the Trump Phenomenon

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Waiting for Buckman to respond. Maybe he can tell me a little about the pandering?

Come on! When Hilary goes to a black precinct and she CHANGES HER DIALECT to sound more black, that's not pandering?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by PaulS

But medical inflation have been decreasing recently.

Maybe the Reps. will let Medicare negotiate drugs prices directly with drug manufacturer just as the insurance companies do. You're right is not affordable but that has been a many decades long issue.

New data released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation show that premium growth in employer-sponsored coverage remained slow in 2015, extending the recent streak of unusually slow growth. Taken together with estimates of current trends in Medicare spending released this summer, these data suggest that underlying growth in per-enrollee health care costs remains low, even as the dramatic expansion in coverage since early 2014 drives a temporary uptick in the growth of aggregate health care spending.



1. Premiums in employer-based coverage continued to grow slowly in 2015. The new Kaiser survey finds that the average premium for employer-based family coverage grew 4.2 percent in 2015. While slightly faster than the record-tying 3 percent rate recorded in 2014, this reading for 2015 continues the recent pattern of unusually slow growth; the last four years account for four of the five lowest growth rates since the survey began in 1999. The Kaiser estimates corroborate earlier estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employer Cost Index that showed that slow growth in employers’ health benefit costs continued into 2015, as well as results from a national survey released last week by the consulting firm Mercer, which found that employers have seen slow growth persist through 2015 and expect it to continue into 2016.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Premium growth is slow because the product is worse . Look at your deductible compared to before the ACA . Your out of pocket is way up .... Unless of course you get it subsidized .

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

New data released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation show that premium growth in employer-sponsored coverage remained slow in 2015,

Looking at premium changes, without considering what's covered, is very misleading. For example, if my new policy requires me to pay a huge deductible before the insurance kicks in, yet my premium doesn't change, that's still a huge rate increase to me. I'm not saying that your study is manipulating that, but you have to compare the premium charged, with how exttensive the coverage is.

And Obama didn't promise that premiums would increase at a slower pace. What he promised, is that the average family would see a $2500 annual decrease in cost.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by buckman

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Premium growth is slow because the product is worse . Look at your deductible compared to before the ACA . Your out of pocket is way up .... Unless of course you get it subsidized .

You're right that prem. growth has slowed bc of that. Companies are pushing more of the cost of the insurance onto the ee. either through higher deductibles or making the ee pay a higher % of the costs. However, the overall costs of health care inflation (called Trend) has been decreasing. The following was from the 2nd part of what I posted.

The Kaiser estimates corroborate earlier estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employer Cost Index that showed that slow growth in employers’ health benefit costs continued into 2015, as well as results from a national survey released last week by the consulting firm Mercer, which found that employers have seen slow growth persist through 2015 and expect it to continue into 2016.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

However, the overall costs of health care inflation (called Trend) has been decreasing.

Healthcare costs are not decreasing, though...they are just increasing at a slower rate. The trends are positive, but they are smaller positive than they have been in the past. Which hopefully is a start.

[PaulS]

I only read/copied the 1st of 3 pages.

http://healthleadersmedia.com/conten...t-Not-Enough##


The health spending rate is slowing. It has been slowing for a long time in a very incremental way, but we are not able to declare victory here," says the director of PwC's Health Research Institute.

PwC's projections for healthcare cost growth in 2016 provide a mixed review of cost containment.

The good news is that the projected 6.5% increase in healthcare inflation in 2016 is almost half the cost growth of 11.9% in 2007, when PwC first started making its annual projections. The bad news is that 6.5% cost growth is wildly outpacing wage growth and is unsustainable over the long run in a country that already spends close to 18% of its gross domestic product on healthcare.

To put that growth in perspective, the overall rate of inflation in the larger economy over the past year was 0%. "You can see what I would call a little bit of good news, but not enough good news to celebrate yet," Benjamin Isgur, director of PwC's Health Research Institute, said during webcast detailing the findings.

"The health spending rate is slowing. It has been slowing for a long time in a very incremental way, but we are not able to declare victory here. It is one of those things where we are winning a few battles but the overall war of health growth is still there. In fact, when we compare that to our national health expenditures as a percentage of gross domestic product, over these last several decades you see a larger and larger part of our economy spent on health services."


That's not necessarily a bad thing, Isgur says.

"Every economy gets to decide what they are going to spend their money on, but as it rises now past 15% of GDP, it does call into question the crowd out effect. Does that mean there are less resources to spend on things like education and transportation? The healthcare growth rate is still rising faster than general economic inflation."

PwC says the key "inflators" for healthcare cost growth in 2016 are expected to include the rising cost of specialty drugs such as Sovaldi, the Hepatitis C therapy from Gilead Sciences; and cybersecurity measures to prevent or mitigate increasingly sophisticated and aggressive large-scale breaches.

Preventive cybersecurity measures are particularly cost effective, PwC says, costing about $8 per patient record, while post-breach measures, including HIPAA fines and customer restitution, can cost about $200 per patient record.

Cost Deflators

The key "deflator" for healthcare cost growth is expected to be the "Cadillac tax" on insurance premiums that will take effect in 2019. To avoid the 40% excise tax, employers are already altering their benefits designs to increase by shifting more of the expense onto employees. The percentage of employers who are only offering high-deductible health plans has grown from 13% in 2012 to 25% in 2015.

"We are starting to see more and more employees share in the cost of their health plans," Isgur says.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Cost Deflators

The key "deflator" for healthcare cost growth is expected to be the "Cadillac tax" on insurance premiums that will take effect in 2019. To avoid the 40% excise tax, employers are already altering their benefits designs to increase by shifting more of the expense onto employees. The percentage of employers who are only offering high-deductible health plans has grown from 13% in 2012 to 25% in 2015.

"We are starting to see more and more employees share in the cost of their health plans," Isgur says.

Again, what they are calling "cost deflators", are thing sthat cause premiums to decrease, not things that reduce the overall cost of healthcare. If my employers swithces to a high-deductible plan, my premium will go down, but that doesn't mean my out-of-pocket expenses will go down. So what's the value in knowing that my premiums are increasing at a slower pace, but that's offset by higher deductibles or co-pays?

[PaulS]

Look at the 2nd page of the link for other cost deflators.

and since you mention the Cadillac tax (the implementatin was delayed):

It is a tax on the most expensive insurance plans to slow people's’ use of health care. It will lesson the employer sponsored tax subsidy that the vast majority of healthcare economists think cause the overuse of healthcare. It will hit a larger and larger % of premiums over time.

Business, ees and insurers won’t like that so insurers will be forced develop ways to reduce health care costs and drive harder bargains with providers. This will also likely mean that more health care costs are shifted from premiums to out-of-pocket expenses. That should encourage lower utilization and/or lower prices too.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by DZ

I find this election cycle fascinating. The sheer numbers of people voting for Trump and other GOP candidates in the primaries has dwarfed the turnout numbers in the DEM primaries. Most presidential elections are won by the party who can attract most of independent voters AND in no small part, the numbers of what I call uneducated/uninformed voters. The Dems have had a monopoly on these uninformed/uneducated voters for the last two presidential elections. Trump has turned that portion of the electorate around and managed to get the vote out for the GOP.

Sadly I agree ... will the Right blame these uninformed/uneducated voters for the last two presidential elections. when trump gets to the white house due to them or will they suddenly stop being uninformed and uneducated voters and become intelligent just because they Voted White I meant GOP???

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Sadly I agree ... will the Right blame these uninformed/uneducated voters for the last two presidential elections. when trump gets to the white house due to them or will they suddenly stop being uninformed and uneducated voters and become intelligent just because they Voted White I meant GOP???

Wait . . . Hillary is not white?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

voters and become intelligent just because they Voted White I meant GOP???

Are you feeling OK? Your side has Hilary and Bernie.

The other side has Cruz, Rubio, Ben Carson.

Which side is whiter?

I await your honest, thoughtful reply. Good lord.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Wait . . . Hillary is not white?

Maybe he heard her pandering to blacks by switching to a jive dialect at one of her speeches and, assuming no one could be that condescending, he assumed she really is black.

[The Dad Fisherman]

I think we traded for Micheal Jackson and gave them a "Player to be Named Later"........so we are in the process of completing the trade. Hillary is "Dat Playah"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

ha..ha..ha...stupid MSNBC talking heads...when things don't go the way you planned

[scottw]

Obamacare...here's a shocker

http://freebeacon.com/issues/officia...-on-the-brink/

[buckman]

Looking forward to casting my vote for Bernie today 👍
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by buckman

Looking forward to casting my vote for Bernie today 👍
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Sadly I agree ... will the Right blame these uninformed/uneducated voters for the last two presidential elections. when trump gets to the white house due to them or will they suddenly stop being uninformed and uneducated voters and become intelligent just because they Voted White I meant GOP???

http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/...y-affiliation/

[Meanolpah]

All of you genius' are gonna crap your pants when Trump is your leader. I support him all the way.

I'm not a rascist, I am a realist. This country is REALLY effed up, time to shake it up!

Love that you more intelligent folks, can tell exactly who is supporting Trump.

Guess I'm just a dumbass, uneducated, rascist. Too bad, I thought I was pretty ok. I'll take your word for it guys, you are smart, I am stupid. BUT my team is going to win, and yours is Shrillery the ENABLER.

Maybe the Shrill, is really the stupid one out of all of us. 1. Bill 2. Benghazi 3. Bill 4. emails 5. these suits she is wearing have to go. 6. she is a wall street suck up. with zero true business experience.

And lastly, she is the leader of the politically correct wave. They spend more time worrying about bullies than they do about defeating our enemies.

Trump is going to crush her in the general, woo hoo

[buckman]

Interesting to hear The statistics for Massachusetts this morning . The Democrat party lost 30,000 last year. 1/3 of those reenrolled as Republicans .
I love how the left throws out the word "uneducated " , as if it's some indicator of smarts. Ironically these are the same people complaining that they are crushed by student loans , that they can't afford to repay . Education they couldn't afford was only there first mistake in life .
I prefer to surround myself with people with common sense and open minds
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's my anti Hillary vote .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Sadly I agree ... will the Right blame these uninformed/uneducated voters for the last two presidential elections. when trump gets to the white house due to them or will they suddenly stop being uninformed and uneducated voters and become intelligent just because they Voted White I meant GOP???

I don't think when Dennis wrote "uninformed and uneducated voters", he meant they didn't go to school or weren't intelligent, I think he meant they weren't necessarily politically astute or don't spend/invest considerable time into the political process which is why so many can't make up their minds each election cycle between two candidates with polar opposite views...but we still hear demands that they all get out and vote don't we?

like Dennis I'm thoroughly enjoying this go round....I don't like Trump but he's as close as you can get to actually waterboarding a leftist or a Republican establishment type and the MSM... which is endlessly amusing

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/...y-affiliation/

Paul, earlier i asked you this question...other than public perception, what evidence is there, that democrats care any more about blacks, than republicans? I didn't see a response.

Paul, when I see what has happened here in CT, to places like Bridgeport and Hartford, controlled by Democrats for a generation, it makes me sick. I look at these failing cities, and I feel that (1) these people deserve better, and (2) whatever the leaders are doing, it clearly isn't working, so let's try something else, anything else.

Please tell me, how that makes me racist.

I think I can make a compelling case that for ANY Dempocratic leader of these cities to say with a straight face "elect me, because I am doing a good job representing you, and what you deserve, is more of the same"...I can make a case THAT is the person who obviously doesn't care about these people.

You cannot make that wrong. You just can't. And that's the agony and irony in all of this...it's what the Tea Party endorses, which is what blacks need to embrace to not just survive, but to start climbinbg th economic ladder. It worked when Bill Clinton did it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

I love how the left throws out the word "uneducated " , as if it's some indicator of smarts. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama is the personification of the notion that there's a big difference between being educated and being smart. "I can add millions of uninsured to the health insurance rolls, and cover more things, and remove lifetime caps on insurance benefits, and that will lower costs by $2,500 per family".

Genius.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If I asked you, or Spence, or Rockhound this question, how would you respond? Here's the question - please tell me what evidence there is, other than popular perception, that liberals care more about blacks than conservatives do? Seriously, how would you respond to that?

Oh lookie, a political scientist studied this issue...

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s4/sh...713003733a.pdf

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, when I see what has happened here in CT .

http://patch.com/connecticut/ridgefi...t-skyrockets-0

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Oh lookie, a political scientist studied this issue...

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s4/sh...713003733a.pdf

Your link doesn't work either
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

for the Trump lovers among us .. and others you should see this clip very funny from John Oliver .. this is not news but it is factual

its the Actual things trump has said and done in the clip that should alarm the Trump Faithful ..

[scottw]

my proud communist friend was very confident that Trump would be the next President, and he's never wrong...just ask him

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

for the Trump lovers among us .. and others you should see this clip very funny from John Oliver .. this is not news but it is factual

its the Actual things trump has said and done in the clip that should alarm the Trump Faithful ..

oh good...is this the new snarky comedian that leftist will roll out to make all of their "points"?

this is not news but it is factual....love that...


hey Spence....that's all been taken out of context ...right???