ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/25/10 7:27 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 11:41:03 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:13:42 -0400, wrote:

gee. the germans have a world class export based economy that's
HEAVILY unionized.

the US, with NO unions, is not.


Yeah, and such powerful unions they are.
This union factory worker makes $22,000 a year and the government
taxes more than half of that away for things like his "free" health
care.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...M&refer=europe


german purchasing power parity is on a level with US PPP when compared
on a per hour basis

the difference is that europeans go more for quality of life.
americans, slaves to their companies, have no choice but to work at
least 200 more hours per year than their european counterparts



Those who oppose providing decent quality healthcare and decent
retirement possibilities for lower-income workers have no ideas that
will improve the lives of these families. A large percentage of
lower-income workers simply don't have the ability to climb up the
ladder since they must devote all of their time to survival.

Instituting higher tax rates on those who can afford them is a way to
provide the poorer among us with a better quality of life. That, and
cutting the military budget in half would do the job, I am sure.
The sad truth is that low income families often breed low income
children - or worse - who have the same work ethic they do. Money would
be better spent educating these children and holding their parents
accountable for their attendance. People who are criminals or simply
lazy and choose to fail in life don't deserve the same SS check as those
who worked for their entire lives.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/25/10 8:18 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 12:48:37 -0400, Harry
wrote:

What do you expect the working poor to do, w'hine, to help you hang
onto
more of your dollars? Get sick and die? Miss an entire day of work to
sit in a hospital ER for a flu shot? Live in a cardboard box when they
are pushed out of their job and there aren't any more jobs?

What did they do 100 years ago ?



They got sick and they died, w'hine. Is that what you want to say to
those who cannot afford decent medical care or a respectable
retirement...just...die? Poor people are just a commodity to your
type, eh? Use 'em up and then discard them by the side of the road.

Darwinism....

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/25/10 8:22 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:45:09 -0400, Harry
wrote:

since the
Constitution didn't discuss providing decent health care for the poor,
there was no rationale for doing it...or something like that.

There is no rationale for the federal government to do it. That is
very clear.


Sure there is...you just don't accept the concept of decency towards
your fellow man and woman.
Now *that's* funny coming from you, WAFA.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/25/10 10:55 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:41:14 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Sure there is...you just don't accept the concept of decency towards
your fellow man and woman.

Decency is admirable. That doesn't make it the job of the federal
government however. You can't legislate decency and government is
absolutely the wrong place to try and provide it.



Government is nothing more than people and their policies. I still
haven't seen any reasonable ideas from you that would help low-income
workers secure decent health care coverage or a decent retirement,
when every dime they earn goes to feed and shelter themselves and
their families. The days of upward mobility for tens of millions of
workers are pretty much over.
Maybe John Kerry has a "plan". He was the King of plans...

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:


Right...because the private sector has been doing so much of late to
create jobs...

Actually, I'd prefer we get the health care insurers out of the health
care insurance business altogether...they serve no useful purpose.
You won't see that in your lifetime. The government can't handle
delivering mail without losing billions and we all know how well SS is
doing. My government approved retirement age will be 95 by the time I
can take a penny of what I've put into that screwed up system.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/26/10 10:45 AM, Harold wrote:
"Harry wrote in message
...
On 7/26/10 10:28 AM, Harold wrote:
"Harry wrote in message
...
On 7/25/10 10:55 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:41:14 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Sure there is...you just don't accept the concept of decency
towards
your fellow man and woman.

Decency is admirable. That doesn't make it the job of the federal
government however. You can't legislate decency and government is
absolutely the wrong place to try and provide it.



Government is nothing more than people and their policies. I still
haven't
seen any reasonable ideas from you that would help low-income workers
secure decent health care coverage or a decent retirement, when every
dime
they earn goes to feed and shelter themselves and their families. The
days
of upward mobility for tens of millions of workers are pretty much
over.

If only them thar people up there in Washington would start acting
decently
and responsibly to serve the needs of ALL the people. The first
thing the
Govt. needs to do is get out of the jobs and cars and healthcare
businesses
and plant the seeds for entrapanerial ventures that create products
and
jobs.

Earn a dollar, then spend a dollar. That's the way it should be done.



Right...because the private sector has been doing so much of late to
create jobs...

Actually, I'd prefer we get the health care insurers out of the health
care insurance business altogether...they serve no useful purpose.


It's guys like you who are dead set against the private sector
succeeding.
The ability to conceive and deliver a product or service the consumer
needs
or wants, leads to job creation and often great wealth to the creator
of the
jobs. Win-Win for everyone. Until the union creeps in and removes the
incentive to work hard and EARN merit increases.


Do you insure your car, your gentleman's estate, your boat, your
life? Why
not your health?



Health insurers do not deliver a product the consumer needs or wants.
Health care is already out there...it exists. Health insurance adds an
unnecessary middle-man factor.
The same could be said about car insurers or home/property insurers. I
realize both include liability (tort) insurance but that's another topic.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/26/10 11:43 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:52:05 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Health insurers do not deliver a product the consumer needs or wants.
Health care is already out there...it exists. Health insurance adds an
unnecessary middle-man factor.

... and a huge government bureaucracy wouldn't?


It wouldn't have to, would it? Remember, I am an advocate of the swiss
system, in which the basic plans offered are all the same, and could
easily be administered (claims received, claims paid) by a non-profit
third party, since procedures and medications would be covered or not,
and lists would be circulated and coded. If you want additional
coverages, and many would, private insurance companies could sell
those separately through a regulated process.

I advocate dumping the current health care payment process and coming
up with something entirely different.


"something"...sounds like the current bill that will never be
implemented without a huge overhaul, if ever.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

Harry  wrote:
On 7/26/10 12:04 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:49:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

On 7/26/10 11:43 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:52:05 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Health insurers do not deliver a product the consumer needs or wants.
Health care is already out there...it exists. Health insurance
adds an
unnecessary middle-man factor.

... and a huge government bureaucracy wouldn't?


It wouldn't have to, would it? Remember, I am an advocate of the swiss
system, in which the basic plans offered are all the same, and could
easily be administered (claims received, claims paid) by a non-profit
third party, since procedures and medications would be covered or not,
and lists would be circulated and coded. If you want additional
coverages, and many would, private insurance companies could sell those
separately through a regulated process.

I advocate dumping the current health care payment process and
coming up
with something entirely different.

I guess my problem with the government is their vulnerability to
fraud. Medicare is the shining example of a low overhead way to pay
bills, when you ask but their fraud rate is a lot higher than the
private insurers. For some reason our government is very susceptible
to getting robbed. (Medicare, DoD procurement, USDA programs,
whatever)
Perhaps the Swiss are just more honest.


Sadly, we tolerate fraud. Look at government defense contracting.
And unions.

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:28:09 -0400, "Harold"
wrote:



If only them thar people up there in Washington would start acting decently
and responsibly to serve the needs of ALL the people. The first thing the
Govt. needs to do is get out of the jobs and cars and healthcare businesses
and plant the seeds for entrapanerial ventures that create products and

the govt IS out of the healthcare business for most people

that's why healthcare is so expensive and doesnt cover everyone. it's
known as a 'market failure


Is social security also a "market failure"?

ah, yes, the latest on my company 401K
 

bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:45:50 -0400, "Harold"
wrote:



It's guys like you who are dead set against the private sector succeeding.

we just give the private sector 30 years of one of the most
deregulated economies in history

how'd that work out?


The ability to conceive and deliver a product or service the consumer needs
or wants, leads to job creation and often great wealth to the creator of the
jobs. Win-Win for everyone. Until the union creeps in and removes the
incentive to work hard and EARN merit increases.

there are no unions in the US. you really DO believe all the right
wing bull**** don't you?

uh...let's see...was it unions or WALL STREET that destroyed 10
TRILLION DOLLARS in equity in the last 3 years?

WALLSTREET!

but the right wing still blames the easter bunny


Who, in your bizarre mind, comprises this group you call "Wallstreet" sic?