U.S. No Health Care 10-15 GOP based Medicare plan squanders $15 billion in 2007

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Ford slashes 11,600 jobs, cuts salaries from $38 to $17 hr and no health care.

The New American Dream - Nothing

5-25-2005 Ford to Take Back 24 Ailing Visteon Plants

The agreement reduces the number of Visteon manufacturing plants in North America from 58 to 36 and cuts the average plant size in half, Johnston said. The company won't have any plants with more than 1,500 employees under the agreement; now it has six.

The average hourly wage at Visteon's plants will drop from $38 to $17, Johnston said, and the number of UAW-covered hourly employees will drop from 17,400 to 5,000.

This is some of the best news I've heard from ford - maybe the company won't tank after all if they can reign in their incredibly high labor costs. I see $17/hr as a fair wage for WORKING ON AN ASSEMBLY LINE which is just menial labor. $17 is more in-line with what Asian plants in the U.S pay their workers and I view it as a good market rate for work that can be done without a college degree - Ford should hopefully be able to pass the savings onto the customer by doing more quality control and still generate a profit.

Don't hold your breath for that.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ElFenix

$450 million to $650 million this year and $300 million to $500 million between 2005 and 2009 connected to the buyouts of about 5,000 hourly workers

1 billion split between 5000 people... they're not hurting too bad

That's not the issue, it's new employees.

Nice way to skirt the issue of U.S. wages spiraling down while costs of living go up (health care leading the way).

From the article - key point that you may have overlooked

Merrill Lynch analyst John Casesa said in a research note Wednesday that when Ford spun off Visteon it forced the supplier to try to compete with wage levels that were too high. Casesa said the deal is a positive for Visteon but a negative for Ford.

The employees had too high of a wage structure to compete.

The UAW had previoously driven wages costs to high for the cost of the parts being produced.

Maybe now the wages are going to be more inline with the product and output costs.?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ElFenix

$450 million to $650 million this year and $300 million to $500 million between 2005 and 2009 connected to the buyouts of about 5,000 hourly workers

1 billion split between 5000 people... they're not hurting too bad

That's not the issue, it's new employees.

Nice way to skirt the issue of U.S. wages spiraling down while costs of living go up (health care leading the way).

From the article - key point that you may have overlooked
q[]Merrill Lynch analyst John Casesa said in a research note Wednesday that when Ford spun off Visteon it forced the supplier to try to compete with wage levels that were too high. Casesa said the deal is a positive for Visteon but a negative for Ford.

The employees had to high of a wage structure to compete.

The UAW had previoously driven wages costs to high for the cost of the parts being produced.

Maybe now the wages are going to be more inline with the product and output costs.?

[/quote]

I really can't argue against your logic here. At the same time I'd like to point out that CEO's and most if not all of the upper echelons are also overpaid, only much more.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

From the article - key point that you may have overlooked

Merrill Lynch analyst John Casesa said in a research note Wednesday that when Ford spun off Visteon it forced the supplier to try to compete with wage levels that were too high. Casesa said the deal is a positive for Visteon but a negative for Ford.

The employees had too high of a wage structure to compete.

The UAW had previously driven wages costs to high for the cost of the parts being produced.

Maybe now the wages are going to be more inline with the product and output costs.?

I really can't argue against your logic here. At the same time I'd like to point out that CEO's and most if not all of the upper echelons are also overpaid, only much more.

Agree - Upper managemnet should be more accountable to the stock holders and board.

However, that is a catch 22. Most bigshots also preside on other boards that set salaries for their management - Scratch my back - I will scratch yours.

More than 3-4 layers of management between the product and the top dog becomes expensive and inflates the product costs due to the non-productive overhead costs to support that infrastructure.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper


Agree - Upper managemnet should be more accountable to the stock holders and board.

However, that is a catch 22. Most bigshots also preside on other boards that set salaries.

More than 3-4 layers of management between the product and the top dog becomes expensive and inflates the product costs due to the non-productive overhead costs to support that infrastructure.

The Board of Directors votes on the CEO's salary and the CEO reccomends the Boards salary. Kind of like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. LOL, that's a racket and one reason I think the leaders should lead by example. I just can't stand the "Do as I say, not as I do" hypocrisy.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper


Agree - Upper managemnet should be more accountable to the stock holders and board.

However, that is a catch 22. Most bigshots also preside on other boards that set salaries.

More than 3-4 layers of management between the product and the top dog becomes expensive and inflates the product costs due to the non-productive overhead costs to support that infrastructure.

The Board of Directors votes on the CEO's salary and the CEO reccomends the Boards salary. Kind of like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. LOL, that's a racket and one reason I think the leaders should lead by example. I just can't stand the "Do as I say, not as I do" hypocrisy.

Small business CEO salarys average between 7-10 times the average workers salary.

Big business with shareholders & boards pull at least 100 times if not more. Without an increase in production/demand and a reduction in costs, how does a company support such a discrepency. By overpricing the product; which then allows everyone with-in the system to get inflated salaries becuse no-one is held accountable until after they leave the mess that they helped create.

And when the competition sees that the price of the product can be sustained, they ratchet up their product price and the same cycle exists.

 

[dmcowen674]

7-11-2005 Universal Health Care Push Being Revived

A push for universal health coverage is being rekindled in some states by the soaring cost of health care and the lack of political support in Washington for federal changes.

Advocates of a single-payer system ? where the government would collect taxes and cover everyone, similar to programs in Canada and across Europe ? have introduced bills in at least 18 state legislatures.

Across the nation, the number of uninsured is 45 million and rising, and 16 million lack enough insurance to cover all their medical bills.

Companies are raising employee fees for health care, increasing co-payments and decreasing benefits.

"There's no other solution out there," said David Pavlick "The system we have now is immoral."

Not since Oregon in 2002 has a state voted on a single-payer health system. Voters there soundly rejected it, as did Californians in 1994.

Both times, the proposals came under fierce assault from the medical, insurance and pharmaceutical industries.
======================================================
Of course the medical, insurance and pharmaceutical industries oppose Universal Healthcare because their insane profit at the expense of human life would get knocked down.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
7-11-2005 Universal Health Care Push Being Revived

A push for universal health coverage is being rekindled in some states by the soaring cost of health care and the lack of political support in Washington for federal changes.

Advocates of a single-payer system ? where the government would collect taxes and cover everyone, similar to programs in Canada and across Europe ? have introduced bills in at least 18 state legislatures.

Across the nation, the number of uninsured is 45 million and rising, and 16 million lack enough insurance to cover all their medical bills.

Companies are raising employee fees for health care, increasing co-payments and decreasing benefits.

"There's no other solution out there," said David Pavlick "The system we have now is immoral."

Not since Oregon in 2002 has a state voted on a single-payer health system. Voters there soundly rejected it, as did Californians in 1994.

Both times, the proposals came under fierce assault from the medical, insurance and pharmaceutical industries.
======================================================
Of course the medical, insurance and pharmaceutical industries oppose Universal Healthcare because their insane profit at the expense of human life would get knocked down.

Reading that makes it sound like it's "big business" screwing the employee again. In the case of health insurance that couldn't be farther from the truth. As an employer I want my employees to be covered in case of an emergency.

The business I manage has about 30 employees. For the last two years the only claim made against our health insurance was an employee's wife having a baby. One year we had exactly ZERO claims. In other words, our insurance company collected a stupid-expensive premium from us and paid out exactly $0 in claims. Did our insurance go down as a result of us not filing any claims? No. It went up 20%. And then 20% more the next year. The insurance co got approx $100k in premiums over that time period and our employees collected about $3500 in benefits. WTF kind of shlt is that?

In order to remain profitable (re: Stay In Business) you have to accept the fact that there is a finite amount of money that can be dedicated to expenses beyond salary, rent, electric and other costs related to keeping your doors open. All the rest of our expenses remain more or less the same. It's health insurance that is killing us so it's health insurance that has to be trimmed.

Now... why are the premiums going up so fast? I have a few ideas.

1. Mandated employer coverage. Once insurance became mandatory there was no reason for insurers to be competitive AND there was no reason to structure coverage packages in an effort to WIN NEW BUSINESS. It simply became a hold-up job.

2. Insurance providers make no demands of health care providers to keep costs down. And under the current system health care providers have to run up costs and perform unnecessary tests because...

3. There are no tort restrictions for malpractice suits. People can (and do) sue for just about anything. And since there is no reasonable definition of what malpractice is and there is no reasonable cap on damage awards...

4. Malpractice insurance claims are going through the roof. And this causes providers to have to increase fees and costs of supplies to the patients. And this brings us back to #2 and the circle starts all over again.

And it's not just private enterprise that is suffering under this system. Medicaid is causing huge financial burdens to state governments all over the country for exactly the same reasons.

Obviously this is an overly simplistic model. There are a million other factors involved here as well. One example is that somewhere around 1/3 of your average medical bill is there to cover the cost of dealing with insurance companies. This is evident in the growing number of "cash only" practices where the same proceedures and examinations can be 25-50% less expensive than in practices that accept insurance.

The solutions to these problems seem simple enough. Put a cap on punitive damages awarded in malpractice suits. Ban lawyers from charging on a contingincy basis in medical suits. Basically, bring all the variables in the expense side back under control and remove the lottery like atmosphere that comes with a lawsuit.

Remove restrictions on employers and insurers. One problem we have is that we have to buy insurance from insurers in our state. We're not allowed to shop around for an less expensive insurer somewhere else in the coutnry. If they aren't licensed in our state they can't sell in our state.

These are three simple things that would make a world of difference to me as an employer in regards to my ability to provide my employees with proper coverage. Now if only we could elect people with the balls to stand up to the insurers and lawyers to enact some of these things.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Reading that makes it sound like it's "big business" screwing the employee again. In the case of health insurance that couldn't be farther from the truth. As an employer I want my employees to be covered in case of an emergency.

The business I manage has about 30 employees. For the last two years the only claim made against our health insurance was an employee's wife having a baby. One year we had exactly ZERO claims. In other words, our insurance company collected a stupid-expensive premium from us and paid out exactly $0 in claims. Did our insurance go down as a result of us not filing any claims? No. It went up 20%. And then 20% more the next year. The insurance co got approx $100k in premiums over that time period and our employees collected about $3500 in benefits. WTF kind of shlt is that?

In order to remain profitable (re: Stay In Business) you have to accept the fact that there is a finite amount of money that can be dedicated to expenses beyond salary, rent, electric and other costs related to keeping your doors open. All the rest of our expenses remain more or less the same. It's health insurance that is killing us so it's health insurance that has to be trimmed.

Now... why are the premiums going up so fast? I have a few ideas.

You claim to be "managing" a business yet refuse to take responsibility for "business".

Typical :roll:

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Reading that makes it sound like it's "big business" screwing the employee again. In the case of health insurance that couldn't be farther from the truth. As an employer I want my employees to be covered in case of an emergency.

The business I manage has about 30 employees. For the last two years the only claim made against our health insurance was an employee's wife having a baby. One year we had exactly ZERO claims. In other words, our insurance company collected a stupid-expensive premium from us and paid out exactly $0 in claims. Did our insurance go down as a result of us not filing any claims? No. It went up 20%. And then 20% more the next year. The insurance co got approx $100k in premiums over that time period and our employees collected about $3500 in benefits. WTF kind of shlt is that?

In order to remain profitable (re: Stay In Business) you have to accept the fact that there is a finite amount of money that can be dedicated to expenses beyond salary, rent, electric and other costs related to keeping your doors open. All the rest of our expenses remain more or less the same. It's health insurance that is killing us so it's health insurance that has to be trimmed.

Now... why are the premiums going up so fast? I have a few ideas.

You claim to be "managing" a business yet refuse to take responsibility for "business".

Typical :roll:

Dave, why don't you work for free, like you believe health care professionals should?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Reading that makes it sound like it's "big business" screwing the employee again. In the case of health insurance that couldn't be farther from the truth. As an employer I want my employees to be covered in case of an emergency.

The business I manage has about 30 employees. For the last two years the only claim made against our health insurance was an employee's wife having a baby. One year we had exactly ZERO claims. In other words, our insurance company collected a stupid-expensive premium from us and paid out exactly $0 in claims. Did our insurance go down as a result of us not filing any claims? No. It went up 20%. And then 20% more the next year. The insurance co got approx $100k in premiums over that time period and our employees collected about $3500 in benefits. WTF kind of shlt is that?

In order to remain profitable (re: Stay In Business) you have to accept the fact that there is a finite amount of money that can be dedicated to expenses beyond salary, rent, electric and other costs related to keeping your doors open. All the rest of our expenses remain more or less the same. It's health insurance that is killing us so it's health insurance that has to be trimmed.

Now... why are the premiums going up so fast? I have a few ideas.

You claim to be "managing" a business yet refuse to take responsibility for "business".

Typical :roll:

WTF is that supposed to mean?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

*cough*

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

bump

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Reading that makes it sound like it's "big business" screwing the employee again. In the case of health insurance that couldn't be farther from the truth. As an employer I want my employees to be covered in case of an emergency.

The business I manage has about 30 employees. For the last two years the only claim made against our health insurance was an employee's wife having a baby. One year we had exactly ZERO claims. In other words, our insurance company collected a stupid-expensive premium from us and paid out exactly $0 in claims. Did our insurance go down as a result of us not filing any claims? No. It went up 20%. And then 20% more the next year. The insurance co got approx $100k in premiums over that time period and our employees collected about $3500 in benefits. WTF kind of shlt is that?

In order to remain profitable (re: Stay In Business) you have to accept the fact that there is a finite amount of money that can be dedicated to expenses beyond salary, rent, electric and other costs related to keeping your doors open. All the rest of our expenses remain more or less the same. It's health insurance that is killing us so it's health insurance that has to be trimmed.

Now... why are the premiums going up so fast? I have a few ideas.

You claim to be "managing" a business yet refuse to take responsibility for "business".

Typical :roll:

WTF is that supposed to mean?

Originally posted by: zendari
Dave, why don't you work for free, like you believe health care professionals should?

Both you guys are on the wrong rungs of the ladder, try a bit higher :roll:

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Ok... That was a completely pathetic non-answer to my question so I'll just fill in the blanks. It's simple really. I can jeapordize the company by pretending to be a microcosm of a socialist eutopia, placing employee wants above and beyond the needs of the business eventually going bankrupt and closing my doors in which case my employees now have NO healthcare AND no job.

Or...

I can be careful in the way I spend company monies on employee perks and benefits, maintain a healthy financial sheet and preserve as many jobs as I can.

Since you obviously have no concept of how to run a business nor the dificulties of balancing employee needs against company resources I'm going to assume that your silence is a simple bit of shame and a blow to your ego that someone finally called you on your mindless BS and you had no way of formulating an intelligent response to my very simple question. I suppose I shouldn't have expected anything more.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Ok... That was a completely pathetic non-answer to my question so I'll just fill in the blanks. It's simple really. I can jeapordize the company by pretending to be a microcosm of a socialist eutopia, placing employee wants above and beyond the needs of the business eventually going bankrupt and closing my doors in which case my employees now have NO healthcare AND no job.

Or...

I can be careful in the way I spend company monies on employee perks and benefits, maintain a healthy financial sheet and preserve as many jobs as I can.

Since you obviously have no concept of how to run a business nor the dificulties of balancing employee needs against company resources I'm going to assume that your silence is a simple bit of shame and a blow to your ego that someone finally called you on your mindless BS and you had no way of formulating an intelligent response to my very simple question. I suppose I shouldn't have expected anything more.

Bahahahaha fancy way of of simply saying the employees are just cattle and don't matter.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

Awwwww simple truth too much too handel eh??

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

Awwwww simple truth too much too handel eh??

You haven't said anything. Let me know when you want to talk like a grown-up.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

Awwwww simple truth too much too handle eh??

You haven't said anything. Let me know when you want to talk like a grown-up.

Let me know when Americans that are not rich can get health care.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

Awwwww simple truth too much too handle eh??

You haven't said anything. Let me know when you want to talk like a grown-up.

Let me know when Americans that are not rich can get health care.

Around 200+ million Americans have good health care, not all rich.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How old are you? Does your mommy know you play on the internet?

Awwwww simple truth too much too handle eh??

You haven't said anything. Let me know when you want to talk like a grown-up.

Let me know when Americans that are not rich can get health care.

I don't know what your definition of "rich" is but all my employees have health care and they are not rich.

According to your stats 60 million people are without insurance that means that 240 million are covered. I don't know what your problem is. Nobody is denied health care in this country.

 

[Vic]

Arguing with dmcowen674 is a complete waste of time. He has no points besides insults, strawmen, lies, and massive over-generalizations. Those 240 million Americans who do have healthcare are all "rich" to him... :roll:
More than that, he is completely incapable of realizing that those evil rich employers and corporations are actually the ones who provide jobs so that people can feed their families and have healthcare. Or maybe he does realize it... I have long suspected that Dave's political goal is the complete economic destruction of America -- the easier to create his totalitarian socialist state.

The problems with healthcare in America is that we have toyed with socialism and, by doing so, have removed all competitiveness from the industry. So of course costs are going up. If we want "free" healthcare in America, then we need to free healthcare. There is no other way.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic
Arguing with dmcowen674 is a complete waste of time. He has no points besides insults, strawmen, lies, and massive over-generalizations. Those 240 million Americans who do have healthcare are all "rich" to him... :roll:
More than that, he is completely incapable of realizing that those evil rich employers and corporations are actually the ones who provide jobs so that people can feed their families and have healthcare. Or maybe he does realize it... I have long suspected that Dave's political goal is the complete economic destruction of America -- the easier to create his totalitarian socialist state.

The problems with healthcare in America is that we have toyed with socialism and, by doing so, have removed all competitiveness from the industry.

So of course costs are going up. If we want "free" healthcare in America, then we need to free healthcare. There is no other way.

This whole post ranks up there for BS post of the year. :roll:

My "totalitarian socialist state"???

That is what the Republicans have put in place, you should be thrilled.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Vic
Arguing with dmcowen674 is a complete waste of time. He has no points besides insults, strawmen, lies, and massive over-generalizations. Those 240 million Americans who do have healthcare are all "rich" to him... :roll:
More than that, he is completely incapable of realizing that those evil rich employers and corporations are actually the ones who provide jobs so that people can feed their families and have healthcare. Or maybe he does realize it... I have long suspected that Dave's political goal is the complete economic destruction of America -- the easier to create his totalitarian socialist state.

The problems with healthcare in America is that we have toyed with socialism and, by doing so, have removed all competitiveness from the industry. So of course costs are going up. If we want "free" healthcare in America, then we need to free healthcare. There is no other way.

That's about what I figured. If he wasn't crazy he was just out to pick a fight and see how long he could keep it going. I wasn't planning on enganging him any further. Thanks though.