GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-26-2013, 09:08   #21
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,461
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
If they use the healthcare wisely and properly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
True dat
Yep...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
So you are saying that often people stay with a company because of the benefits. During the period of "I'm just here for the benefits," performance may not be at peak quality. Management requires improved performance. Employee doesn't like the job, still only does minimum +. Is that the friction you're talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Yeah, but it goes beyond that. Lots of jobs with people in them that really shouldn't be there but they stay because of the benefits. Those jobs could be freed up for people to move up or move in if those folks retired. That's part of the friction I'm talking about. Also, people who need the healthcare don't go start new businesses because they can't afford to lose their healthcare at their existing job so that's another source. That's just a few examples but you get the idea.
Good points. Motivating people to look for new employment might be easier if the undesirable employee did not have the benefit package "anchor". That would have been helpful to me a few times over the years.

Attracting employees to a new venture would be easier if they bring their own insurance plan. Still, many will be under corporate master policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
But, if the insurance attaches to the individual, or to the family, not the employment, employees could move about between companies as freely as they wish? Is that your point? Wouldn't that create volatility, uncertainty in the market?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Not really. There's still utility in seniority and stability for both parties. People make more when they've been there a while and whatnot. But, if an employer doesn't treat their employees well, or pay well, then they're less likely to hold on to them. That's the labor market functioning as it should.
True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
What then would an employer offer to attract and retain employees so that they can produce/provide goods/services at values that attract clients and customers, earning profits that attract investors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Pay, better working conditions, etc. Labor will always be one of the bigger costs associated with business, but we've had a problem with wages falling while simultaneously, profits rising for decades so a correction is probably in order. Again, the labor market working as it should.
More recently the market is learning to do more with fewer employees.

Demand will have to increase more dramatically than in the past to entice employers to employ more.

Otherwise, new companies, either for new products or competitors for existing products will have to come online to hire the employable.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 09:30   #22
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
The take home point is, free markets only work when both parties have something to offer the other. In healthcare the providers have the customer over a barrel. This effectively means the market breaks down.
Are you aware that the "health care crisis" of the early 1900's was that health car was so cheap and universally available that doctors were afraid of "not getting paid what they deserve?" That ushered in the era of "political solutions," where the government began by effectively giving the AMA a monopoly. There have been many more distortions to the market since then, to the point that it's really a joke to mention the word "free" at this point, but the take home is that even when you think you have customers are over a barrel, providers in a legitimately free market are great at undercutting each other to the point that prices are low and availability is high.

It's only very recently that you have this meltdown of a heavily regulated and controlled system, with the government artificially propping up the cost of health care (guess who prevents re-importation of drugs, etc).

Another example of "perfect inelasticity" is food -- if you need it to survive (and you do), you'll pay whatever it costs. According to you, this should completely destroy the effectiveness of the free market. But it doesn't -- instead, we have an obesity problem with poor people, and the ultimate in convenience and low price (fast food) is everywhere.
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?

Last edited by Chronos; 10-26-2013 at 09:40..
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 09:37   #23
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,317
Ocare need not be defunded. It will do that on its' own. ACA will not survive without a lot of young, healthy and low risk people signing up. Thus far, they haven't. And they aren't going to, either.
__________________
The past is the past, the future hasn't happened yet, so today is linguine and clam sauce!
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 09:41   #24
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Rye View Post
Ocare need not be defunded. It will do that on its' own. ACA will not survive without a lot of young, healthy and low risk people signing up. Thus far, they haven't. And they aren't going to, either.
Yes -- it's already happening: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=225427
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 09:50   #25
Michael Rye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,317
In a bass ackwards sort of a way, it's a good thing for the Administration that the website is in such disarray. People can't see the prices! Once they do, there will be even less incentive to sign up. This whole thing has been a turkey from the get go.
__________________
The past is the past, the future hasn't happened yet, so today is linguine and clam sauce!
Michael Rye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 10:27   #26
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Are you aware that the "health care crisis" of the early 1900's was that health car was so cheap and universally available that doctors were afraid of "not getting paid what they deserve?" That ushered in the era of "political solutions," where the government began by effectively giving the AMA a monopoly. There have been many more distortions to the market since then, to the point that it's really a joke to mention the word "free" at this point, but the take home is that even when you think you have customers are over a barrel, providers in a legitimately free market are great at undercutting each other to the point that prices are low and availability is high.

It's only very recently that you have this meltdown of a heavily regulated and controlled system, with the government artificially propping up the cost of health care (guess who prevents re-importation of drugs, etc).

Another example of "perfect inelasticity" is food -- if you need it to survive (and you do), you'll pay whatever it costs. According to you, this should completely destroy the effectiveness of the free market. But it doesn't -- instead, we have an obesity problem with poor people, and the ultimate in convenience and low price (fast food) is everywhere.
If you'd studied markets as you purport to have done I'm sure you'd be able to come up with a few reasons your comparisons break down.

How many people in 1900 got blood panels, CAT scans, MRI's etc. done as part of their standard battery of tests? Did doctors shell out millions for those machines in 1900?

Didn't think so...

Medicine is just a bit different now isn't it. It's more science and technology driven and a bit less voodoo-art.

As far as food, that's a bit more interesting...

The market for food is full of substitutes. It's full of tens of thousands of different suppliers. If tomatoes were $10,000 apiece you'd by something else. You wouldn't need to starve because there's hundreds of choices.

That's the western paradigm.

In other parts of the world where I've traveled, the local Warlords use food just as you're describing. Africa is a biggie. They withhold food from the locals except their own thugs. This has the effect of creating fanatical loyalty and giving them godlike power.

So in essence you can see how Market forces break down in various ways using the food analogy.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 10:31   #27
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Yep...Good points. Motivating people to look for new employment might be easier if the undesirable employee did not have the benefit package "anchor". That would have been helpful to me a few times over the years.

Attracting employees to a new venture would be easier if they bring their own insurance plan. Still, many will be under corporate master policies.True.

More recently the market is learning to do more with fewer employees.

Demand will have to increase more dramatically than in the past to entice employers to employ more.


Otherwise, new companies, either for new products or competitors for existing products will have to come online to hire the employable.
This hits at the crux of the matter.

The businesses that made it through the crisis figured out they could do lots more with fewer employees. Lots of those jobs aren't coming back.

That's why giving people the freedom to go out and try new things like starting businesses without being worried about losing their healthcare is such an important thing. Those guys are the backbone of our economy and they're going to create the new jobs, not the top 1% folks who currently own the bulk of the wealth.

There's a significant problem with people just sitting around waiting for the plant or the mill to re-open and it's not gonna. Their job is gone forever and them sitting on their couch complaining isn't going to pay off ever.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 10:55   #28
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
If you'd studied markets as you purport to have done I'm sure you'd be able to come up with a few reasons your comparisons break down.

How many people in 1900 got blood panels, CAT scans, MRI's etc. done as part of their standard battery of tests? Did doctors shell out millions for those machines in 1900?

Didn't think so...

Medicine is just a bit different now isn't it. It's more science and technology driven and a bit less voodoo-art.

As far as food, that's a bit more interesting...

The market for food is full of substitutes. It's full of tens of thousands of different suppliers. If tomatoes were $10,000 apiece you'd by something else. You wouldn't need to starve because there's hundreds of choices.

That's the western paradigm.

In other parts of the world where I've traveled, the local Warlords use food just as you're describing. Africa is a biggie. They withhold food from the locals except their own thugs. This has the effect of creating fanatical loyalty and giving them godlike power.

So in essence you can see how Market forces break down in various ways using the food analogy.
Technology is there to reduce the cost of remaining healthy, not increase it. It is only in an ass-backwards heavily regulated system (full of government-granted monopoloies and enforcement) that the availability of technology causes prices to increase.

In the food example, you haven't remotely addressed the problem with your theory. You only have a multitude of suppliers and replacements because there is a relatively free market in place. If you go to where food production is carried out by the state, you have starvation and inelasticity and exactly the situation you cite -- politically motivated distribution. The theory would then say that "markets can't work" when in fact they are the only way to make the system work.
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 11:03   #29
janice6
Platinum Membership
NRA
 
janice6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: minnesota
Posts: 20,586


Legacy of a politician:


“I'm a politician, and as a politician I have the prerogative to lie whenever Iwant.”
Charles Peacock, ex-director of MadisonGuaranty, the Arkansas S&L at center of Whitewatergate.

Yet this one lectures us on "honesty"........
__________________
janice6

"Peace is that brief, glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". Anonymous

Earp: Not everyone who knows you hates you.
DOC: I know it ain't always easy bein' my friend....but I'll BE THERE when you need me.
janice6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 11:36   #30
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,988
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=222652

Government Medicare coverage is essentially a scam. Even under current regulations, prices at "cash only" hospitals are 20% of the competition that accepts Medicare patients. But the Medicare co-pay is 20%, so prices become inflated at those hospitals such that out-of-pocket expenses are identical for the patient. So what does the Medicare money end up paying for? Nothing. It's a fraud on a scale so massive it can only be pulled off by you-know-who.
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2013, 21:22   #31
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Technology is there to reduce the cost of remaining healthy, not increase it. It is only in an ass-backwards heavily regulated system (full of government-granted monopoloies and enforcement) that the availability of technology causes prices to increase.

In the food example, you haven't remotely addressed the problem with your theory. You only have a multitude of suppliers and replacements because there is a relatively free market in place. If you go to where food production is carried out by the state, you have starvation and inelasticity and exactly the situation you cite -- politically motivated distribution. The theory would then say that "markets can't work" when in fact they are the only way to make the system work.
Want to know what I like about Economists? At least the good ones aren't ideologues. They study the data and the established theories and follow where the data and the research leads.

The statement I bolded is completely false and without merit. Technology in medicine is there to help doctors and other medical professionals figure out what's wrong with people so they can treat them. It's not supposed to lower costs. It's supposed to save lives.

With regards to the food example, my point stands. Relatively free markets work relatively well. Markets where someone is controlling everything on one side, effectively creating a monopoly aren't free. That's an externality which economists who are worth their weight in chalk dust take into account in their models.

See, if you have something that's inelastic like healthcare, which you can't get from your garden, like healthcare, and you die without it, like healthcare, then the relatively few conglomerates who control it can charge whatever they want. It's not quite a monopoly but close.

Interestingly, we've been going that way in our food supply for years. The government subsidies to agribusiness have had the effect of squeezing out the small farms and letting companies like Monsanto dominate the markets. This isn't a good thing for the consumer.

But the market is still functioning as a market at this point because you can still grow your own food. I get all my produce from farmers markets locally. I either shoot my own meat or get it from local ranchers in the case of beef. My sister has a farm with a bunch of chickens if I need eggs, etc.

So you see it's a bit different.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 07:16   #32
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,312
Well, we have had the left in charge of the economy for a while now.

How's that working out for everybody?
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 07:16   #33
muscogee
Senior Member
 
muscogee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,841


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Want to know what I like about Economists? At least the good ones aren't ideologues. They study the data and the established theories and follow where the data and the research leads.

The statement I bolded is completely false and without merit. Technology in medicine is there to help doctors and other medical professionals figure out what's wrong with people so they can treat them. It's not supposed to lower costs. It's supposed to save lives.
At the same time, the doctors maintain a monopoly on the use of that technology. I have to pay a doctor to order a blood workup, pay the doctor to read it to me and pay the doctor to prescribe the needed medications based on that blood test. That's one middle man that could be cut out. I've been having blood work for over ten years. I can read the test as well as anyone. It's not that hard. I know what medication I need because I've been taking that medication for over ten years. Beyond that I know what I've been doing that impacts the results of the blood work. Of course the doctors will argue that most people can't interpret the results. That may be true, but one doesn't need a doctor to do that either. A trained professional could do it or a computer readout could recommend the necessary medication. I see no reason why one couldn't take the results to a pharmacist and have the pharmacist recommend the necessary medication.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
With regards to the food example, my point stands. Relatively free markets work relatively well. Markets where someone is controlling everything on one side, effectively creating a monopoly aren't free. That's an externality which economists who are worth their weight in chalk dust take into account in their models.

See, if you have something that's inelastic like healthcare, which you can't get from your garden, like healthcare, and you die without it, like healthcare, then the relatively few conglomerates who control it can charge whatever they want. It's not quite a monopoly but close.

Interestingly, we've been going that way in our food supply for years. The government subsidies to agribusiness have had the effect of squeezing out the small farms and letting companies like Monsanto dominate the markets. This isn't a good thing for the consumer.

But the market is still functioning as a market at this point because you can still grow your own food. I get all my produce from farmers markets locally. I either shoot my own meat or get it from local ranchers in the case of beef. My sister has a farm with a bunch of chickens if I need eggs, etc.

So you see it's a bit different.
You're on target. We've been moving towards fascism at least since Reagan. Sole Proprietorships now have to operate under the same rules as Halliburton but pay proportionately more taxes and get little to no government subsidies. When Sole Proprietorships can't pay their bills they go under. When Goldman Sachs can't pay its bills it gets a bailout paid for by the Sole Proprietorships and others. Then it can take it's money and invest it overseas, give it to it's executives, or do whatever it wants because the rest of us are going to pick up the tab. Ain't American capitalism (fascism) great.

Quote:
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
In that light, fascists want to "do what's right for the country", the country being the corporations and the government they support. Every time John Boehner starts in wth "do what's right for the country" mantra I think of this.
__________________
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

Leona Helmsley
muscogee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 12:30   #34
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
Well, we have had the left in charge of the economy for a while now.

How's that working out for everybody?
Try and step away from ideology for a sec and look at voting records.

Aside from a few key social issues, "left" and "right" vote about 96% or so the same.

There is no functional difference.

There is no "Left" and "Right" as it pertains to most issues.

There's two groups in America. The people who can afford to purchase influence, and those of us who cannot.

Once you figure this out you'll be much angrier but you'll be angry at the right people for a change.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...

Last edited by Mad Ryan; 10-27-2013 at 12:31..
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 12:47   #35
G29Reload
Tread Lightly
 
G29Reload's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,620
The only solutions for Obamacare is for it to DIE.

It does not need to be replaced with ANYTHING.

There was not that much wrong with healthcare to begin with.
There will be now.

Not that O-care has anything to do with healthcare but control.

It needs to be dumped and its authors strung up or shot.

Adding government to a situation improves nothing and only makes things worse.

This entire exercise, half a billion for a failed website, all the rules and regs and economic destruction are completely unnecessary. All the unemployed didnt have to happen except for one narcissists ego and his syncohants.

I say massive civil disobedience is the only thing left shy of lock and load.
__________________
Avenge me...AVENGE ME!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by G29Reload; 10-27-2013 at 12:49..
G29Reload is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 13:46   #36
snerd
Senior Member
 
snerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,717
Heisenberg!!!

Love that guy!! Nothing to add, just wanted to comment on reload's avatar.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by snerd; 10-27-2013 at 13:46..
snerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 13:47   #37
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,708
My favorite Coburn movie was "In Like Flint".

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 13:53   #38
snerd
Senior Member
 
snerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyguy View Post
My favorite Coburn movie was "In Like Flint".

Regards,
Happyguy
And my favorite commercial line was, "Schlitz, Light!".
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
snerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 15:20   #39
Stubudd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kennesaw GA
Posts: 5,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscogee View Post
I have to pay a doctor to order a blood workup, pay the doctor to read it to me and pay the doctor to prescribe the needed medications based on that blood test. That's one middle man that could be cut out. I've been having blood work for over ten years. I can read the test as well as anyone. It's not that hard.
http://www.jec.senate.gov/republican...4-a100c43fb5c8

You guys just don't make any sense, really
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Stubudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 16:27   #40
muscogee
Senior Member
 
muscogee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,841


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubudd View Post
http://www.jec.senate.gov/republican...4-a100c43fb5c8

You guys just don't make any sense, really
You can't think outside the box because you're the box. Rather than some uninterpretable web page, why not address the issues i raised?
__________________
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

Leona Helmsley
muscogee is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:17.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 534
117 Members
417 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31