Useful Links

Bestwifeever · 04-07-2011, 12:17 PM

College costs seem to go up proportionally when credits/subsidies/grants (Pell, Hope, etc.) are enacted. I would fully expect insurance rates to rise to offset any vouchers.

MasterBlaster · 04-07-2011, 12:22 PM

Ryan's proposal stands no chance of passing.

But at least the conversation is starting. This head-in-the sand approach does nobody any good. dealing with problems earlier is better than facing drastic solutions later.

When are we going to have the "adult" conversation about entitlements, defense and taxes? Those with the simple snap-your fingers-there solutions or worse those in denial of a problem are not helpful.

rescueme · 04-07-2011, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

The plan is freaking stupid. Our government is filled with freaking idiots who only care about money and the squeaky wheel.

Aw, tell us what you really think

...

FinanceDude · 04-07-2011, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

The plan is freaking stupid. Our government is filled with freaking idiots who only care about money and the squeaky wheel.

There. I've said my piece.

(Keep in mind incentives work many ways. Research shows that raising deductibles cause people to go without necessary care which can drive up costs later. I know people who do not buy medications for chronic illnesses because they cannot afford the deductible.)

Well, I guess we can all analyze the stupid plan the Dems will submit next week..............

mystang52 · 04-07-2011, 01:21 PM

[disclaimer: other than the brief highlights, I have not read the plan in any depth] I consider myself a Republican, but I have serious doubts about this proposal. Those vouchers presume (as another poster alluded to) reasonable insurance rates that will go up as soon as the vouchers become effective. I do agree a true discussion/analysis is needed for the solvency of SS and Medicare, but that discussion will never happen due to both parties' refusal to do anything but play politics...as they have for at least 25 years regarding Social Security.

Westernskies · 04-07-2011, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29

Perfect! Just as I've predicted. Guess who turns 67 in 2032?

Charlie Sheen. If we are lucky he'll be institutionalized by then.

FinanceDude · 04-07-2011, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westernskies

Charlie Sheen. If we are lucky he'll be institutionalized by then.

Charlie Sheen won't live that long..........

haha · 04-07-2011, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

The plan is freaking stupid. Our government is filled with freaking idiots who only care about money and the squeaky wheel.

There. I've said my piece.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude

The Dem talking heads in Washington have said "this is a good day for Dems", because they feel they can attack the GOP on this plan. So much for "reaching across the aisle"..........

This plan ought to be attacked, it is stupid.

Ha

So we agree. I also agree about the motivations behind it. Purely serving one's masters. Unfortunately the Repubs are not the only experts at this; if they were our problem would be over, we would have good healthcare, and Dems would have a long spell in control of the government.

sheehs1 · 04-07-2011, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgoldenz

When services cost people $0, they don't care about making the financial choice to not utilize them. Same reason people go to the ER with a $50 co-pay for common sickness when the doctor's office is closed. If they had to pay their deductible first, they would be more likely to let it go.

I actually do agree with this somewhat. I think it very possible there is over-utilization. Something is certainly being over utilized with the way the budget has skyrocketed the last 10 years. Of course...there is always the fraud.