dw57

Corporations Win Again - This Time It's Healthcare

while it might not do any thing. its impossible to accomplish any thing that will. nobody will allow a disinterested 3rd party to review doctor's opinions. today insurance companies are only interested in reducing what they cover, raising premiums, or canceling the policy for any reason imaginable before you get care. thats where they make their money and they have monopolies in most ares they serve. doctors only care to provide care that they get paid for. they have figured out that if they own the labs and other medical providers they can make even more by prescribing tests and other such procedures/ and they have monopolies in most areas they serve. but there are places in the US that don't seem to have those problems. but in those rare areas doctors are on salary.

U.S. Healthcare Legislation Investment Impact

while one might complain that SS is a ponzi. the replacements for pensions are more like frauds that any thing else


On Nov 09 02:59 PM Gedankonomist wrote:

>
> Yes, just like social security. The definition of "insanity" is
> essentially the idea that, after trying something and finding out
> you are wrong, you go and try the same thing again, expecting a different
> result.
>
> Roosevelt promised you "social security" and what you got instead
> was a Ponzi scheme. Actually, it is worse than a Ponzi scheme, since
> most Ponzi schemes are VOLUNTARY. So my apologies to Charles Ponzi.
>
>
> Anyway, now the same monstrosity in DC is promising you "free health
> care." You fools, you are about to find out the hard way that "free
> health care" is actually stealing. Although you think your neighbor
> will be paying for your "free health care," you will be getting robbed
> at the same time.
>
> On Nov 09 11:21 AM Michael D. wrote:
>
> healthcare won't be only available

Don't Believe Long-Term Oil Forecasts

not sure that the dollar has declined that much has it? after all oil is up what 100% or more? but you are correct it has had very little to do with supply and demand
and the export countries desperately need the US consumer to buy their stuff, and that consumer is dollar based. make the dollar decline and they stop buying. raising interest rates may or may not have any impact at all. didn't before now in the last 8 years.


On Nov 09 09:47 AM ringo3khan wrote:

> I think it's important to remember that as much as the price of the
> commodity is determined by supply/demand considerations, it's also
> determined by the value or lack thereof of the U.S. dollar as same
> is held in vast quantities by the producing countries. Thus, oil
> has, in many ways become the new "Currency" and will be for as long
> as it's valued primarily in "dollars"; it's natural that as the instabilities
> in the U.S. financial and economic models become ever more violent
> and less predictable that the dollar will continue to fall in value.
> There is of coure the "model" out there that would indicate that
> if the Fed was to begin to raise interest rates, the dollar might
> begin to strengthen. However, the increased instability and inefficiencies
> of the U.S. society, political system and financial systems may well
> put us in a place where despite interest rate increases, the dollar
> doesn't appreciate significantly in value because, just as may now
> be the case with the currency of Zimbabwe, other countries and central
> banks won't want to be holding dollars in reserve. To the extent
> that this is the case, until such time as a more stable world reserve
> currency can be found, there may be no forseable ceiling on the price
> of oil.

Japan: Demographic Time Bomb Waiting to Explode

i don't thats what they are saying. what they are pointing out is that if you have a shrinking population (and i have seen where they might die out in 20 or 30 years) you can't have a growing GDP (cause every year there is less demand).


On Nov 05 04:20 PM maff wrote:

> "if we don’t take care to make sure our population is dynamic, healthy
> and growing sooner or later bad economic things will happen"
>
> and if we do manage to engineer continuous population growth and
> ever-increasing consumption everything will end happily?

The Performance of Japanese Companies: A Growing Connection with External Demand

not sure that any country that is dependent on external growth will be a permanent economic superpower. and there is that population problem they have (they are shrinking). which is true of many Asian countries. even China. and it has that dependency on external demand for growth too

Financial Regulation: How Would You Have It Work?

well that was engineered by one person. Phil Graham. and he isn't a democrat


On Nov 05 11:57 AM Techtrader10 wrote:

> The was a great law in place that was removed during the Clinton
> Admiinistration because it was said to "hinder" the banking industries
> competitiveness. The Glass Steagall Act was a way to separate the
> banking and investment firms. It was a good idea and should be reimplimented.

Bailout Nation Mentality: Ford Workers Reject Further Concessions

not sure that Ford wasn't just lucky. they hocked every thing back 2006. for billions. when they could. now maybe that was the right choice (looking back). but at the time every one thought that was a really bad choice. and there a lot of other reasons that F didn't want a bailout. can't forget the Ford family, had they had a bailout, they would loose control of the company. hard to overlook that too. But they have done really well and so should be commended for that. but they are very much a truck company still. and they need new cars. and lucky (and really good timing) they have some of those in the pipe line (and some that came out this year too). but unless the car market gets well (how likely is that?) they too will be in trouble, per their own testimony, under oath

Three more Ford (F) plants reject union contract givebacks, bringing the total to 11 plants and dimming Ford's hopes of getting the concessions granted to GM and Chrysler. "This never happens. It’s a vote of no confidence in the bargaining committee and a vote of no confidence in Ford," says a labor professor. (previously: I, II, III)

can Ford be in trouble? they said they would be if the entire car market wasn't bigger than 10 million? will we hit that? unlikely. but possible. and why should Ford get the same deal as 2 bankrupt companies? the others got a court to do the deed for them. to many have no idea how much these folks get (not 70/hour). not even 50/hour. not do many if us know what they do (its not what it was 30 years ago). and there aren't many of them. so if Ford is doing so well, why do they need the same kid gloves that GM and Chrysler got?

Dollar Forced to Abdicate Its Throne

not sure that the 'weaker' dollar has much more to do with any thing other than falling demand for dollars. after all, we just saw a mad rush to it, driving its value up. and with the panic receding, demand has fallen off. but considering what other countries have done to their budgets (think the US has the highest deficit? think again). or that all that 'printed' has gone into the economy? nope its sitting in the banks going now where (little demand for it any way). and considering that we are the biggest buyer, how likely is it that out countries won't cut their currencies to keep them lower? if they don't, they loose a lot of what they sell to us. and since we just came from an era of tax cuts, and saw how little they helped the economy (which turned out to be based on easy credit than any thing else. what a hoax! after all we had falling incomes in the entire era).

The Hypocrisy and High Stakes of Healthcare Reform

here the thing. if we do nothing at all. in 10 years the average cost of insurance will be 30K per family (if we are lucky).
what are the odds that any business will keep this benefit when its that high?
and business has been dropping this already (down to about 50% of those business that have ever done so).
and why is the rest of the world has solved this problem, but the richest country in the world is helpless to solve it?

The Hypocrisy and High Stakes of Healthcare Reform

how do you figure that? all we lead in is the cost. we don't lead in any of the results of health care.


On Oct 22 12:45 PM CLH wrote:

> This whole reform is unbelievable. America has the best health care
> in the world. Does anyone go to Europe or Canada for health care?.
> Of course not. They all come to America where the health care is
> the best. The only way to cut costs is to privatise Medicare which
> is a bankrupt disaster.

The Hypocrisy and High Stakes of Healthcare Reform

doctor may have used to over treat because of fear. but not any more. and we proved it in Texas. we 'reformed' tort so that it is not economically feasible to sue for malpractice. but it had no impact on health care costs. seems to have gone up just like every where else.
and while patients have no idea about costs and doctor's do either. i doubt very seriously any one ever signed up for surgery because it didn't cost them any thing. or at best they did that once.
and learned that it was painful. and thats true of almost procedures isn't it?

and not every one will be allowed to buy insurance. you can't do that if you have some really minor conditions they won't write the contract for any amount of money. they will also cancel your contract if they can for any reason if they have a major claim coming (even if it will kill you to not have a procedure). happens all the time

and you still can't buy drugs from Canada. they won't allow that.
you can go there to have surgery if you want (they haven't stopped that. in fact your insurance company might suggest you go to India on a medical vacation.
all insurance is regulated. it all has rules as to what can be sold and what has to offered. and do you really think that buying from another state will really help? and how likely will that state be in helping you when the insurance companies fails to do some thing (like pay a claim?). not likely to be much help there at all

On Oct 22 07:32 AM fwi wrote:

> The central problem with health care expenditures is that consumers
> think of their insurance like an all-you-can-eat buffet. They overconsume,
> primarily because "it is already paid for", and they do not know
> what anything costs. Doctors often over-treat because of fear of
> grotesque lawsuits. And insurers only compete within a state, often
> with very few players.
>
> We no more need the Federal Government to take over our healthcare
> than we need a Federal bureaucrat picking out our clothes. Wholesale
> overhaul is complete madness. We need only address the above three
> issues in the following ways:
> 1. Each consumer uses his own allowance to buy his own insurance.
> For those employers who want to provide , fine, but not in purchased
> insurance, but with money to the employee. For the person who cannot
> afford insurance, the government provides the consumer with a cash
> allowance, with the freedom to use it as he would any other life
> sustaining purchase. For example, food stamps allow the consumer
> to purchase his own food choices. If food stamps were run like a
> public option, then the Feds would tell the consumer what brand of
> bacon to buy, how often he could buy it, and what store he was required
> to use. How long would anyone stand for that?
> 2. Doctors would stop over-prescribing procedures and tests if they
> told the patients what each cost, and what the dangers were if the
> tests were not done. The two then decide how best to manage the
> risks and benefits. Out of control lawsuits would be capped. One
> thing that everyone has forgotten is that the practice of medicine
> is as much an art as a science. To hold doctors to a standard of
> infallibility is unfair, as politicians and money managers are clearly
> not.
> 3. We are in a global economy and insurance cannot be purchased
> across state lines. The consumer then overpays to an insurer who
> is under challenged by the marketplace. This crazy law must be overturned.
> If you live in Florida and can buy controlled drugs in Canada, why
> cannot you buy cheaper insurance from Georgia?
>
> None of these reforms cost a dime, no new bureaucracies and entitlements
> created. Consumers take control of their own health care, insurers
> would have a more competitive marketplace, and doctors would practice
> more common sense medicine and less "defensive" medicine.
>
> If the Federal Government has decided that the citizens of this country
> cannot handle their own healthcare decisions, then what is the next
> thing they will decide we cannot handle? We must be beware of the
> unthinkable, because it is already happening.

Trading executives warn sweeping rule changes meant to shed light on so-called dark pools could ultimately hurt the investors regulators are trying to empower. SEC meets on Wednesday, and is expected to force off-exchange dark pools to display more quotes and reveal more data.

is this the case of the bank robber with the gun to the head of the guard saying if you take my picture you will hurt the banks customers?

The Debt-Equity Clock Is Ticking - Morgan Stanley

i wonder what they sell? it couldn't be they are brokers could it?

How GE Beat Our Consensus

so sales tanked. earning from sales are up based on cost cutting. not a good sign for the future