Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Cyberchat > Political Issues
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

DW Simpson Global Actuarial Recruitment

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #291  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:53 PM
win diesel's Avatar
win diesel win diesel is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Some 500 FPP Step1
Favorite beer: lol beer ... ketel1 please....k thks
Posts: 33,931
Default

Obama will call them and retroactively get them covered since they were in the womb
__________________
To be great, is to be misunderstood

Spoiler:
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:55 PM
soyleche's Avatar
soyleche soyleche is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whisper View Post
Year long open enrollment would do that.
Making insurance have to be retroactive to the date of the application would help too.

I could easily see the govt doing either or both of those things at some point in the not so far off future.
__________________
I'll never again say that I could never enjoy Bieber sung by a bunch of Mormons - Ben Folds
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:56 PM
pete5383's Avatar
pete5383 pete5383 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by win diesel View Post
Obama will call them and retroactively get them covered since they were in the womb
Future Imaginary Obama sounds like a really *******.
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:59 PM
Clara Oswald's Avatar
Clara Oswald Clara Oswald is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whisper View Post
Year long open enrollment would do that.
So would bears with machine guns at every underwriter's desk. What is your point?
__________________
Run, you clever boy, and remember.
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:07 PM
C8 Guy C8 Guy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara Oswald View Post
So would bears with machine guns at every underwriter's desk. What is your point?
I think most underwriter's are out of a job.
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:10 PM
Pujols4Prez's Avatar
Pujols4Prez Pujols4Prez is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,426
Default

I explained all of what I know about ACA (not a ton, but lots more than the general population) to my brother the other night. His response was, "Sounds like a good time to be a doctor" and "this sounds like health insurance reform".
__________________
Hardwork is the crutch of the talent-less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Statatak View Post
what's a JAS
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:19 PM
notreallyme's Avatar
notreallyme notreallyme is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 18,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete5383 View Post
.............I haven't factored into account the scary things that Adolf Obama is GOING to do.
...........
This is why you think so many Gov't plans are good options. Social Security, Hell it's only 1% of income and only affects the wealthy, sounds like a good plan. I bet it will never even be more than a blip.

Income taxes ... Hmmmm sounds kind of scary but I guess they have to fund things somehow and it's only on the people making the most. We'll hardly ever even notice it

If you can't see why people are scared of Gov't taking over the healthcare system you are being intentionally dense.

** I personally believe that Healthcare and Banking should be non-profit and run by the Gov't somehow. I certainly do NOT trust our Gov't to run either. **
__________________
Only true outliers:

succeed without lots of work
fail in spite of hard work

(paraphased from Sheba)
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:26 PM
whisper's Avatar
whisper whisper is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Favorite beer: Hefewizen
Posts: 30,222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara Oswald View Post
So would bears with machine guns at every underwriter's desk. What is your point?
Quite simple:

It's an easy thing to implement in law, and it sounds perfectly reasonable. Why shouldn't people be able to enroll in insurance whenever they want?
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:31 PM
twig93's Avatar
twig93 twig93 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 14,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete5383 View Post
That might be the dumbest article I've ever read in my life. I wouldn't swear to it, but so far nothing else is coming to mind.

So if more Democrats run unopposed than Republicans, they get more votes and that somehow equals a mandate??? If the Republicans in the heavily Democratic district don't bother to vote because the Democrat always wins with 80% of the vote... they're giving the Democrats a mandate???


At least now I know what you mean by "House popular votes", so you did in fact answer my question. It's just that this measurement is one of the dumbest most meaningless statistics I've ever heard... even dumber than paying attention to the popular vote in a presidential election. (Not much dumber, to be sure, but dumber.) It's like we're pretending that the knowledge that their vote means nothing doesn't influence voter behavior.

Quote:
Second question
I'm only looking at spending increases. From the final year of the Bush presidency to the last rolling 12 months under Obama, spending has increased by 2.1% per year.

Compare this to the same time period of, say, the Reagan administration, which had 8.0% per year.

http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts.xls

Please, check my math.
I understand your math, but once again, you're looking at the wrong thing. Bush already ran up the spending to absurdly high levels and then Obama just kept increasing it further. The higher the deficit is when you take office, the more critical it is that you don't increase it. The higher your base is, the lower a percent increase you're going to have for the same dollar increase. Also, Obama was transitioning from a wartime to a [sort of] peacetime economy. How did non-military government spending change under Obama?
__________________
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The thing that is clearest is twig's advice
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:32 PM
Clara Oswald's Avatar
Clara Oswald Clara Oswald is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whisper View Post
Quite simple:

It's an easy thing to implement in law, and it sounds perfectly reasonable. Why shouldn't people be able to enroll in insurance whenever they want?
Easy? In a House that voted to repeal Obamacare 41 times? They are going to add more provisions that the R's won't like? M'Kay
__________________
Run, you clever boy, and remember.
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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 1.06058 seconds with 8 queries