; Why did I hear a legislator report a month ago about exempting themselves because they have a good plan and want to keep it? Because of classy Nancy's advice to pass it so we can learn what's in it?
Posted by Curt Zingula at 7:18AM CST 11/20/13
Curt, Sorry I can't help you with the smoke. You will have to see the mayor of Toronto or the new Congressman from SW Florida for that! The ACA law is aimed at those not covered or individual buyers. That is a relative small amount of the population. Folks such as myself can keep our insurance with improved coverage afforded by ACA and in some cases, some folks are not eligible to use the federal exchange as directed by the law. The rollout of the website was extremely disappointing to me and other supporters for obvious reasons. However, that does not change the fact that healthcare in the USA is flawed and needs improvement. I believe that we now have an opportunity to work on it. Even if our efforts fall short in some areas it still contributes to the learning process and puts us ahead overall. Farmers certainly learn from failure and we may be in for another round soon. If you are accustom to everything coming out flawless and have an answer for our situation, then your role in life is not in the fields but putting your life and reputation on the line to help the USA and mankind to follow. I encourage you to put forth your well thought out and guaranteed to perform solution. Thanks.
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:14AM CST 11/20/13
I appreciate your sense of humor Don. I also appreciate the idea of learning from mistakes and coming up with a better solution. My concept of "change" involves limited influence from the government - the same government that mismanaged the Postal Service, stole from Social Security and lies. Perhaps we can make improvements that aren't wealth transfers such as the one Marcia describes in her "don't worry, be happy" article about seniors sponging off their kids. There are an immense number of problems in the ACA and at the risk of being labeled as a "half empty glass of water" those problems shouldn't be ignored!!
Posted by Curt Zingula at 1:16PM CST 11/20/13
Curt, I fully believe that the government is "we the people" so when we say the problem is the government I agree. We people are the problem in that we have discouraged sanity in our governing. You and I may disagree on who the problem children are but our best and brightest are not willing to serve in elective office today. Regarding ACA, I fully want whatever healthcare law we arrive at to be refined to the best of our ability to formulate without the political need to make sure someone loses and someone perceives himself as a winner. Throughout my varied career enterprises I have sensed an increasing creep of regulation and it concerns me. That concern is only exceeded by the realization of the overwhelming willingness for our fellow citizens to purposefully muck things up, private and public, for personal gain.
Posted by Don Thompson at 2:20PM CST 11/20/13
Check out http://youngcons.com/the-best-video-deconstruction-obamacare-you-will-ever-see/
Posted by Alvin Obert at 11:51PM CST 11/21/13
Getting back to the topic of your article, Marcia. Over 65 might only be wishfull thinking. With the interpretations of Obamacare, from various decision makers, the end resusult is still in LaLa Land. I wonder if Rep. Pelosi has yet read this mess.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:56PM CST 11/23/13
Physician says Obamacare is causing 'chaos' for doctors Text Size Published: Tuesday, 3 Dec 2013 | 12:00 AM ET By: Ben Thompson | Senior segment producer for the Kudlow Report Poor situation for Obamacare: Pro Monday, 2 Dec 2013 | 7:25 PM ET Paul Howard, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and Dr. William Grace, assistant professor at New York Medical College and a physician at Lenox Hill Hospital, discuss problems on the Obamacare exchanges. The administration is furiously trying to rectify another Obamacare issue: faulty enrollment data that could soon become a significant headache for consumers and insurers. The latter say much of the information they have received is practically useless, which means some consumers might not be able to get access to benefits on Jan. 1, the date their coverage is scheduled to take effect. Dr. Bill Grace, founder of Grace Oncology in NYC and an assistant professor of clinical medicine at New York Medical College, told CNBC Monday night that the enrollment problems also are causing significant problems for doctors. "Right now that back end is in chaos. â?¦ We don't even know if we should sign up for these plans, because we have a suspicion that many of [them] offer very little reimbursement or offer a loss to the physicians who are going to see these patients," Grace told Larry Kudlow on CNBC's "Kudlow Report". "No physician wants to take money out of his pocket and put it in the government's." (Read more: Obamacare enrollment error rate still secret as more sign up) The Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services, which is responsible for running the federal Obamacare website, has refused to reveal how many sign-ups have software-related errors that could delay enrollees' coverage. The administration released a 50-state report Tuesday morning saying that nearly 1.5 million people had been found eligible for Medicaid during October, far outpacing enrollment eligibility in subsidized private coverage. But as Obamacare puts more people in the Medicaid system, Grace said fewer doctors are treating Medicaid patients. "The problem is, who's going to care for you when you have Medicaid?" he said. "For an hour-and-15-minute evaluation of a cancer patient, I get $6.50. That won't even pay for the electricity. What kind of physician will you get ... what kind of specialist will you get?" Doctors are "already leaving in droves from accepting Medicare," he said. "They're going to concierge practices. They're limiting the number of Medicare patients they take. They're taking only commercial insurance plans, and the premier physicians are taking no insurance at all." (Read more: Insurers claim health website is still flawed) Obamacare's website troubles have resulted in enrollment numbers significantly lower than administration officials had hoped. It's questionable whether the program will reach the 7 million sign-ups the Congressional Budget Office predicted. The sign-up period runs through March. Grace told CNBC that the biggest problem with Obamacare is that patients don't have skin in the game. He offered this health-care fix as an alternative. "I'd give everybody at birth a health savings account, because it makes everybody a capitalist. People make poor health care choices and want somebody else to bail them out. When they own the plan, they begin to make healthy ... choices. " â?By CNBC's Ben Thompson. Follow him on Twitter @BenThompson00.
Posted by W Kuster at 6:21AM CST 12/05/13
Monday 11/11/13
Do Weather Models = Yield?
Yield predictions based on weather data alone remain a work in progress, farmers and economists say.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 10:34AM CST 11/11/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments |
Post a Comment
Thursday 10/31/13
Insurance Terminated? Get a Plan B
Millions of policyholders have been put on notice. Their existing health insurance will be terminated Jan. 1 because they aren't compliant with federal standards under the Affordable Care Act. Farm families have options.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 6:34PM CDT 10/31/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (45)
ObamaCare Is Not Settled Law â? It's Still In Court 4 Comments Posted 07:00 PM ET Email Print License Comment inShare Affordable Care Act: When a few Republicans used the shutdown to try to tie up ObamaCare, its supporters said it was settled law, get over it, deal with it, move on. But it's not. It's merely a statute and courts are still looking at it. The individual mandate provision of ObamaCare is the pivotal piece that many thought would fail the constitutional test. But the Supreme Court said the mandate is a tax and therefore falls within constitutional limits. The ensuing re-election of President Obama further emboldened ObamaCare supporters, who, after the election, said it was a referendum on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But no law is settled in our system â? the Constitution itself can be changed through a constitutional process â? and that includes ObamaCare. Even as Washington debates delaying implementation of the individual mandate for a year, a U.S. district court has refused to dismiss a legal challenge to the Democrats' reform. This is not some petty complaint but a sober legal issue that "has the potential to sink ObamaCare," Cato Institute health policy analyst Michael Cannon said this week in the Los Angeles Times. "It could make the current website problems seem minor by comparison," he said. George Mason Law School professor Michael Greve believes that the legal challenge is so serious that "all of ObamaCare hangs on the outcome" of the case. In the suit, Halbig v. Sebelius, private employers and individual taxpayers argue that the IRS does not have the authority to hand out hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to health insurance companies in the 36 states that have not set up health insurance exchanges, nor does it have the power to penalize individual taxpayers and employers in those states. The plaintiffs' point: The language of the law does not allow the subsidies â? issued through the tax credit system â? to be used in the federally run exchanges in those 36 states. A similar complaint, King v. Sebelius, is working its way through the federal court in Richmond. This case also has the potential to halt ObamaCare. Clearly, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is not settled law, even as Americans try â? and continue to fail â? to sign up. There is hope the country can still escape from its miserable clutches. We can be rid of this legislated nuisance if the courts do their job. Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/103113-677561-obamacare-is-not-settled-law.htm#ixzz2jM0CiECh Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 8:41PM CDT 10/31/13
Industrial Policy: Four years ago, the insurance industry decided to get in bed with President Obama to help him get his health reform passed. But as soon as things started to go wrong, guess who Obama blamed? Soon after President Obama won the 2008 election, the big insurance industry lobby laid down its arms. Instead of fighting a government takeover of health care as it did in 1994 â? it announced it would partner up. "Universal coverage is within reach," said Karen Ignagni, head of the America's Health Insurance Plans trade group. And just as the president signed Obama-Care into law, AHIP teamed up with a big liberal health reform lobby, Families USA, to form Enroll America and "make reform work." But whatever goodwill the industry hoped to gain by this was short-lived. Once ObamaCare's inherent flaws started to surface, Obama and his liberal chorus immediately pointed their fingers at evil insurers. In a speech in Boston on Wednesday, for example, Obama said that people "are getting notices from their insurance companies suggesting that somehow, because of the Affordable Care Act, they may be losing their existing health insurance plan." Not so, Obama insisted. The blame rests instead with "bad apple" insurers who'd been offering "cut rate plans" or had decided to "downgrade or cancel" their "substandard" policies. Obama press secretary Jay Carney kept at it, saying "the insurer is making the decision to basically cancel the plan and reissue or offer the individual a new plan with different benefits or different costs. So the insurer makes that call." Never mind that Obama's own regulators designed the rules explicitly to force millions to lose their plans, even as Obama promised this would never happen. At the same time, the administration is reportedly pressuring the insurance industry to keep its mouth shut about any complaints it has with ObamaCare. Industry consultant Bob Laszewski told CNN: "The White House is exerting massive pressure on the industry, including the trade associations, to keep quiet." This is just the beginning. As soon as costs start to spike because of ObamaCare's regulations, who do you think will get the blame? And when the young refuse to sign up, creating a premium death spiral, or shortages of doctors inevitably emerge, or job growth stalls out, does anyone think Democrats will accuse ObamaCare? What will follow instead will be a rising chorus for still more price controls, more rules, more regulations and more central planning. The left is already using these failures to argue for a single-payer system. After the ObamaCare launch disaster, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman pined for "a much simpler system in which the government just pays your major medical expenses." We're tempted to say the insurance industry is getting its just desserts. Except it's not just them â? we're all going to pay the price for the ObamaCare disaster. Meanwhile, let this be a lesson to corporate execs who think they can win by selling out to the government. Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/103113-677543-obama-blames-insurance-industry-for-obamacare-failures.htm#ixzz2jM4gZtQ5 Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 8:58PM CDT 10/31/13
All government, especially government insurance, should be reduced in size rather than be increased to a level where, even Obamma can not buffalo the American people.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:51AM CDT 11/01/13
If the government cannot force you into health insurance, such as the ACA, then how can it force you to buy auto insurance? However, I think the nation as a whole needs a reality wake up call. Our health industry in this country was bankrupting America day by day. When is the last time your insurance premiums actually went down? I cannot remember myself. To blame the ACA for the total cost of rising premiums is a weak argument. Sure, it may have contributed to it, but I can guarantee that rates were going up. One medical issue for the uninsured would possibly bankrupt them. I just had a baby and even with my "insurance" it is still going to cost me just over $5000 out of pocket. The total bill for a routine, no problem, in and out delivery (actual delivery took 5 minutes, was in labor for about 3 hours) was just under $14,000. That is outrageous, and the majority of Americans could not afford to pay that bill without insurance, and many people have to put their deductible on payment plans anyways. A simple ER visit will likely run you between $500 to $1000 before they actually do anything. The point I am trying to make is that our current system is broken. Health care costs are on a runaway train from the general economy, with no end in sight. The government needed to do something as our population is aging and that is when the majority of healthcare costs are incurred. As of now, the ACA isn't working too smoothly, but I suggest we give it some time. The alternative is doing nothing, and that is not working.
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 8:34AM CDT 11/01/13
November 1, 2013 Stick a Fork in Obama By William L. Gensert We are only three and a quarter years away from transforming the United States of America. We may never get back to where we once were, but we can sure roll back much of the mess Barack Obama has created through his misguided policies and serial incompetence. With ObamaCare's ascendancy and impending crash, America will be on the cusp of transformational action. The misery the ACA will bring to almost every American cannot be overestimated in its ability to incite anger -- and, anger has consequences and repercussions. The failure of the ACA has the potential to make 2014 a wave election for Republicans. In 2016, we may see a true conservative as president. America put men on the moon. Now, with 3 ½ years and a half a billion dollars, we can't even build a website. This is how much Barry and his ilk have degraded the brand. We used to be the shining light on the hill. Now, we are darkness at the end of the tunnel. Barack Obama has been the worst thing that has ever happened to the Oval Office, and in the end, ObamaCare will seal his fate as a failed president. Three and on half years ago, who would have thought that the most emblematic part of the Affordable Care Act, would be the website? Yet, they already have more than a half a billion dollars in for something that doesn't work at all. Just imagine how much they will spend to fix it. Healthcare.gov, when fixed, will probably have cost the nation's taxpayers upwards of a billion dollars That's the thing about Barry, before his election, the national conversation about budgets and deficits was always about "billions of dollars." Since January of 2009, it's all about "trillions of dollars." Now we are talking about websites in the "billions of dollars" category. That's Barry, always breaking new ground. Yet, it is not over. America is holding all the cards. Republicans have always had a tendency of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, but it's looking fairly safe they will play this one right. The path forward, almost always begins by going in the wrong direction. There would have been no Ronald Reagan without Jimmy Carter. The Republicans need to find a new Reagan. Like the "Gipper," he will have to be a fighter and the gloves will have to come off, because ObamaCare has given Republicans the best opportunity to halt the progressive onslaught in a generation. America, at last, will be listening. Ronald Reagan gave us 25 years of prosperity and freedom. It's high time we fight to get that back. Before the last election, I told friends that if Barack Obama won reelection, his second term would destroy the Democratic Party and progressivism for a generation. By the end of his reign, Americans are going to be so tired and soured on Obama, his anointed successor will not stand a chance of becoming the nation's next president. Barack Obama has become a leader who does not matter -- the stimulus was all Pelosi and ObamaCare was Pelosi and Harry Reid, et al. What idea was ever his? Can he point to one thing where he was deeply involved? He has been our golfing president. He is so incompetent and uninvolved that it is believable that he did not know the problems with healthcare.gov, the integral component of ObamaCare, a program he proudly put his name to. Well...after the IRS targeting of political opponents, the NSA spying on everyone -- including the tapping of the German Chancellor's cell phone, the Fast and Furious dead, Solyndra and all the other crony capitalist backroom deals, the Pigford payouts, his $6 trillion addition to the national debt, the 13.6% U6 unemployment rate, the increase in food stamp and disability rolls, the Benghazi dead and the cover-up, the Syria embarrassment, the racial divisiveness, the doubling of the price of gasoline, and now, Healthcare.gov, people are starting to realize a thing or two about Mr. Hope and Change. If you think people hate the website, wait until they get a load of ObamaCare itself. If I did not have such a visceral dislike for the man, I would almost feel sorry for him...it's going to be a long three plus years for Barack Obama. Daniel Henninger in the Wall Street Journal writes: "Barack Obama may have spent a lifetime failing up, but eventually it's just failure. He has presided over five years of sickly economic growth, inadequate job creation, a doubling of the food stamp population and now this -- ObamaCare." The Obama presidency is dead -- killed by Obama himself in a fit of vanity and hubris. With it, goes the entire progressive movement. It won't be long before people begin to understand what ObamaCare will cost them and how it will affect their healthcare. Avik Roy in Forbes Magazine estimates 93 million people will lose their current coverage. It is altogether possible there will be more people uninsured in 2014 than there were uninsured in 2009 when the ACA passed on a purely partisan vote, promising universal coverage. With every cancellation letter received, an angry American will remember Obama telling the nation repeatedly: "[I]f you like your insurance plan, you will keep it." Republicans, having made a futile stand in attempting to defund ObamaCare, have immunity. Barack owns this baby. They can spend most of the next year in the run-up to the midterm elections picking apart ObamaCare with impunity -- control of the Senate is within their grasp. The shutdown of our government, while seemingly detrimental to Republicans in the short run, will be a blessing going forward. The MSM did conservatives a favor by making sure every American knew that the Republicans shut down the government in an attempt to defund ObamaCare. As the ACA touches the lives of every American and the anger builds, they will remember who tried to stop it. The nail in the coffin of progressivism is ObamaCare. After all, it is a law that penalizes almost everyone, while simultaneously ruining the nation's healthcare system. So staggering will its failure be, and its failure is inevitable, Hillary Clinton may be forced to run in 2016 as a small-government conservative. Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/11/stick_a_fork_in_obama.html#ixzz2jPN2atTV Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 10:29AM CDT 11/01/13
To think that liberals spending trillions insanely is going to solve health care cost inflation is preposterous. You would think that trillion dollar government deficits and endless trillions in debt would alert at least a few people that mindless government spending does not drive down costs.
Posted by Sally Benson at 12:19PM CDT 11/01/13
And now we know democrats are responsible for insurance cancellations. See Senate Democrats supported rule that led to insurance cancellations Posted by CNN Investigative Correspondent Chris Frates Washington (CNN) - Senate Democrats voted unanimously three years ago to support the Obamacare rule that is largely responsible for some of the health insurance cancellation letters that are going out. In September 2010, Senate Republicans brought a resolution to the floor to block implementation of the grandfather rule, warning that it would result in canceled policies and violate President Barack Obamaâ?s promise that people could keep their insurance if they liked it. â?The District of Columbia is an island surrounded by reality. Only in the District of Columbia could you get away with telling the people if you like what you have you can keep it, and then pass regulations six months later that do just the opposite and figure that people are going to ignore it. But common sense is eventually going to prevail in this town and common sense is going to have to prevail on this piece of legislation as well,â? Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley said at the time. â?The administration's own regulations prove this is not the case. Under the grandfathering regulation, according to the White House's own economic impact analysis, as many as 69 percent of businesses will lose their grandfathered status by 2013 and be forced to buy government-approved plans,â? the Iowa Republican said. On a party line vote, Democrats killed the resolution, which could come back to haunt vulnerable Democrats up for re-election this year. Senate Democrats like Mary Landrieu, Jeanne Shaheen, Mark Pryor, Kay Hagan and Mark Begich â? all of whom voted against stopping the rule from going into effect and have since supported delaying parts of Obamacare. The rule set up the criteria for what insurance plans would be grandfathered, or exempted, from the new Obamacare requirements. Democrats argued then that the rule was necessary to insure that insurance companies werenâ?t able to drastically change their plans and still remain exempt from Obamacare. Republicans are â?saying that basically we will grandfather it in, but the insurance companies can change it however they want, and you are stuck with it,â? Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa said in 2010. The rule essentially prevents insurance companies from keeping their grandfathered status if they make changes to their plans. In practice, insurance companies are loath to leave their plans unchanged so grandfathered plans are disappearing, and people are being forced to change their plans to meet Obamacareâ?s more robust coverage requirements.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 12:31PM CDT 11/01/13
Ya Know! Sum day I figur I"m a gonna Die. If the ailment aint gunna kill me, the Obummer pill will.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:57PM CDT 11/01/13
Thanks Sally for the easy to understand analysis! Turning the best health care in the world over to the worst management institution in world (government) is utter stupidity. I wish Pedro could understand that things like tort reform would more likely achieve his goal of cheaper health care than this government attempt to manage 1/6 of the economy it has no clue about. My daughter is an optometrist and tells me that the ACA will cap what she charges for an eye exam. Sounds like a big savings for you and me until we realize that many, if not most, doctors will figure out that they can get around this by scheduling more patients per day and spending less time with each patient. More followups, whether you need them or not, will fill the schedule. My daughter is also expected to spend considerably more time expanding the personal data files for ACA even though this information has nothing to do with eye care. In light of NSA and IRS scandals, this fact should concern us!! Perhaps Marcia could research the government's explanation for demanding so much of our personal information?
Posted by Curt Zingula at 6:48AM CST 11/05/13
The USA spends double for health care with often lesser results than any comparable industrialized nation. Our infant mortality rate ranks with third world nations. Complex medical procedures are routinely completed daily on Americans by American trained doctors in lesser developed economies for a cost less than the insurance copay if performed stateside. George Washington spoke of a national health care policy in his term. Rural America was losing healthcare access before our current president was born. The conservative faction of our population has opposed a national health policy for 237 years and will continue until the demise of this country despite factual evidence. And on these pages, we see the same old hysterical comments showing an absolute denial of the need to step in to the future. If you deny even the basics of human need, how are you to be trusted in your handling of the nation's food supply and treatment of the environment? As usual, there are no comments to improve health care, only the rural traditional need to tear something or someone down. I ask for accurate comments that address US health needs, not another example of your personal and collective prejudices. Please help.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:10AM CST 11/06/13
Of utmost importance to reducing health care costs is not to elect anyone from the most morally bankrupt party, the party of supporting unborn baby killers, the party of liars, and from the party that run Detroit in the ground. See http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/terry-mcauliffe-governor-virginia Solutions do not flow from corruption in power. With you Don we have to start with the basics.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 9:02AM CST 11/06/13
More evidence of liberal incompetence - See http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasdelbeccaro/2013/11/06/our-cash-for-obamas-clunkers/
Posted by Alvin Obert at 9:45AM CST 11/06/13
Alvin, Did you use to blog as John Olsen and a long list of other identities? I see no discussion of the issue, just wild eyed name calling. And yes, I like the ACA even with the short comings of the initial web site. It is about time we addressed a pressing issue rather than the continuous fight over ideology that leaves the problem to fester as we weaken ourselves again in a fast paced world.
Posted by Don Thompson at 2:15PM CST 11/06/13
From what I read, St. Mary's Hospital( a Catholic Hospital) in Rochester, Mn. gets patients from all over the world. I have not read of people from Rochester, Mn. going elsewhere for better care.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 8:19PM CST 11/06/13
With libs like you Don facts and evidence do not matter. For some unknown reason libs jump to the conclusion that government in control will offer better quality health care and lower health care cost. See http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2371/chavez-socialist-health-care and http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/08/world/fg-healthcare8 Government healthcare is a failure every time it is tried, but that does not deter libs from destroying healthcare.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 6:46AM CST 11/07/13
Equivalent care for much cheaper costs, Bonnie.
Posted by Don Thompson at 6:47AM CST 11/07/13
Alvin, I have the facts and that appears to leave you bitter and confused. The ACA is not government in control. Third world nations can offer quality health care at much cheaper costs. That is the point. Other healthcare programs by foreign governments are not "always" a failure as you suggest. The USA lack of a program is recognized as the most obvious failure. You do not see any country following our lead. We had no overall healthcare policy in this country prior to ACA, just it like it was in the Stone Age. You seem comfortable with that.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:58AM CST 11/07/13
You are like Obama Don - the truth is opposite of what you say.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 3:24PM CST 11/07/13
Why can't the low income worker enjoy the largesse of the government just like row crop farmers?
Posted by Unknown at 8:26PM CST 11/07/13
Do you have actual experience Don. Please share the details. I am not interested in an opinion from what you have read or what you think on this topic. Real comparisons.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:21AM CST 11/08/13
Curt, Tort reform would help, but that is not that big of a piece of the puzzle. Why don't you actually look up facts instead of spewing hersay. This is from the CBO: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that implementing a typical package of tort reform proposals nationwide would reduce total U.S. healthcare spending by about 0.5 percent, or about $11 billion in 2009. http://www.hfma.org/Content.aspx?id=8697 That seems like a drop of water in a big bucket. Will tort reform help, yes, but it won't make that big of a difference. What you all seem to be forgetting is that before the ACA was ever implemented or considered, health care costs were bankrupting everyday Americans and our country through Medicaid and Medicare. If you are too ignorant to acknowledge that you need a reality check in the worst way. A health emergency can happen in the blink of an eye and no one, no matter who they are, are safe. Accidents happen all the time, cancer doesn't care who you are. Stuff happens. What the Democrats decided to finally do was try and get the runaway train of rising healthcare costs under control. Like I said before, I don't know if the ACA will do that, but the principle behind the program is the way to do it. Richard Nixon first proposed this type of insurance exchange back in the late 60's/early 70's (I believe) as a way to counter the Democrats single payer concept. The GOP in Massachusetts implemented this similar concept in their state. So now that the Democrats have said let's try it your way, the GOP says no, we don't want no government involvement. Well folks the PRIVATE INDUSTRY FAILED US MISERABLY!!!! Now the USA has told the PRIVATE INSURERS, this is a minimum level of care we expect you to provide. In order for you to do this, we acknowledge you need "healthy" people in your system to make it work. Therefore, we will mandate that everyone has it, so you can still make your actuarials work. This is how insurance in the auto/home industry works people. It is not rocket science. Turn off the conservative drones for a bit, take a step back and realize what we have doesn't work for the vast majority of the country, and this is the best, least government intrusive (yes I said it) way to get it done short of making the whole system a single payer system like Medicaid, Medicare, Tricare (that's the military system folks).
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 9:11AM CST 11/08/13
Bonnie, Yes I do have knowledge of these situations, some through people I know as providers and others who were involved as customers. These were generally people who I met through my work in the travel industry. Google "Health Tourism" and please let me know what you find.
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:18AM CST 11/08/13
Please share Don, first hand experience, not knowledge through aquantance. Do you run to a Doctor in Kabul for health care? I can certainly share 2nd. hand information obtained from quite a few individuals with experience. Most have not had good experiences, other than those with cash! I did not fall off the pumpkin truck yesterday.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 1:00PM CST 11/08/13
Actually Bonnie, you did fall off the turnip truck some time ago it appears. Just because you are inclined to not believe a fact does not make the fact any less authentic. Did you research any of this before you came to your opinion? Why not?
Posted by Don Thompson at 4:28PM CST 11/08/13
Good grief! Another, non-food producer with just an opinion, reached with tunnel vision.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 8:37AM CST 11/09/13
Don you really should have your health checked out in Venezuela since you are so fond of government health care! See http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/110813-678654-venezuela-health-care-collapsing-not-unlike-obamacare.htm?p=2
Posted by Alvin Obert at 6:58PM CST 11/09/13
Not the turnip truck, Don. Can you not read. Pumkin truck, potatoe truck or pickle truck. Bale wagon, rock wagon. Worked on all of them. Did you?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:05PM CST 11/11/13
Bonnie, You are getting way off the subject with your name calling and attempts at insults. We were talking about health care in the USA and options around the world. Any constructive input from you on that subject? By the way, I am quite comfortable with my experiences in the work force, education, and contributions to society. Thank You.
Posted by Don Thompson at 12:02PM CST 11/12/13
Read your own entree's Don. Would you be comfortable with the Health Care in Kabul? Do lower income people have the same H.C. access in Eastern Europe or the former Soviet Union? The Scandinavian Nations have North Sea crude oil as revenue, yet have tax rates over 50%, kicking in at low income levels. I prefer my local Drs., if they do not quit with this fiasco or if Uncle Obama don't assign me Physicians Assisstant from somewhere like Central America.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:34AM CST 11/13/13
Bonnie, What ARE you talking about? No one has proposed a 50% tax or healthcare in Kabul. The US ranks 37th in the world in total health care quality per dollar equivalent spent. Maybe we should seek improvement?! The ACA mandates a minimum amount coverage provisions with everyone in the pool. The program services are ran and organized by the same private insurance firms and health providers we have now. What is wrong with PA's? That is what we saw all the time in the military and I still do. Bring them on. Doctors who claim they are going to quit are blowing smoke. What are they going to do - go to Kabul, work in an auto factory? I guess they could go to Costa Rico. Good health careers down there with lots of American retirees.
Posted by Don Thompson at 6:59AM CST 11/13/13
You can sure twist things with-in the small tunnel you peer through, Don. My question was, Would you be comfortable getting health care in Kabul?? Many of those nations with socialized medicine of the 36 you refer are also broke unless they are blessed with sellable natural resources to fund it. I am trying to express that there is a lot more involved than the Obamacare fiasco itself. PA's and other medical certificates earned outside the USA (some Central American country's)for example, have much less criteria to get a degree, but under such things as NAFTA are licensed to practice here through contract language. DR's are quiting working with ins. at an alarming rate and going into a cash only type practice. Much cheaper for many of us to pay cash for non-major medical, than the higher deductables with Obamacare. There is more to it than what the super salesman has sold the gullible.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:53AM CST 11/14/13
Bonnie, First of all, your question about getting health care in Kabul is frivolous. I would venture that every country is broke by someone's definition but only one is the richest country in the world with one the the worst overall health care conditions for a modern nation and that is the USA. My own experience, which you may choose to discount, is that people in the rest of the world are as competent as any American when given equal opportunity. You may not like to hear that and you chosen sources of information may say otherwise but it is my observation. The USA has had a poor history of providing rural doctors during my entire life. I have heard but have not seen the exodus of doctors you refer to. More smoke I guess. I am a strong supporter of the ACA for its attempts to improve our health situation despite outrageous opposition claims. In 5 years, just like Part D, it will be considered the norm. Even you will have to admit there are things in this bill you would not want to give up just in the name of ideology. No reason to be afraid of change or people that are different.
Posted by Don Thompson at 8:04AM CST 11/14/13
Good grief, Take off the blinders,Don. Most of the world has little or no rural health care. Make comparisons from throughout the world as a whole, rather than the cream of crop. If one would look, even the 36 you reference will differ in availability and affordability. If you are someone, no obstacles. I use Kabul only as an example of the worst. Go there and then state how poor our system is.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 11:32AM CST 11/14/13
Bonnie, I am quite aware of the world's health predicament. However, I do not accept your issue that because of it, we Americans should be content with 3rd world health results. US farmers will swear they are the best in the world and we all like to brag how our military can beat their military but our health care for our populace ranks below Cuba and that is just fine. Really? You can do better and you must for the betterment of those that follow you.
Posted by Don Thompson at 1:56PM CST 11/14/13
Even the Clintons are quivering on Obamacare, Joe Biden is hiding and the agenda driven President is violating the law to cover his massive mistake.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:57AM CST 11/15/13
Bonnie, You have an entire political party and all their allies staging a massive effort to throw rocks in the gears of ACA. Rather unprecedented action from any party. One would expect issues on roll out. Even all this roadblocking does not make the objective less valid than the opponent's ultimate objective to leave the USA with a third rate health care.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:11AM CST 11/15/13
Don do you really think that a dictator thugs like Chavez and Obama can offer anything positive to government? See http://blog.heritage.org/2013/11/14/obamas-cancellation-fix-violating-law-short-term-public-relations-move/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social#.UoYi5XAzQoM
Posted by Gene Tyler at 7:37AM CST 11/15/13
When a RIM, Ram and Rod program is pushed through into law without ,even Nancy Pelosi having the time to read it, the sink hole was started through the neglegence of the promoters, not the opposition. If one would take a look, one would see that terrible Boener begged Congress and Obama for a one year delay for implementation Obamacare. If Obama would have gotten off his high horse and Mr. Ried would stand up and quit hiding in the desert, a legal bi-partisan extension could have materialized. Nope! The little Dictator shall ignore the law and rule. Talk of rocks. It seems only those living in the big glass house are the ones throwing stones. Even the safety glass of the liberal press is shattering.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 9:49AM CST 11/15/13
Bonnie, I believe we have hit a sore spot. The right wing rantings are coming to a fever pitch. I see the "dictator" theme being used by several off the wall naysayers so I must assume that Fox News is using that ploy now. I went to a concert last evening after the tornadoes and talked with some rational red staters who commented that ACA would probably be OK after it is settled. Pretty wild comments from an almost totally reliable red state! There was even the mention of how the detractors were fighting SS and Medicare years after its implementation. Take a deep breath Bonnie and breathe out of your nose, it relieves stress and is recommended by the ACA supporters.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:31AM CST 11/18/13
Do a little research on the number of executive orders signed by this President and compare to all of the previous before him.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 8:08AM CST 11/18/13
Say Don how does terrorizing Americans by denying their doctors and hospitals of choice, taking away the policies they were promised they could keep, and continually lying to them constitute health care? At least Nixon had the decency to resign. All Obama has done is create chaos.
Posted by Sally Benson at 6:23AM CST 11/19/13
Bonnie, We are still talking about medical care in the USA in this blog. I want to hear your remedy for rapidly rising health care costs and the disparity of services between the haves and have nots in the USA. I really do not care what you think about this administration or your prejudices.
Posted by Don Thompson at 6:05PM CST 11/19/13
More reading material for liberals see Obama's Edicts Are Dictatorial, Not Presidential 3 Comments By BETSY MCCAUGHEY Posted 05:59 PM ET Print Comment inShare Betsy McCaughey Betsy McCaughey President Obama says he can "fix" the millions of canceled health insurance plans with an administrative change. He's claiming more executive power â? power for himself â? than the Constitution allows, and is playing fast and loose with the truth. The culprit behind the cancellations is not an administrative regulation, as he claims. It's Section 2702 of the Affordable Care Act. It says all plans sold in the individual market or small-group market on Jan. 1, 2014, or later must include the Essential Benefits Package. This means 10 categories of health coverage the Washington "experts" deem essential, such as maternity care even if you're 50 years old. Plans are being canceled because they don't have all 10. Only Congress can dispense with the deadline. Last Friday, the House of Representatives passed a bill to do that.(Insurers and insurance commissioners in several states have said the "fix" is too late to retool by Jan. 1.) Nevertheless, the House bill is a legal attempt to stop the mass cancellations. Amazingly, our arrogant president says he will veto that bill if it reaches his desk because it would allow insurers to sell the noncompliant policies to new customers as well as old. The real reason is that Obama wants to rule by edict. This particular edict could put taxpayers on the hook for a hefty amount. The American Academy of Actuaries warned that the fix is likely to cause healthy people to stick with their old plans, leaving the sickest in the new exchanges. That will clobber exchange insurers. Section 1342 of the law set up a mechanism to bail out insurers that incur losses. It's funded by fees on insurers and employers. The actuaries predicted the pot of money might not be enough. "Costs to the federal government could increase," the group warned. The incorrect part of the actuaries' statement is "costs to the federal government." The federal government has no money. It's our money. Obama often brushes off critics of the health law by saying ObamaCare is "the law of the land." (Except when he wants to patch it up himself.) "It passed the House. Passed the Senate. The Supreme Court ruled it constitutional ... it was the central issue in last year's election. It is settled." That's a claim you could make about the Affordable Care Act. But not about ObamaCare â? the ad hoc health reform the president is rolling out. Obama himself has stripped the law of key components such as the employer mandate and then padded it with handouts to favored constituencies. On Aug. 9, the president was asked where he gets the authority to make these changes. "In a normal political environment," he replied, "it would have been easier for me to simply call up the Speaker (of the House) and say: 'You know what? This is a tweak that doesn't go to the essence of the law â? so let's make a technical change in the law.' That would be the normal thing that I would prefer to do." He's suggesting these are not normal times, just because Republicans control the House. Sorry, Mr. President, but divided government â? with an uncooperative Congress â? is the norm. Don't be shocked if a renegade insurance company sues to stop the president's most recent fix. Insurers have invested hundreds of millions of dollars creating and marketing health plans that conform to the Affordable Care Act. Lower federal courts already are smacking down the president for his footloose way with the law. Though the Affordable Care Act says only state exchanges can provide subsidies to health plan enrollees, the Obama administration is trying to offer subsidies in all 50 states, rather than just in the 14 states that set up exchanges. The administration has tried to get these lawsuits dismissed, but so far has failed twice. This isn't just about ObamaCare. On Aug. 13, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the president for failing to obey a 2002 statute that required the executive branch to take final action on the certification of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste site. Judge Brett Kavanaugh ruled that "under Article II of the Constitution and relevant Supreme Court precedents, the president must follow statutory mandates." In our country, the rule of law is king, not Mr. Obama Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/111913-679823-obama-wants-to-rule-by-edict-ignore-constitution.htm#ixzz2l8y6dFol Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:09PM CST 11/19/13
"Sally", Medical and mental health insurance coverage is available through the ACA created exchanges. Please take advantage of it. I hope you live in a state progressive enough to not make health care inaccessible for those so obviously in need.
Posted by Don Thompson at 8:28PM CST 11/19/13
Its obvious to the honest that obamacare is not about healthcare but all about government control. See http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/364362/some-dc-exchange-plans-cover-elective-abortion-not-hearing-aids-betsy-woodruff
Posted by Sally Benson at 5:53AM CST 11/20/13
Thursday 10/24/13
When You Are Your Brother's Keeper
Off-farm heirs need fair rent if they jointly own your farmland and decent buyout prices when they exit farm ownership, courts and business counselors say.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 10:39AM CDT 10/24/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (1)
Correction: Actually the double taxation for C Corp shareholders is slightly worse than 35% plus 20%. We forgot to add the new 3.8% surcharge on investment income, so the combined damages would be 35% corporate tax, plus 23.8% for the individual. Net result is you'd take home less than HALF of any farmland appreciation in a C Corp, BEFORE state income taxes. If you need ideas on how to unwind a C Corp, see Elizabeth Williams' excellent article "Avoid the Land Trap" in the November issue of The Progressive Farmer magazine and/or join us in Chicago!
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 11:02AM CDT 10/25/13
Monday 10/21/13
Financial Aid Mounts for Blizzard Victims
A Ranchers Relief Fund and sympathetic lenders can ease strain after South Dakota's Atlas Blizzard. But without the equivalent of crop insurance, cattlemen need Congress to pass disaster aid.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:58PM CDT 10/21/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments |
Post a Comment
Wednesday 10/16/13
Risk Management Post-Farm Bill
You'll need to consider three pieces in your risk protection package after the farm bill's passage--a basic revenue feature in the commodity title, maximum conventional crop insurance for your disaster risk and an SCO-policy on top to cover "shallow' losses.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 12:43PM CDT 10/16/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (18)
There is no "risk" in crop farming any more. Congress has ensured that there is no risk for croppers and hope to run any small farmer off the map. I'm o.k. with it because I am big and will continue to receive hundred's of thousands in welfare for doing things (planting and harvesting) that I would do with or without the subsidies. I will just buy more collector cars and lake homes! I do have pity on the livestock guys who actually put in a 40 hour week and have zero safety net.
Posted by Bill Billson at 7:12PM CDT 10/16/13
An inept and corrupt congress is rapidly depopulating rural America of smaller farmers by mindlessly awarding the largest and most profitable farms with massive investment and profit guarantees. This so called safety net provides nearly a unlimited and consistent massive financial advantage to those least in need of any government help For small farmers these so called safety nets are providing an endless volley of lethal bullets to the financial competitiveness and sustainability of smaller farmers. Congress needs to be awaken to the enormous social changes taking place in rural America by the callous granting of these despicable and discriminatory financial safety nets to the most profitable.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 1:57AM CDT 10/17/13
Sorry- Food Bill Haters. The exodus from rural America started when the mold board plow showed up. I think that was prior to crop insurance. Just a fact.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:30AM CDT 10/17/13
Every one knows that technology plays a role in farm size and when farm numbers in this country peaked Bonnie. What is being discussed is the results and effects of the recent proliferation of multimillion dollar federal crop insurance policies accompanied by billions in subsidies for the largest farmers and 17 or so multinational insurance, machinery mfg. or seed producing companies. Try getting off the farm sometime Bonnie :).
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:42AM CDT 10/17/13
"Crop insurance" was not so profitable for the farmers until their insured commodities became so valuable to the marketplace primarily because of the increased usage and demand from biofuels. If crop insurance were the reason for farmers being so profitable, they would have been doing awesome before the biofuels boom 2007 and forward. Be happy that farmers have finally enjoyed some good times. Of course those times will ebb and flow. Just 3 years ago many farmers lost money even though they had good crop insurance because the market was so relatively low compared with their input costs.
Posted by Eric Sorensen at 9:40AM CDT 10/17/13
Sorry Sally, I like it here. I even boycott Wallymart!
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 9:43AM CDT 10/17/13
There is no reason to jump to the conclusion that anyone is begrudging farmers the enjoyment from marketplace profitability. What is despicable is government awarding massive financial insurance benefits to those least in need of any help as well as the billions in subsides that are disproportionately awarded farmers and insurance companies.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 12:27PM CDT 10/17/13
The US also has the most affordable food in the world, thanks partly to the security of crop insurance. However, I believe there should be limits. Why can't congress come up with a farm bill that pays subsidies towards the first 1,000 to 2,000 acres a farmer farms. They can farm any number of acres, but over the 1,000 to 2,000 acre amount they have to cover the entire cost of insurance. I think this would relax the farm economy a bit, keeping it a free economy and give other smaller farmers more opportunity to compete. Current discussion in the farm bill is to lower the percentage of subsidies the larger farms receive by income. What kind of an administrative nightmare will that be when crop planting is reported in the spring, will they go off the previous years taxes? Sounds simple to me to limit it by the number of acres, but would that be too easy?
Posted by Ryan E at 7:56PM CDT 10/20/13
Good point Ryan. However, all land is not equal. Irrigated, double cropping, 250 bushel corn, across the road 175 bushels etc. My opinion leans toward a maximum dollar amount to any operation. regardless of number of owners. I think in the Reagan era a max. was attempted. Did not last long though. ($25,000) ?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:58AM CDT 10/21/13
Why not a limit to policy size per farmer. That would give all farmers an equal opportunity to benefit from federal crop insurance benefits and not target massive benefits to a select few.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 7:48AM CDT 10/21/13
Why not a limit to policy size per farmer. That would give all farmers an equal opportunity to benefit from federal crop insurance benefits and not target massive benefits to a select few.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 7:51AM CDT 10/21/13
I think Wesley, that both Ryan and myself are suggesting a policy size. Some, however, are so obsessed with a train of thought that the target is benifits for big business, the Food Security Act intentions and discussions get lost in mindless rhetoric.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 9:40AM CDT 10/21/13
There absolutely must be a net worth eligibility standard for federal crop insurance. Why should the taxpayer be providing millions in profit guarantees and insurance subsidies to those with millions in net worth.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 8:13AM CDT 10/30/13
So then Wesley, you would also suggest a financial statement to qualify for FEMA, which is more costly to the taxpayer, SBA Loans, etc. do I need go on? I do not disagree with your perspective in principal, but what do you suggest for the implementation? The IRS?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 10:56AM CDT 10/30/13
Sounds good to me Bonnie - if you want the taxpayer to provide massive financial aid the least someone can do is provide a financial statement. What is wrong with means testing? Also there should be public disclosure of all this massive financial assistance for individuals and companies. The general public should have the right to see who the politicians are showering with the big benefits.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 12:24PM CDT 10/30/13
Great, When the IRS gets Obummercare figured out, they can get right on it.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 11:16AM CDT 10/31/13
The IRS is very busy targeting conservatives. See http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/31/report-irs-provided-conservative-groups-confidential-tax-information-to-fec/ When you work for Obama it is all about politics.
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 12:22PM CDT 10/31/13
The IRS is very busy sending refunds overseas also - see http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/10/irs-lost-4-billion-to-identity-thieves-in-2012-as-it-targeted-the-tea-party/
Posted by Wesley Kuster at 7:00AM CST 11/11/13
Tuesday 10/08/13
Will Corn Claims Get Furloughed?
Corn growers with high levels of insurance and below average yields are likely to trigger crop insurance claims in 2013. But government shutdowns pose bottlenecks and cashflow issues for companies.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 9:16PM CDT 10/08/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (6)
A great example of the private/public relationship that is crop insurance. Even in a government shutdown farmers are still getting their losses paid. While the FSA is shut down and all payments out of their offices are not going out until the shutdown ends.
Posted by Aaron Cross at 4:42PM CDT 10/09/13
O shucks! I suppose we will have pay premium then.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:35PM CDT 10/09/13
Anyone still think having FSA administer the crop insurance program is a good idea? No disrespect to the employees at FSA, but this demonstrates how terrible of an idea that really is.
Posted by Jarrod Bennett at 9:03AM CDT 10/10/13
At what point do the crooks and thieves decide it is time for annual payment limitations for federal crop insurance subsidies? 10 million or is it 100 million? I guess that it is a decision that these birds would rather leave to the Chinese government when the world's largest creditor nation takes possession of the largest debtor nation ever.
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:57AM CDT 10/12/13
See http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/513431/20131013/china-debt-ceiling-shutdown-xinhua-de-emericanised.htm
Posted by Sally Benson at 7:58AM CDT 10/13/13
Thank you, Sally
Posted by Unknown at 8:43PM CDT 10/14/13
Thursday 10/03/13
Big Bets on Climate Corp.
Monsanto paid almost as much for tiny Climate Corp. as ACE paid for the jewel in the crown of the crop insurance business. The seed giant sees the value in crop forecasting, not the insurance market.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:17PM CDT 10/03/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (1)
whats the connection between climate corp and ace?
Posted by Unknown at 6:00AM CDT 10/17/13
Monday 09/30/13
D-Day for Health Exchanges
Small business has more to gain than lose by buying insurance in bigger pools.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 5:56PM CDT 09/30/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (14)
Thanks for the clear factual unbiased info Marcia. âº
Posted by Vince Moye at 5:55AM CDT 10/01/13
Democrats in congress needed a special exemption from obamacare since they are so special. See http://www.nationalreview.com/article/358550/congresss-exemption-obamacare-john-fund
Posted by Jim Swanson at 7:52AM CDT 10/01/13
It is amazing that the people/organizations in this article that think this is such a great idea don't realize that there is no free lunch. How do you think it will be paid for? HIGHER TAXES AND/OR A REDUCTION IN QUALITY/QUANITY OF SERVICES, YOU DOLTS.
Posted by Brandon Butler at 3:23PM CDT 10/01/13
Obamacare Overcharging Fraud Like three peas in a pod. See http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/30/company-with-1-2-billion-obamacare-contract-under-investigation-for-serious-fraud/ And there are naive people who actually believe obama could lower health care costs.
Posted by Al Thomas at 7:07AM CDT 10/02/13
The democrats sure know how to choose the corrupt to manage our personal information. See http://spectator.org/blog/2013/10/01/obamas-acorn-pals-cashing-in-o
Posted by Alvin Obert at 7:16AM CDT 10/02/13
Before you do any more cheer leading for obamacare Marcia check this out - http://www.nationalreview.com/node/359861/print
Posted by Alvin Obert at 11:25AM CDT 10/02/13
I assume all the "anti" crowd does not have a preexisting condition. Good for you. All your links refer to organizations that have fought not only healthcare but all social programs from their inception. They will continue until all but their supporters are totally without. Nice crowd. See you in church.
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:37AM CDT 10/02/13
Try checking out those links again Don. The Teamsters and AFL-CIO certainly did not fight obamacare originally. The longer obamacare is in effect the fewer Americans will have full time jobs. Part time jobs do not pay the bills.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 1:11PM CDT 10/02/13
Sorry Marcia, I like reading. However the D-Day description is just not acceptable. It was the likes of my relatives and many, many others, who were actually there and some of us who just tried to understand what they went through that insured our freedom. If some of you had ever listened to our true Hero's opening up, not todays liberal and lax description of hero, the title of the article just would not be acceptable. The government welfare of healthcare is just not, in any way, comparable to what our Veterans went through. If some of these whiners ever had to pick up their buddies arm or leg on a beach and try to put it back on, they might have a valid reason to complain about health care.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:47PM CDT 10/02/13
When I write about these financial subjects, I keep real people in mind and try not to side with any party. One of my heros is a Red River Valley wheat farmer whose 16-year-old son died from a brain tumor in the mid-1980s. It was the worst of times for US farmers, but Melvin decided to pay all his hospital bills rather than declare bankruptcy. When a devastating wheat disease later hit the Valley, he was tapped out and had to sell out. He retired penniless after a lifetime of sweat and labor, leaving a widow with virtually nothing. I don't care which party created the law that puts erased the lifetime limit on health expenses, or is trying to make insurance more affordable. I'm just hoping small business owners with medical issues can retire with some dignity and something to show for their sacrifices.
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 9:52AM CDT 10/03/13
Marcia. I support health care reform for similar reasons. My neighbor was the sharpest hard working individual I knew. He and his wife's health issues produced an insurance premium of $35000 per year back in the 80's. They made it with some state help by getting the premium down to $21K. Not right in this country.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:01AM CDT 10/04/13
To think an inept government spending trillions on health care will lower health care costs is absurd. Government cannot manage current spending judging by the trillions Obama has exploded the debt and deficits.
Posted by Alvin Obert at 1:00PM CDT 10/04/13
How unfortunate for the Red River Valley family. We can all relate to similar disasters at or very close to home. The health care issue is just not in any way comparable to what our and other family members lived and died for on D-Day. If you recall, some of the biggest issues causing problems in agriculture in the 70's and 80's were caused from government flubs. Recovering from the grain embargo, the missery index(inflation rate+interest rate) of Tip O'neals spendaholism. There were many farmers went under without medical disasters. All of the money in the world will not save the young man nor all of the family farms. It is unfortunate, but that is the way it is. One should look up the definition of "Hero".
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:58PM CDT 10/04/13
More obamacare news at http://spectator.org/archives/2013/10/14/obamacare-and-the-edsel-a-tale
Posted by George Hanson at 6:58AM CDT 10/14/13
Tuesday 09/24/13
Do the Math on Obamacare
Buying insurance on a health exchange could save small business owners a bundle.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 5:53PM CDT 09/24/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (42)
"Thanks to tax credits and subsidies" WOW, free money!! Like grant money, it just appears out of the blue!!
Posted by Curt Zingula at 7:51AM CDT 09/25/13
Oh, are the comments on this column going to be priceless. Let the fur fly!
Posted by Brandon Butler at 8:27AM CDT 09/25/13
Thank you Dear Leader!
Posted by Unknown at 7:31PM CDT 09/25/13
When not enough apply, are they going to offer free cell phones as an incentive?
Posted by Paul Beiser at 4:58AM CDT 09/26/13
Great! A hairdresser or other, single parent, usually the mother, working one or two days a week to get out of the house, living in public housing gets a $ $5,000.00 low income credit. Now another $5,000.00 bonus tax credit for buying Obamacare for $144.00, or less, per month. Don't forget the rest of the incentives for not being married and not working full time. The cell phone would be a bargain.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:01AM CDT 09/26/13
In regard to our nation's economic woes: "I have spotted the enemy...and he is we."
Posted by tom vogel at 6:50AM CDT 09/26/13
Marcia - you are one duped liberal. Victor David Hansen has done a great job of informing you of basics you have missed. See http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359515/late-great-middle-class-victor-davis-hanson
Posted by ubknown unknown at 7:01AM CDT 09/26/13
Marcia, Thanks for a fact based article about real ACA options. With all the biased opinion based bloviating that has been expressed through Fox, AEI, Hoover Institute, and Texas politicians in need of mental health services from the ACA, it is a pleasure to have someone author a truly informative article.
Posted by Don Thompson at 8:28AM CDT 09/26/13
At least when you post a blog like this, we don't have to sort through and skip over the ones that John Olsen posts:)
Posted by Glenn BRANDS at 8:33AM CDT 09/26/13
Before you criticize Ted Cruz's mental abilities Don you should listen to what he says. See http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4466033 Also read http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/obama_has_dismantled_america.html
Posted by ubknown unknown at 10:30AM CDT 09/26/13
More reading material for duped liberals. See http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359652/opposing-obamacare-isnt-anarchy-jonah-goldberg
Posted by ubknown unknown at 7:47AM CDT 09/27/13
Unknown Unknown, I did listen to what he has said. That is why I would include him in the group of politicians to which I refer.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:56AM CDT 09/27/13
Liberalism truly is a mental disorder that is demonstrates an unwillingness to deal with reality. Check out Ted Cruz's resume Don. See http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2013/03/ever-take-look-at-ted-cruzs-resume.html No one believes an addiction to a teleprompter demonstrates superior mental abilities.
Posted by ubknown unknown at 8:28AM CDT 09/27/13
Glenn Brands, your comment is about the funniest thing I've read in a while. Thanks for the good laugh.
Posted by Jarrod Bennett at 9:08AM CDT 09/27/13
Definitely time to flush obamacare - see http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/27/paul-suffering-the-sting-of-obamacare/ see http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/27/president-obama-lied-to-us-told-america-some-real-whoppers-about-obamacare/?intcmp=HPBucket
Posted by Greg unknown at 6:10AM CDT 09/28/13
More obamacare nonsense. Check out http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/01/the-new-federal-wedding-tax-how-obamacare-would-dramatically-penalize-marriage Also https://twitter.com/johngort/status/383915886232363008 Also http://chicksontheright.com/posts/item/24764-the-best-obamacare-monologue-evah
Posted by Jim Maxwell at 6:40AM CDT 09/28/13
I am assuming most medical devices are used by recipients of medicare- medicaid-Veterans etc.. The tax on devices will fund part of Obummercare. Net result- government taxing itself to make a failing program look good. Are these expenses being considered as cost increase on the other programs or will Obama be the savior and exempt the same? Can I order my majic Obama Pill on-line?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:58AM CDT 09/29/13
"ObamaCare is based on limitless government, bureaucratic arrogance, and a disregard of the will of the people," said Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.).
Posted by Bob Sanderson at 7:19AM CDT 09/29/13
Who pays for the subsidy,??? The debt is already $16 trillion and growing. More in your face government, sorry to see it happening, I hope everyone will be happy when someone from DC comes over to run your farm .....
Posted by Dick Doriguzzi at 6:50AM CDT 09/30/13
Quoting Tea Party Republicans is an exercise in futility especially if you have actually met these people. Not impressed is an understatement.
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:27AM CDT 09/30/13
The problem with the ACA is that it was a Republican based idea - back when they had ideas - that they now oppose for total political purposes. They now need to ramp up their base to a new level of crazy because they feel they can not allow a Democrat to again bring on a program that all people will like and eventually adopt just like SS, Medicaid/care, and Farm welfare programs. Especially this Democrat. :-)
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:33AM CDT 09/30/13
Why all the doom and gloom people? I am sure this will work out just fine. Don't panic just because the ones who pushed it are the exact same ones who insisted Fannie & Freddie woul be fine...when Bush repeatedly warned there was going to be trouble.
Posted by Mark Benjamin at 7:34AM CDT 09/30/13
Lets just "HOPE" this splendid program runs as smoothly as SS and medicaid with none of the shortsighted "we will worry about paying for it later" yet never actually set the money aside to pay for it. Just let our kids sort it out and pay for it. Sure the people like anything that benefits them when others pay for it. Yes we have paid into SS.... but then we kid ourselves to believe we haven't KNOWINGLY maxed ot our credit cards to China and others. We know darn well we are destroying our kids future because we refuse to believe our "Liberal" way of thinking can somehow cheat simple math. Simple math always wins no matter how far you shove your head where the sun doesnt shine to try to escape logic.
Posted by Mark Benjamin at 7:54AM CDT 09/30/13
The same Bush who insisted there were WMD's in Iraq? Who added trillions to the national debt because of it? Who insisted we kill and maim thousands of GIs and Iraqis to promote his "cause"? Give me Obamacare!
Posted by Don Thompson at 7:55AM CDT 09/30/13
Liberalism truly is a mental disorder that is demonstrates an unwillingness to deal with reality. Check out Ted Cruz's resume Don. See http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2013/03/ever-take-look-at-ted-cruzs-resume.html No one believes an addiction to a teleprompter demonstrates superior mental abilities. Posted by ubknown unknown at 8:28AM CDT 09/27/13
Posted by Bob Sanderson at 8:01AM CDT 09/30/13
Don Thompson How about if we quote the leader of the democrats that wrote "their" version of the health care bill, and not the republicans, "This is a train wreck." That came from Max. And where do all the Senate aides that help craft the ACA work now. At lobby groups that specialize in medical and pharmaceutical companies, just like their bosses, in it just for the money they can make. And if the ACA is soooo good, why did congress exempt their employees from being covered by it?
Posted by CRAIG MOORE at 9:23AM CDT 09/30/13
Typical lib Don...deflect when confronted with facts. Yes the same Bush. There WERE wmd's in Iraq. Sadam used them on his people. They were used in the 12 year war with Iran before that. Iraqi generals TOLD US they were moved to...guess where...it is in the news right now. Yes we went to war instead of letting a piss ant defy about 50 countries orders via the U.N. That war also had some profound impacts. Iran, N. Korea and a few others saw something that made them soil their britches. They saw U.S. military hardware cut through soviet made tanks like a hot knife through butter. They saw the capabilities OF THEIR mlitary hardware tossed around likearag doll. The same forces who had battled Iran for a decade in a stalemate of over 200,000 lives were breached from border to Bagdad in 100 hours. The Iraqi tanks in reserve who were used to Iranian fighting GOT CAUGHT OUTSIDE THEIR TANKS behind the front lines an mowed down with .50 cal Browning. Sure N. Koreafires off a mssle now and then to keep face. But that war has kept the others in check. They all KNOW that war proved the ave no chance. Of course the currnt Presidial stuffed suit thought he could draw a line in the sand. He got called on it. The amatuer in the Oval Office got tactfully reprimnded by his military or doing such a stupid thing. And he almost went ahead anyway without world support. So yes give me Bush doctrine over this empty suit any day.
Posted by Mark Benjamin at 9:28AM CDT 09/30/13
So now lets put it all together. Don praises O'care like Medicare & S.S. Both of which if you look at real math forecasts are drastically mismanaged as underfunded and even worse noose around our neck than that little fiasco with Fannie & Freddie the Libs BS'd the public "was fine". Think that needs no further explnaation. (Don't even try to go with Franks or Dodds BS. I'll cream you there) Then when taking heat for praising them deflects off onto 'the Bush war and no WMD's" That is typical liberal playbook. Bash Bush and the war. Problem is the WMD's were taken across the border during Sadams stalling tatics of defying a armistice treaty he signed...THAT STIPULATED military force would be used if he barred inspectors after Iraq War round 1. And then your hollow suit hero draws a line in the sand for those same WMD's going off script of his teleprompter. Those weapons are used in a civil war...but he needs distraction so he ALMOST goes to war ALL BY HIMSELF without a world coalition. Everyone I present to you the typical Lib chasing their tail in a circle. Take a bow Don.
Posted by Mark Benjamin at 10:37AM CDT 09/30/13
Mark B., You sure are full of BS. We talking health care here and and whether this program is an improvement over our current situation that puts US healthcare spending astronomically higher than the rest of the civilized world with a large percentage of our population uninsured and with infant mortality at 3rd world levels. At the same time, we lead in obesity and have a lower life expectancy than the rest of our comparative nations. Since George Washington, political LEADERS have proposed a reasonable national health care policy and the right has stood in the way. Why? And you want to wail about how great our military is. Those of us in the military knew Iraq's mil was a joke. Mark, Do you even know what the R's health plan is or how it differs from Obamacare? Do you care?
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:35AM CDT 09/30/13
Dear Readers, I love your political passion, but I don't see a single one of you addressing the big problems in health care--namely that small business owners pay a heck of a lot more for insurance with much worse coverage than Big Business pays. So I go back to my statement to do the math and let personal economics decide. Until the great minds in Congress come up with something better, this is what we've got to work with. I understand that ambivalence about subsidies, but like the farm subsidies of yesteryear, you may be economically disadvantaged if you don't run the numbers.
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 11:37AM CDT 09/30/13
Craig Moore, I don't know if you are new to this US political operation or not but lots of folks who work in a government specialty end up hired by private firms. Just like military retirees end up in the "military industrial complex", or Texas politicians end up in Big Oil, or Midwest ag politicos end up in the pocket of Big Ag making sure average guys have to buy their stuff. Nothing new here. And the aides who lost are probably now at Fox News, Club for Growth, or the Heritage Foundation filling your head with BS so you can get on a blog and impress other wingers that you have a clue.
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:44AM CDT 09/30/13
Marcia, My apologies for getting off subject. I support your comments 110%. However, it is exciting to get "off course" from time to time! I will behave from now on. Respectfully
Posted by Don Thompson at 11:48AM CDT 09/30/13
What a bunch of f'ing walking clichés.
Posted by Brandon Butler at 12:39PM CDT 09/30/13
Yes we will do the math. But I am not holding my breath for "the great minds in congress to come up with something better." Your statement was a little understated about "like farm subsidies of past". It was more than just economic dsadvantageous not to be part "of the game'. And Don...I was just chasing you down the path you chose to go...to the point you ran full circle.
Posted by Mark Benjamin at 12:56PM CDT 09/30/13
Fortunately Marcia we can work with and support some candidates in the Republican party with integrity that are serious about removing this healthcare debacle from the country such as http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/30/ben-sasse-nebraska-obamacare.
Posted by Bob Sanderson at 1:19PM CDT 09/30/13
Get it straight, IT IS ROMNEY CARE!!!!! He is the one who used the same system in Mass.
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 4:13PM CDT 09/30/13
Mark B. , Hah You are So clever!!
Posted by Don Thompson at 6:58PM CDT 09/30/13
Mary, I am really ashamed of all the wild accusations from commenters. Just keep reporting the facts and the truth will be known. When these 'O' haters find out their lib neighbors are paying less for health insurance, they will crash the website trying to get signed up too.
Posted by Vince Moye at 5:50AM CDT 10/01/13
Vince, wish in one hand for that "cheap" care, and s*&t in the other. See which fills up first.
Posted by Brandon Butler at 11:52AM CDT 10/01/13
I don't care what the benefits of this "ObamaCare" program are. The fact is, we as a nation simply can not afford this costly socialistic healthcare program. Yes I admit we need some form of healthcare reform, but we have to do it as cheap as we can. We cannot afford to keep giving handouts to all of the deadbeats, druggies, grossly obese, and illegal aliens that are sucking the rest of us dry. We need to get our finances in order before we spend anymore. And printing more money is not the answer, nor is borrowing. I can't stress this enough, WE CANNOT AFFORD IT AMERICA, WHO CARES WHAT "GOOD" IT DOES!!!
Posted by RJZ Peterson at 9:41AM CDT 10/02/13
Why would anyone support anything to do with Obamacare? See http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/10/06/evil-is-not-too-strong-a-word-for-the-wendy-davis-phenomenon/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Posted by George Hanson at 8:10AM CDT 10/07/13
If the top 1% of Americans would pay the taxes they did before Reagan and not the poultry 17% they do now we wouldn't have such a deficit. They don't get any benefits from the US government like insuring a stable middle class????
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 6:43AM CDT 10/15/13
Monday 09/23/13
RMA's Balancing Act
Capping benefits for county-based insurance might appease crop insurance critics, but RMA also needs farmer cooperation to get better yield data to expand the program.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 11:28AM CDT 09/23/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments |
Post a Comment
Tuesday 09/10/13
GRIP's Astronomical Payouts Nipped
For pure revenue protection, it's been hard to beat GRIP coverage in the Midwest. In 2014, RMA is pruning potential benefits.
[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 2:01PM CDT 09/10/13 by Marcia Zarley Taylor |
Post a Comment
Comments (9)
The rma bureaucrats are circling their wagons in an effort to maintain their sorry government schemes, jobs, and attempting to remain relevant. Government has no business guaranteeing farmers' investments or profits.
Posted by John Olson at 5:47PM CDT 09/11/13
Jon. Just drop it. Your comments have Been heard. Move on with your life. Volunteer At A food pantry and do something constructive With your life.
Posted by Unknown at 8:15PM CDT 09/11/13
I am a farmer and am not too proud to admit that crop insurance is the biggest waste of taxpayers money there is. How can we farmers justify asking our hard working fellow citizens to pick up the tab so we can have guaranteed profit when the average farmer has a net worth 20 times the average American? Its not that hard for me to farm 2200 acres of corn\beans on my own with 8 months off for liesure. FARMING IS DARN EASY THESE DAYS SO WHY ARE WE BAWLING LIKE ENTITLED FOOD STAMPERS?? We are worse than ood stampers because we expect hundreds of thousands guaranteed by the taxpayer withou working full time....WHAT A COUNTRY!
Posted by Bill Billson at 1:24PM CDT 09/12/13
Maybe, kind of like FEMA, AIG,the list is endless, Bill. The one thing about crop insurance is- It is better than any other food program. For whatever that is worth.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:10PM CDT 09/12/13
Better for you and I, Bonnie. As for the other 98% of the country, not so much.
Posted by Unknown at 5:18AM CDT 09/14/13
looks to me like southern iliNOIS should quit planting corn and let us grow it up north
Posted by Mark Knobloch at 8:27PM CDT 09/14/13
Lets get rid of it all. Crop Insurance, Direct Payments, and all of the conservation programs that are tying up whole farms at absurd rent levels. In the end these programs do nothing but support higher cash rents and therefore artificially higher land prices. The real winner is anyone who owns farmland which obviously is not only farmers.
Posted by Nathan Richard at 6:16AM CDT 09/16/13
A major reason that margins in ag are tight is because of government not only assuming nearly all the production and marketing risks for many of the major ag crops, but also government guaranteeing a profit to many farmers with current prices and current government insurance schemes. The farm bill proposals double down on these government risk assumption schemes with new and crazier shallow loss income guaranteeing schemes. When farmers have to budget for more of the production and marketing risks they are not as crazy about driving profitability margins below zero. The billions in subsidies and investment/profit guarantees the government is targeting to the growers of select grain crops are capitalized into extremely higher land and equipment prices. This extreme inflation in the cost of land and equipment has basically prohibited new and younger blood from becoming involved in the ag production business. We can depend on government to screw up just about everything that they touch..
Posted by John Olson at 7:20AM CDT 09/16/13
In your opinion, John, do you think all problems in agriculture are because of crop ins.?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 12:50PM CDT 09/20/13
Blog Home Pages
Market Matters Blog
Technically Speaking
Fundamentally Speaking
Ag Policy Blog
Minding Ag's Business
Ag Weather Forum
Ethanol Blog
Production Blog
Harrington's Sort & Cull
Machinery Chatter
South America Calling
An Urban's Rural View
Editors' Notebook
July 2013
Commodity Bears Have It
Recent Blog Posts
Living at Race Pace
Fri Dec 13, 2013 04:30 PM CST
I'll never think of America's elite warriors the same after hearing Navy SEAL Team Six member Don Mann speak at this week's DTN/The Progressive Farmer Ag Summit--and I will certainly never use analogies to war as lightly as I have in the past.
Borrowers' Golden Age
Mon Dec 2, 2013 05:05 PM CST
Don't get used to the fantasy of cheap credit. The lowest rates in 63 years are behind us.
Tax Reform Could Get Nasty for Ag
Fri Nov 22, 2013 04:27 PM CST
Decades of favorable tax treatment for agriculture could crash to a halt if Congress gets serious about tax reform.
Over 65? Turn Off Noise on Obamacare
Tue Nov 12, 2013 03:45 PM CST
Seniors, your Medicare coverage exempts you from the health insurance mandate Jan. 1.
Do Weather Models = Yield?
Mon Nov 11, 2013 10:34 AM CST
Yield predictions based on weather data alone remain a work in progress, farmers and economists say.
Insurance Terminated? Get a Plan B
Thu Oct 31, 2013 06:34 PM CDT
Millions of policyholders have been put on notice. Their existing health insurance will be terminated Jan. 1 because they aren't compliant with federal standards under the Affordable Care Act. Farm families have options.
When You Are Your Brother's Keeper
Thu Oct 24, 2013 10:39 AM CDT
Off-farm heirs need fair rent if they jointly own your farmland and decent buyout prices when they exit farm ownership, courts and business counselors say.
Financial Aid Mounts for Blizzard Victims
Mon Oct 21, 2013 04:58 PM CDT
A Ranchers Relief Fund and sympathetic lenders can ease strain after South Dakota's Atlas Blizzard. But without the equivalent of crop insurance, cattlemen need Congress to pass disaster aid.
Risk Management Post-Farm Bill
Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:43 PM CDT
You'll need to consider three pieces in your risk protection package after the farm bill's passage--a basic revenue feature in the commodity title, maximum conventional crop insurance for your disaster risk and an SCO-policy on top to cover "shallow' losses.
Will Corn Claims Get Furloughed?
Tue Oct 8, 2013 09:16 PM CDT
Corn growers with high levels of insurance and below average yields are likely to trigger crop insurance claims in 2013. But government shutdowns pose bottlenecks and cashflow issues for companies.
Big Bets on Climate Corp.
Thu Oct 3, 2013 04:17 PM CDT
Monsanto paid almost as much for tiny Climate Corp. as ACE paid for the jewel in the crown of the crop insurance business. The seed giant sees the value in crop forecasting, not the insurance market.
D-Day for Health Exchanges
Mon Sep 30, 2013 05:56 PM CDT
Small business has more to gain than lose by buying insurance in bigger pools.
Do the Math on Obamacare
Tue Sep 24, 2013 05:53 PM CDT
Buying insurance on a health exchange could save small business owners a bundle.
RMA's Balancing Act
Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:28 AM CDT
Capping benefits for county-based insurance might appease crop insurance critics, but RMA also needs farmer cooperation to get better yield data to expand the program.
GRIP's Astronomical Payouts Nipped
Tue Sep 10, 2013 02:01 PM CDT
For pure revenue protection, it's been hard to beat GRIP coverage in the Midwest. In 2014, RMA is pruning potential benefits.
Modest Grain Farms Beat Goliaths
Mon Aug 19, 2013 01:13 PM CDT
Don't call small grain farms the dinosaurs of agriculture just yet. Based on their recent profits, they don't have a reason to go extinct any time soon.
Health Care Costs and Counting
Mon Aug 19, 2013 09:51 AM CDT
Most farmers have put decisions on 2014 health care on the back burner--until they know more about how the Affordable Care Act's individual and employer options materialize. When researching DTN's recent series "Health Care Countdown," DTN Contributing Editor Elizabeth Williams and I even found quite a few corn and soybean farmers who don't yet believe the government will implement mandatory insurance coverage starting Jan.
Corn Continues Profit Streak vs. Beans
Fri Aug 9, 2013 04:55 PM CDT
Soybeans have a place on Midwest farms, but they have been far less profitable than corn in many operations since 2008, studies by the financial consulting firm AgriSolutions show. Based on actual client records of more than 100 farms from 13 Corn Belt states, "corn wins in a good year, it wins in an average year, it wins in a dry year, now in 2013 we can see if it wins in a wet year," said Sam Bachman, an analyst at the Brighton, Ill.
Commodity Bears Have It
Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:39 PM CDT
About 400 ag economists and business leaders assembled at the Kansas City Federal Reserve last week to assess agriculture's global future. It was rare to find a bull among the crowd of bears (see related story, "Get Plan B Ready" in Farm Business).
Crop Insurers Battle Image in Farm Bill Debate
Fri Jun 28, 2013 05:03 PM CDT
After the humbling 195-234 farm bill defeat on the floor of the U.S. House last week, anguished ag groups are encouraging their members to contact their representatives to press for another chance at passage.