Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  
Two Harbors Forum * Local Topics & Issues * Commentary and observation, local or otherwise < Previous Next >

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 455
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 10:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I think a reasonable suggestion was for a thread for stuff that is not lighthearted. Maybe those things could be posted here, so the more fun stuff or the more light hearted stuff could be posted under just stuff.
Nobody died and made me king, just responding to a suggestion.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tailspin
Princess of the Realm
Username: tailspin

Post Number: 665
Registered: 09-2002


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 07:57 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

But you might make a great king.

Thanks Tom.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

skipper
Pro Poster
Username: skipper

Post Number: 394
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 09:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm not sure where to put this but was wondering what folks think about this...

http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/61330642.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1307
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 09:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just the other day, hubby was talking about grouse hunting and walking the trails. He really enjoyed that, hasn't been able to do that in years though, but the memories still vivid. One remark he made was about 4 wheelers, he said it isn't the same as enjoying the serenity of the woods, listening to nature, enjoying nature not to mention the exercise you get....but each to their own, it is a matter of personal choice.

I went on a few of his jaunts and it truly was beautiful and so peaceful, that is until he saw a bird!! We would pack a lunch and find a nice spot to sit and eat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 538
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 10:33 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The article doesn't specifically say it, but makes one think that these ATV hunters are driving through the woods, blasting away at any game they may see. The fact that it is illegal to carry a loaded or uncased gun on a motorized vehicle, is not mentioned. It has been legal to operate an ATV during deer hunting for getting to a deer stand, or to drag a deer to camp. If these grouse hunters are using the ATV to access their hunting area, fine, but if they are running down the trails until they spot a grouse, then go after it, I am not in favor of that.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 539
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 10:56 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Another news article from the StarTribune. Not sure if anyone else has reported about this or knew about it. Anyone affected by this?

http://www.startribune.com/business/61304742.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW 3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1308
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 11:52 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I brought this up here on the forum a few months back about a rumor I heard it was closing. There was a response at that time, it was not true. But that was then, this is now.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 456
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 03:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I used to be a member of the CHC.I got out of the Navy at the end of 1971 and joined up with the CHC in 1972, some time. My yearly premium and membership costs were under $150. That is YEARLY cost. I got a comprehensive physical exam every year, and full medical coverage. The only catch was that I had to use the CHC doctors and facilities. the doctors had a certain guaranteed annual income there, but it was significantly less than they could have made on the "outside". Paperwork was simple for member expenses. All that was needed was your name. Period.
Membership or premium costs went up over the years, but it was still cheap enough that when I started work on the railroad, I kept up my membership at the CHC. I'd get laid off every year, and my company coverage would expire, so it was simpler and cheaper for me to just keep up my CHC coverage just so I'd have insurance during long layoffs.

Eventually two things happened that prompted me to drop my CHC membership. The costs were much higher, and I had enough seniority that my layoffs were short enough to keep my company health coverage year-round.

It was a great system until outside insurance company paperwork added to the costs of running the CHC, and resulted in skyrocketing membership costs and a limitation on comprehensive membership benefits. A couple of the doctors from time to time also had bad vibes with the people they served, to the point that incoming "customers" would inquire who was on duty that day, in order to avoid those particular doctors. The CHC then had to change its policy and not say who the duty doctor was on a given day, just to avoid the kind of clumping of traffic that resulted from trying to avoid certain doctors.

When i retired from the RR two years ago, I had to get private coverage for my wife and I. The premium took half of my pension check every month. Less than 6 months after we were enrolled in that particular plan, the premiums went up twice. I dropped that plan and we got into another plan that was a little cheaper, but had less coverage. Now the premiums take a bit more than a third of my pension each month. I turned 62 today, and so Medicare coverage for me is not too much farther off.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 457
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 04:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

to tailspin:

toggle Gary Cooper mode [on]

"awww... shucks, ma'am... "
(scrapes toe of boot in dirt in front of him, while looking downward, somewhat)

toggle Gary Cooper mode [off]

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jackburton
Regular Poster
Username: jackburton

Post Number: 18
Registered: 06-2009
Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 06:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I have some experience with ATV partridge hunters. (grouse? what are they?) One guy drives ,the other sits on the back looking either right or left into the woods for targets. I never saw a driver with his gun out for forward shots, but that is probably common too. I didn't know it was illegal, I seen plenty do it on state trails.
Once up in Tomi I had walked far back on an old logging road, I got passed by an ATV hunting party, so I turned around and walked back. It was a wasted day.
The news story was interesting. This is my favorite time to hunt. Lots of dumb young birds wandering around clueless. If you don't like to hunt with leaves on the brush, or break brush stopping and listening for their little feet crunching on dead leaves, you don't know what you are missing. Besides, ATV shooters don;t get far into the brush with those vehicles and they aren't able to pass me up and ruin my hunting.
I saw 5 birds coming home from fishing on Sat. All standing on the Cramer road and some of the side roads. All young and stupid, I could have killed them with a thrown rock. By the way, fishing was outstanding Sat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin

Post Number: 275
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 10:37 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Happy Birthday Tom!


I'm addicted to placebos. I'd give them up, but it really wouldn't make any difference . . . .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

webman
Moderator
Username: webman

Post Number: 827
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Monday, September 28, 2009 - 10:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

HOTR, Thanks for posting the link to the FirstPlan article. There has been a paucity of coverage regarding the closure of FirstPlan at the end of this year. Lots of people are affected by this, either as employees of First Solutions/FirstPlan/SuperiorHealth Centers, or as people who have insurance coverage through FirstPlan. It certainly hits my family. As to the whys of their closure - lots of reasons. The last couple of years have not been kind to FirstPlan - claim costs up, membership numbers pretty stagnant, lack of successful marketing, all sorts of things. I could ramble on and on and on about this, but I'd better just zip it for now.
The trouble with life is, there's no background music.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 458
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - 11:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Stagnant membership numbers and lack of successful marketing are very possibly issues that FirstPlan had control of. I know that I wanted to join up with FirstPlan again, two years ago, when I retired. I could not. The answer I got was that they were not taking individual memberships any more. With the rising cost of insurances and other costs of business, it is no surprise that business memberships are down. the marketing failure is strictly a sign of failure within the offices and business practices of FirstPlan.

I think the shutting down of this organization is a direct result of corporate decisions higher up than the Two Harbors office. In my opinion the only people surprised by the shutdown are the people who are not inside the organization.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1311
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - 12:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When my husband got to Medicare Age, he was still able to have FirstPlan.... Supplemental Insurance, but then after a couple years or so a letter came saying they were no longer going to be in the Medicare Supplemental part of it, and he was put on BC&BS. Then he got a letter from First Plan asking why he quit!!! DAH, why he quit was he was forced out of First Plan, simple as that!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 302
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 12:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175 .html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091006/ts_afp/commoditiesgoldmetalsprice_200910061 44514

There has been a lot of talk about countries replacing the dollar with some other currency. I read this article this am and was wondering if anyone has any knowlege what would happen to the dollar if this happens on a large scale. I can't imagine it would be good.

Thoughts?
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 460
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 03:28 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Good catch, Nat, and also a good point to ponder.
If I have something, and you want it, I have the ability to say how much I want for it. You of course have the right to say that I want too much.

Now, if the thing is oil, which is as important as air and water - especially if you don't have any of it (oil, that is) then then the seller can pretty much ask whatever price he wants. If the price is in dollars, then our government's response is to just print more dollars. This of course, produces a dollar that isn't worth as much as it was before. This is called inflation, and was dramatically illustrated in post WWI Germany, where the government just printed whatever money it needed. The German Mark value was dropping so quickly that if you were to walk to the grocer with a sack full of this money to get a week's worth of food, by the time you got to the store you'd have enough money for just a day's worth.

If something is chosen which holds its value fairly well, then we have to exchange our money for some of whatever that new thing is. As inflation eats away the value of our currency, then the new thing costs more and more dollars.

Know that our government for the past several years has been borrowing money to pay its bills instead of raising taxes to pay the bills. This borrowing happens by selling bonds of various kinds. The biggest buyer of these bonds has been China, followed in no particular order by Japan and Russia and various oil kingdoms in the Middle East.

If a new medium of exchange is chosen for oil purchases, current holders of dollars (bond holders) will exchange those dollars (bonds) for the new exchange medium before our inflation rate eats up the value of our dollars, compared against the value of the new medium.

You are right, Nat, it is not a good thing.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 303
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 04:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Thank Tom!

It is my understanding that many countries hold their reserves in US dollars. If they predict their reserves will be worth less and decide to change their reserves to say the Yen would that not cause a spiraling affect and make the dollar more unstable and worth less quicker?

This may sound like a dumb question, but could / would the Federal reserve simply stop printing money making less of it available slowing the value decline? Are their solutions / systems in place to balance this out?

You mentioned the German Mark during WWI. What did Germany do to solve this problem? Could we do the same or has the World economy grown to complicated to do so?

Other than buying gold today is there any protection strategies for Joe public to protect our savings from this if other countries decide to dump their dollars and our government doesn't act fast enough or makes the wrong decision?

I don't want to sink into a more taxes less taxes or more spending less spending debate, but you mentioned a possible solution is to raise taxes / increase revenue. Could the same thing be accomplished by lowering spending accross the board? Doesn't new spending like the bailouts during the BUSH years and the Obama stimulus spending have a major affect as well? There is only so many dollars to tax and I know you and I disagree on where that happy medium is, but there must be a better solution than to raise taxes.

Is this in front of the American people yet, or are they too worried about who the next American Idol will be or if the Twins beat the Tigers this afternoon? "GO TWINS"

I might sound nuts when saying this, but I could see a little tussle coming out of this if the US can't pay its bonds. Reel me back in if I'm putting too much emphisis on the trouble this could start.

I know I'm throughing a lot out there to chew on, but thought it is an interesting topic, but I'm kind of a nerd that way. ha ha!
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 304
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 06:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Congressional-leaders-fight-against-p osting-bills-online-8340658-63557217.html#

Can someone explain to me why it is so difficult to have a bill posted publicly for voters and Congress to read and review before the vote? The article mentions this isn't done by either party. I agree that is the case and it should be changed! If you dont want to post it early so people can read, understand and give their representative their opinion on it than something must be fishy in the bill.

This is why the general public doesnt trust politicians and why there was such a loud out cry during the August recess.

I hope the next time around the people speak with their vote and change things up a bit. Get some farmers, miners and small business owners in there and get rid of the lawyers and career politicians!
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 463
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 10:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nat, I had to do a little digging to get a clue about Germany's solution to its hyperinflation. A long article is here : http://www.usagold.com/germannightmare.html
and it does a pretty good job of illustrating the problem and all that went with it. It was so bad that housewives started burning the money for fuel because it was cheaper than trying to buy fuel with the money. People were paid 3 times a day, and the printing presses could not keep up with the inflation rate. Some of the larger business conglomerates made out like bandits, because their debts were wiped out by the inflation. I digress...

In 1923 the German government issued a new currency, and declared that it would be stable. The government refused to print more of the new currency than its initial issue. The central bank then tightened up business credit to the point that nearly no borrowing was possible. Business debts had to be paid in gold marks. Another thing that was done was that the government imposed significant new taxes on business and industry that had to be paid only in the new currency. These basic steps stabilized the German economy in very short order. Instead of government financing its spending by borrowing money, it collected taxes to pay for what it spent. It became a pay-as-you-go government.

These were hard years, and a little corporal from WWI, a charismatic public speaker and failed artist, took advantage of these hard times - blamed it all on the Jews and Gypsies and Communists and eventually took control of the country shortly after. He had plenty of help, from others who wanted an easy scapegoat rather than face the real cause behind their nation's problems.

The bailout spending our government has done recently is a speck compared against what our government spends otherwise. Taxation does not mean an expansion of government, it means that government recognizes that it must pay NOW for what it spends, rather than put it on the national credit card. Large businesses and industries are taxed at a MUCH lower rate now than they were during the Eisenhower administration. Further, corporations are taking advantage of tax dodges by moving their corporate headquarters to tax havens in Barbados and other locations, where hundreds of thousands of corporations have their legal addresses in a post office box. Our elected officials must have the political courage to admit that the vow of "no new taxes" is a lie of the worst sort and the path to ruin. If the government must spend money, it must first get the money from collected taxes instead of from bonds (loans) sold to China and Japan and other nations.

Cutting the budget by cutting spending is admirable, but what in fact has happened is that only the lowest hanging fruit has been cut. Education, arts, science research, medical funding for seniors and military veterans, cutbacks in other social spending are all cut. Meanwhile, the biggest sources of government debt - or spending, if you will, are virtually untouched because political influence has put it up out of reach.

Yes, there are only so many dollars that can be taxed. The problem is that most of those taxable dollars are not being taxed!

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 464
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 06, 2009 - 10:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

More on untaxed money, from MSN at http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Taxes/P80242.asp

During the period from 1996 to 2000 60% of all American companies paid no federal tax. Also, 70% of foreign owned companies doing business in the US paid no federal tax.

The largest corporations... one percent of all US corporations... own 93% of all corporate assets! This is huge! It gets worse... these huge companies paid less than 5% of their income in taxes! The corporate tax rate is 35%, yet they paid less than 5% by means of book keeping tricks, loopholes and shelters.

You think this is bad... in 2003, corporate tax payments amounted to just 7.3% of all tax receipts, but 21% of tax refunds went back to the corporations.

These statistics are from the General Accounting Office, not some liberal think tank.

Big corporations pay little or no taxes, they have most of the money, and get a disproportionate amount of tax refunds.

This represents an unbelievably large pool of money that is not taxed but could be. Fifty years ago it WAS taxed, and at a much higher rate.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 204
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, October 07, 2009 - 06:29 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I say tax the crap out of companies that outsource jobs to quasi third world countries.. (Mexico,China,India etc) ( I know they arent third world but it fit my scenario).

If those companies dont like it, tough cookies. Bring those jobs back the American worker and they will see a tax savings. Its ridiculous that I have to talk to India to get my WI-Fi working... Its ridiculous that a vehicle is made in Mexico and then shipped here.

I know I am being overly simplistic but, in my opinion, it IS that simple... make it here, sell it here. Bring a trade balance back to America and more of America will be working, creating more income, creating more tax base, creating more spending, creating more businesses.... thoughts?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 205
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, October 07, 2009 - 06:30 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Oh.. and by the way... Screw NAFTA.. get rid of it.. nothing good has come out of it...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 465
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 07, 2009 - 11:17 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

well, Jerry, I agree with you on these items. Don't be alarmed. tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 305
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, October 07, 2009 - 01:37 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Thanks Tom for the links! Interesting reading!

Since the crash a year ago me and the fam have been really trying to buy stuff Made in America, but sadly you really need to shop a bit to find it or buy stuff online. So it's kind of a catch 22. Do you stick to made in America and help the job stay in the States by shopping not locally or on line? Or do you keep your dollar locally and maybe not buy Made in America products. Tough one for me to decide.

No opinion on this link below, but thought it was a funny read. Take a leak and a dump before you go on a plane ride to cut down on emissions. HA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1218473/Airline-goes-green-ask ing-passengers-use-toilet-boarding.html
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 306
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Friday, October 09, 2009 - 11:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-wins-nobel-peace-prize/story?id=8 788973

"Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize"

The deadline for nomination was Feb 1st 2009. What did he do prior to that date to qualify to be nominated? What has he done from Feb 1st 2009 to today to qualify for winning?

I find this an interesting section found in the article above.

Two key White House aides were both convinced they were being punked when they heard the news, reported ABC News' George Stephanopoulos.

"It's not April 1, is it?" one said.

Upon being called by ABC News at 5:45 ET this morning, a White House aide said, "This better be good."

When told by ABC News that the president had won the Nobel Peace Prize, the aide replied: "Oh, that is good."


Awarding him the prize minimizes the importance of the award. Just think of the Doctors, Scientists, authors, economists that have worked their entire lives to accomplish a Nobel Prize in their specific field of expertise. What a slap in the face.

Give the guy an opportunity to win it based on his accomplishments! As much I don't like his policies I'm sure if they would have waited he may have done something that would have made this a little more legit.

Craziness!
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 709
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Friday, October 09, 2009 - 12:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Perhaps the world thinks that just replacing a Republican with a Dem is a big step in world peace.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 546
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Friday, October 09, 2009 - 01:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Considering that we don't know who the other nominees were, and some think he didn't deserve it, but then that is saying that the other nominees deserved it less.

The Nobel Peace Price is an annual award. Who else would you think would be more deserving for peace award based on the past year?
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1327
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Friday, October 09, 2009 - 02:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

FF think you might have hit the nail on the head, an article I found.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1219263/Obama-won-Nobel-Peace-Prize-si mply-hes-George-Bush.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 468
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, October 12, 2009 - 10:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nat - another take on the swap of the Dollar for another currency in foreign excahnge issues, re your Oct 6 post.
Go here http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/07/debunking_the_dumping_the_dolla r_conspiracy?page=0,0&obref=obinsite

I am not familiar with this publication, but stumbled across this article while going somewhere else. It is too goood for me to summarize, just read it the way it was published. It is a fairly quick read and well laid out. Two pages. At the end of the articles on each page are commentaries submitted by other readers of these articles. Much of their commentary follows what has gone here on this topic.

Who to believe? Which way to look? I don't know.

tom koehler

(Message edited by Tom_koehler on October 12, 2009)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 307
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 05:24 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gF7yageQtRrlwZsjbFshK7TssKOwD9 BIUEE00

Congress is raising the Debt Ceiling AGAIN! AKA raising the governments credit card limit! Pay as you go should be the way!

I wish I could simply raise my credit card limit with a wave of a magic wand
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 308
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 12:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

What is the structure that is next to the minnehaha? It looks like a sitting area with a pergola covering it.

What's the educational purpose for it?

Who paid for it, and how much did it cost?
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

todd_r
Pro Poster
Username: todd_r

Post Number: 92
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 05:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Didn't I read it was donated time and labor?

Exact purpose, I dunno. I could see it used a outdoor education space, or wait for the bus/ride, out of the rain?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 478
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 06:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

My understanding it was to be used as an outdoor classroom. Eventually there will also be a rain garden somewhere in this area.

My big concern with this outdoor structure is that part of the wooden framework nearest the sidewalk is in the ground. I'm thinking that the ground in this area should have been tapered away in such a fashion as to leave the framework clear of the soil, as it is the rest of the way around.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 309
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Friday, November 27, 2009 - 10:14 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/nov/25/monbiot-climate- leak-crisis-response

A quote taken from the article above: One of the most damaging emails was sent by the head of the climatic research unit, Phil Jones. He wrote "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574559630382048494.html?m od=googlenews_wsj


I don't think for a second that any of the links I've posted here are going to change anyone's opinion about global climate change. I do think that the climate gate emails give some credence to the fact that any scientific literature peer reviewed or not needs to be open to skepticism. If a "denier" has some information it should not be dismissed immediately based only on the fact that he or she is resisting the peer pressure of you better get on board or else. At best man made climate change is a "theory", just as natural climate change is a "theory".

These emails do not change my opinion that humans in history have polluted in our back yards for long enough and that common sense should prevail. It does in my opinion provide evidence that legislation that was / is being based on climate change is caused by man should be looked at much closer. Any policy or legislation that was / is based on "if we DON'T the world will end as we know it" must be reconsidered. NOT immediately changed or immediately discontinued, but must be looked at as "if we DO the world will end as we know it". Any legislation or government policy shift has major impacts on our daily lives, and yes that change can be bad. If legislation or government policy shift is based on science that has been tampered with by the man made climate change deniers or by manmade climate change believers must be looked at with a skeptical eye and reconsidered.

Not attempting to change minds, just trying to open them.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 310
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"Frequent fliers could face higher tax says Government climate adviser"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6761914/Frequen t-fliers-could-face-higher-tax-says-Government-climate-adviser.html

So once again if you can afford to do something you are going to be singled out and punished for doing so.

If you fly more than average you're going to pay a higher fee or be limited to the times you can fly per year? This is nuts. If you fly 2, 3, or more times a year you should pay the same as someone who flys only 1 time.

And why is this being discussed? Because some scientist with fuzzy math says we are causing the world to melt. Well don't you think we should get our math right first? The data is flawed! I remember my math teacher telling me I don't care if you know the answer you need to show me how you got to the answer. Well they've shown us how they've been getting to the answers and they have been cheating!

Yes this is in England, but the knucklheads who are running the US don't care what it does to businessess because businesses are bad because they make money. So if it's good for England it's good for US. Remember we are in a job crunch and where do jobs come from? They come from business's hiring workers. You punish the business with restricting there customers from using their service people will lose their jobs. Can't the knuckleheads in government get that? You don't need a job summit to figure that out.

There are trillions of dollars sitting on the sidelines waiting for the government to stop screwing around with the rules of the game. They want to invest, grow, and hire, but they can't do that if the rules to the game are not known and keep changing.

Would you play a football game if at the end of each quarter the rules changed? By the 3rd quarter I think those that were dumb enough to start playing would quit the game and take whatever they had with them and sit on the side lines until the rules were set.

That is what is going on. If you think I don't know what I'm talking about that's fine, but I'm a business owner and know many business owners. This is a common theme amongst them all. This includes small business, big business, mop and pop shops. No one wants to do anything until they know what the rules are going to be.

Stop changing the rules so we can start the game!
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 486
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 12:02 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

An interesting article, Nat, and even more interesting is the string of comments by other readers of this article. It is a proposal that will not fly (no pun intended). It is still useful, though, as it gets people thinking and talking about the problem and the different kinds of solutions - and non-solutions that are raised.

I ain't defending the guy, and his proposal is nutty. Even if it were implemented, its outcome would be way too small and insignificant to have any good result. Its negative effects, well illustrated by the many reader comments, far outweigh any possible benefit hoped for in the proposal.

This particular proposal is not law and if it gets any kind of traction in the British government, I will be disappointed.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 311
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 04:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lord Turner is the CHAIRMAN of the Government's Committee on Climate Change in England. This is no fruitcake on the fringe. He is the Chairman of the Governments Committee on Climate Change! He's the fringe in a powerful government position.

A solution to a problem that doesn't exist is no solution! -author- Nat Sherman

The governments of the world are signing agreements in Copenhagen to try to solve problems that are based on fuzzy math.

If you read any of this make sure you slowly read this! So instead of giving subpoena's to the climategate scientists, Congress decides to give subpoena's to the white house crashers. Instead of Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, and CNN covering climategate they are covering Tiger Woods wall to wall!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/09/house-committee-vote-subpoena-salahis /

The government and media needs to get their priorities straight!

We need to create jobs and we can't do that with Cap and Trade, the government bailing out private business (banks, AIG, and car manufacturers), forcing business to pay for health insurance or we will tax you. Dammed if you do dammed if you don't.

Spending for decades has been out of control. The debt has been rising and what does the government do? The raise the debt ceiling.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/57493-senate-must-raise-debt-ceiling-above-12 t

You raise the debt ceiling allowing more uncontrollable spending and more uncontrollable borrowing from China. Then what happens? We put our governments debt rating at risk because we are getting to a point where we can't make interest payments on the debt.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=av16pDNNrMig

I have real in the ground, up and running business friends that have stopped all growth plans based on the decisions the government has made. They have been forced to lay of staff or are not planning on hiring new staff any time soon. And based on the governments decisions business is scared to death to see what's coming down the road.

Business does the hiring. If business is in the fetal position, is being bath mouthed by the media and being strapped by ridiculous legislation based on fuzzy math you will NOT see any significant hiring any time soon.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 312
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 04:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/71207-reid-doubles-down-on-slav ery-analogy

Taken from the link above "Reid on Monday said Republicans were displaying the same mindset as those who defended slavery.

“If you think you’ve heard these same excuses before, you’re right,” Reid said. “When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said, ‘Slow down, it’s too early, things aren’t bad enough.’ ”


This is an example of a leading government official bashing those who believe the health care legislation is bad legislation.

I'm tired of spending 15% to 25% more year over year on health care premiums. I'm for health care reform, but not what is being run through the congress. So because I'm opposed to the health care legislation Senate leader Reid wants I'm compared to those who supported slavery?

I think not! I'm diggin in my heels and screaming Slow Down, it's too much at one time. You're making it worse!

Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 552
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 05:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nat, rather than say you are "agin it", why dont' you propose your own health care reform? there are too many folks out there that are "bitchin and complainin", but are not offering any alternatives.

As far as taking time, this has been a subject considered by the government for over 60 years. How much time should we take?
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1387
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 08:56 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I found this on the net awhile ago, thought I would throw it in here, seeing health care is the subject at the moment

http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/alliances-writing-legislation-stimu lus-bill-cap-and-trade-bill-healthcare-bill-america-needs-to-know/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 313
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 08:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The folks that are wanting to provide an alternative idea are not being allowed in the room. Can't change that until the next election, but with that said.

I think health care reform is needed. I just don't think we need to overhaul a system that has 90% of the people covered and that provides good health care.

I think some minor changes like tort reform is a start.

I think changing some of the rules that allow health insurance companies wiggle out of paying for claims is a start.

I think not allowing insurance companies to bump some one off insurance is a start.

I think pre-existing conditions should not be a reason not to cover someone.

I think allowing me to purchase insurance from a provider that is based in FL because their coverage and premiums fit me better is a start. Open up some more competition.

The biggest issue I have is fixing a problem with a medicare type coverage solution. The government hasn't run medicare properly and it is going to be out of money soon. So this is the solution to the problem? Have the unisured choose to go into a program that is not run properly and be out of money soon? That doesn't make sence to me. That's putting the cart before the horse. We need to fix medicare first before putting more people in that type of system.

I simply think the government is trying to take too big a bite out of the apple.

Also the way this is being sold bothers me. They say they are going to pay for this by making changes to medicare and the health care system along with raising taxes on the rich. The first point I have is when have you seen a government agency be able to experience billions in savings? It is not common if it has happened at all. Second is as I mentioned I'm a business owner. One of the business's I'm involved with could poetentialy fall under this legislation where I'm forced to provide health insurance for my workers or pay a penalty. If I could afford to do that and stay in business I would be doing that now. We have looked into it over the past 10 years 3 times and everytime it comes down to either raising the price of my product or letting someone go. Neither of which is a good solution. There is a real potential if certain legislation passes that I may need to do some cost cutting that will affect some salaried postions. All the people that would be covered under a plan knew when they were hired we didn't provide health care, but they chose to do so anyways.

So why am I bent out of shape over this? Because I'm in the sites of Washington right now. I'm not rich, but I'm going to be dropped in the category of a wealthy person and I can't afford it. The person / persons I might have to lay off to pay for this legislation cant afford it.

Lets eat the apple, but not all at once!
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 728
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The folks that are wanting to provide an alternative idea had eight years to provide "an alternative idea." Why would you think they got so smart, so fast?
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

bassman
Moderator
Username: bassman

Post Number: 923
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Greater security for consumers, but no free ride in Democratic health care bill
From Associated Press
December 09, 2009 10:56 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — Health care overhaul now looks like it really will happen, with a compromise coming together in the Senate to give uninsured Americans options they've never had before. But it won't be a free ride.

Have your checkbooks and credit cards ready. There's a price for health care security — particularly for solid middle-class households, who wouldn't get much help with premiums.

President Barack Obama hailed the Senate agreement Wednesday, building expectations that the yearlong fight over revamping health care had finally come down to the bill now emerging.

That measure, like the Medicare prescription drug benefit that passed when Republicans ran Washington, would offer consumers a dizzying lineup of health plan choices — with different costs and benefits.

"People who need to buy coverage as individuals and small employers are going to have a lot more in the way of attractive health insurance options, and they won't have to worry about whether their medical condition precludes them from being covered," said policy expert Paul Ginsburg, who heads the nonpartisan Center for Studying Health System Change.

The downside: "Sticker shock is going to come to some."

Get ready for a whole new set of trade-offs.

For example, people in their 50s and early 60s, when health problems tend to surface, are likely to pay less than they would now. Those in their 20s and 30s, who get the best deals today, will face higher premiums, though for better coverage.

The tentative deal by Democratic senators would give millions of Americans the option of signing up for private plans sponsored by the federal employee health system, which covers some 8 million, including members of Congress. The compromise, which also offers people age 55 to 64 the option of buying into Medicare, appears to have given Democrats a way around the deal-breaker issue of a new government plan to compete with private carriers. Senators continued to debate for a 10th day, with Democrats pushing to pass the bill by Christmas.

The 2,074-page Senate bill will grow even longer as amendments are considered, but the basic outlines of the legislation most likely to pass are becoming clearer.

The overhaul will be phased in slowly, over the next three to four years. But eventually all Americans will be required to carry coverage or face a tax penalty, except in cases of financial hardship. Insurers won't be able to deny coverage to people with health problems, or charge them more or cut them off.

Most of the uninsured will be covered, but not all. As many as 24 million people would remain uninsured in 2019, many of them otherwise eligible Americans who still can't afford the premiums. Lawmakers propose to spend nearly $1 trillion over 10 years to provide coverage, most of the money going to help lower-income people. But a middle-class family of four making $66,000 would still have to pay about 10 percent of its income in premiums, not counting co-payments and deductibles. (That is a person making $5.500/month)

No dramatic changes are in store for most people who get coverage through their jobs — about 60 percent of those under age 65. The Congressional Budget Office says the bill wouldn't have a major effect on premiums under employer plans, now about $13,000 a year. Parents would be able to keep dependent children on their coverage longer, age 27 in the House bill.

One benefit for people with employer coverage is hard to quantify: It should be easier to get health insurance if they're laid off.

The real transformation under the legislation would come for those who now have the most trouble finding and keeping coverage: people who buy their own insurance or work for small businesses. About 30 million could pick from an array of plans through new insurance supermarkets called exchanges.

Some people's taxes would go up.

To pay for expanded coverage, the House bill imposes a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000 and families earning more than $1 million. The Senate slaps a 40 percent tax on insurance plans with premiums above $8,500 for individual coverage and $23,000 for family plans, among other levies.

The rest of the financing would come mainly from cuts in federal payments to insurers, hospitals, home health care agencies and other medical providers serving Medicare.

Preventive benefits for seniors would be improved. So would prescription coverage. But people enrolled in private plans through the Medicare Advantage program are likely to see higher out-of-pocket costs and reduced benefits as overpayments to insurers are scaled back.

The latest big wrinkles in the debate involve intriguing opportunities for consumers. But even there, it may be less than meets the eye.

Lawmakers have been talking for years about giving average Americans the option of coverage through the federal employee system, "just like members of Congress." The compromise among Senate Democrats would make plans certified by the federal employee system available nationwide, bringing competition to states in which one or two large insurers now control the market.

The other big new idea is to allow people age 55 to 64, one of the groups now most at risk for losing coverage, to buy into Medicare.

Yet from the inside, the federal employee health benefits plan isn't looking all that great these days. Federal workers do have a wide choice of insurance plans, but they're looking at hefty premium increases next year. Individual coverage under the most popular plan is going up 15 percent.

"I don't think you'll ever find someone satisfied with the price," said Jacqueline Simon, policy director for the American Federation of Government Employees. "And you've got people who are priced out." The union estimates that 250,000 federal workers are uninsured, mostly because they can't afford the premiums.

And what about Medicare? It is widely accepted, with 74 percent of doctors saying in a recent survey that they're taking most or all new Medicare patients. But buying into Medicare won't be cheap, about $7,600 a year not counting out-of-pocket costs for deductibles and copayments.

Ginsburg, the policy expert, says he's puzzled as to why anyone in their late 50s would want to buy into Medicare instead of picking a plan offered in the new exchanges, the insurance supermarkets. His reasoning: The exchange plans should have lower premiums since they would also include younger people who don't go to the doctor that often.

"The legislation already solved the problem by offering them coverage through the exchange," he said. "A Medicare buy-in based on the older age group is going to cost a lot more."}
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 729
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 12:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I wonder if the Medicare buy in would be available to people who have not paid Medicare taxes over the years. Certain groups are exempt from Medicare taxes, MN highway patrol for one.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1389
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 01:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I wonder that also, as hubby could not get Medicare, because he paid into the State Pension Plan. He had to buy it..NOT CHEAP, plus he had to have supplemental, all toll it was very expensive. He is under me now, but that all could change if Medicare goes down the tubes, as they say it is going too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

bassman
Moderator
Username: bassman

Post Number: 924
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Friday, December 11, 2009 - 02:41 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Marriage Penalty Hidden in Health Care Reform

by Kim Trobee, editor

Higher premiums may discourage people from getting married.

A closer look at premium payments in both the House and Senate health care bills shows higher premiums that might discourage couples tying the knot.

For instance, in the House version, an unmarried couple each making $30,000 a year would pay $1,320 combined each year for private health insurance. If that couple chose to marry, their premium would jump to $12,000 a year, a difference of $10,680.

Allen Quist, a former Minnesota State legislator and current candidate for Congress, discovered the penalty while looking at numbers from the Committees on Ways and Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor.

"This extraordinary penalty people will pay, should they marry, extends all the way from a two-person combined income of $58,280 to $86,640, a spread of $28,360," he wrote in a blog post. "A large number of people fall within this spread. As premiums for private insurance escalate, as expected, the marriage penalty will become substantially larger."

The Senate bill includes a similar penalty.

"The Senate bill stipulates that two unmarried people, 52 years of age, with private insurance and a combined income of $60,000, $30,000 each, will pay a combined cost of $2,483 for medical insurance," Quist wrote. "Should they marry, however, they will pay a combined cost of $11,666 for insurance — a penalty of $9,183 for getting married."

The numbers are based on the government's definition of "poverty level." Those above poverty level will pay higher premiums, and the excess would be redistributed to those in lower income levels.

Quist explains that the government's definitions will play a critical role in whether people will choose to get married.

"'Household' is defined in both bills as including those who can be claimed as dependents for federal income tax purposes, thereby clarifying that adults can avoid the marriage penalty by living together unmarried," he wrote. "The new system provides a huge incentive for doing so."

John Helmberger, CEO of the Minnesota Family Council and Institute, said the middle class will once again take the hit financially.

"This hidden marriage penalty," he said, "hits hardest the very people that are most suffering from the pathologies resulting from the decline of marriage in our culture."

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000011651.cfm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 314
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Friday, December 11, 2009 - 10:45 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30417.html

Here we go again. Washington is again raising the debt ceiling! I say again because they just did it this past spring.

http://www.thefinancialphysician.com/blog/?p=871&cpage=1

This is from the link: The administration’s request, higher than a proposed increase already passed in the House of Representatives, would get the government through the November 2010 midterm congressional elections without needing another increase. Earlier this month, Treasury officials acknowledged they’ll need more borrowing room by year-end to avoid market disruptions.

When you read that did you simply pass by the fact that they are raising the debt ceiling enough so it will get them through the November 2010 elections. Isn't that interesting. I think they are hoping the voters will once again have a short term memory and won't remember they voted to increase the debt ceiling again. One less issue the politicians need to answer to on the campaign trail.

It may seem like I'm focussing in on the Dems. but if the Republicans had a spine they would vote against this. The only problem with that is this debt ceiling vote has been added to a military spending bill. The idea here is that if a Republican votes against the debt ceiling they will get hammerd for not voting for funds to the troops. This is the political game that is played by both sides that is nuts!. They should be forced to vote on issues one at a time. Yes that would make things a little more difficult to pass, but maybe making our elected officials work a little more would be a good thing.

Rememeber these political games are played by both parties and should be changed. Maybe a third party would help!

Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 487
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, December 11, 2009 - 04:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm calling B.S. on the hidden marriage penalty piece. I have a copy of the 1900 page Pelosi bill and have been studying it. I have been doing searches in it as well. Nowhere is the word "unmarried" in this bill. There are references to sposes and "married" in the context of supplying a spouse's social security number on tax forms to qualify for certain drug subsidies. There is a marriage reference in the context of qualifying for certain tribal benefits.

There are references to geographic variations in premium costs and age variations in premium costs, but nothing about whether or not you are married.

Look at the numbers in the penalty piece. $1320 combined premium for a year... c'mon, that's what two people might pay, combined, for a month! That's what premiums can be, right now! $12,000 per year would represent a cut in expense, to the tune of over $3800, a saving, rather than a penalty.

Until the naysayers can cite the section of the Pelosi bill in which married couples are paying more than unmarried couples, I will claim the usual article by the bucket full.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 553
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Friday, December 11, 2009 - 08:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I also had to question this article. It just seemed too far off the wall. I would require much more established data before I could swallow it. While I do not have a copy of the actual bill as Tom K does. I did a search on factcheck, and there was no reference to that particular statement, at least not yet. I also did a check on the website that published it, and found that even Fox news calls the publisher "funny". So much for creditable media.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 315
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Saturday, December 12, 2009 - 11:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/11/un-security-stops-journalists-questions-abou t-climategate/#more-44722

Don't question global warming scientists or you will be removed by security.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 554
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Saturday, December 12, 2009 - 03:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The science seems to be correct, just the scientiest that are behaving badly.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091212/D9CHUV701.html
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

todd_r
Pro Poster
Username: todd_r

Post Number: 94
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Saturday, December 12, 2009 - 08:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Phelim McAleer is a professional filmmaker who successfully cobbled together a few carefully edited video snibets, so as to appear to tell a story which supports his agenda.
The outcome was predetermined and his team did a fair job in collecting enough segments to create an illusion that matches the desired story.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

todd_r
Pro Poster
Username: todd_r

Post Number: 95
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Saturday, December 12, 2009 - 09:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Here is a clip where Phelim McLeer had his mic removed and was sat down when heckling Al Gore, 3 months ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OM9f74n0xs
That issue was about 9 inconsistencies with Gore's movie. Never mind the thousand facts!
Like the e-mails, it took how many thousand hacked emails to find one suspicious one?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jackburton
Regular Poster
Username: jackburton

Post Number: 25
Registered: 06-2009
Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 09:11 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

As the evidence mounts, the people who want to live in denial get more desperate. I expect the more melting of the poles and glaciers and the more record temperatures happen, the more desperate the deniers will get. They have no viable science on their side, they only have the right wing scream machine. Paid for by oil and coal companies. It's a joke, why even listen to it? If they had any facts on their side, they would win based on their scientific evidence, they don't have it, so they scream and distort. Of course to them, the earth is still flat, the sun revolves around the earth and disease is caused by bad air. The earth is what? 6 thousand years old?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin

Post Number: 279
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 09:43 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moved to the Local Topics & Issues area.
I'm addicted to placebos. I'd give them up, but it really wouldn't make any difference . . . .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 316
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 10:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20091211/1afedpay11_st.art.htm?loc=int erstitialskip

From the article link: The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.


This is another example of why the government is needing to raise the debt ceiling.

These increases have taken place under both Republicans and Democrats. So once again I suggest an accross the board ejection of of our elected officials during the next election.

Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 317
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 11:08 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Say what you want to say, but the fact still remains that he asked a question that is appropriate to ask. He was removed by an armed guard after asking a simple question.

You can not honestly call what Phelim McLeer did in the video of Gore "heckling". He was at an event that people were allowed to ask questions. He was given a microphone / given permission to ask a question. The former Vice President gave an answer and Phemlim McLeer attempted to ask a follow up as is standard in these events. He didn't rush the stage, scream and yell, break anything, threaten anyone physically. He simply asked a question and he and his question is dismissed as crackpot.

Keep in mind that Phelim McLeer may be "a professional filmmaker who successfully cobbled together a few carefully edited video snibets, so as to appear to tell a story which supports his agenda", but ask yourself who Al Gore is. He is a lawyer/politician who successfully cobbled together a few carefully edited video snibet, so as to appear to tell a story which supports his agenda. HMMMM interesting choice of words don't you think.

Well the questions need to be asked now more than ever. Again governments are basing decisions on potentially faulty information. All I ask is for governments and the scientific community to investigate this issue. If they openly and publicly investigate the issue and find nothing than I guess I'll have to put on my tin foil hat again and get put back on the oil companies payroll.

Again instead of congress investigating this issue they spend valuable time investigating the white house crashers even though the secret service is investigating it.

Even though it's been a bit chilly the past decade let's say I forcibly fall into lock step with the idea that global warming is happening. My issue is I don't think it completely caused by humans. Mars is warming too, but that science has been dismissed by the IPCC. The issue I have and we all should have with this is the IPCC may be basing their decisions on faulty info.

All I'm saying is an open and honest investigation should be done by our government before any new legislation is passed or any global agreements are entered into. I would think that if you are that confident in the science, then spending a few months looking into it shouldn't be an issue. I think this is a reasonable request considering what is at stake. Or are you afraid the science will fall apart.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 488
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 11:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Well, Nat, I won't dispute the salary figures. You will notice though that these inflated salaries are for non-elected personnel. Either they set their salaries or their department heads set them, the requests get bundled up in a big package of requests and sent on to whichever department or bureau that eventually approves them. Our senators and representatives don't personally authorize each pay hike. Assorted non-elected department heads and bureaucrats are the actual rats nibbling away at the budget cheese. Our elected representatives can only act on the information given them. While many of them are slackers, perhaps, the problem is far more serious and includes many influential high-ranking non-elected people who actually pull the strings and push the buttons, making things happen. Housecleaning is needed, but the ballot box is not the single answer.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 318
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 12:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Tom, I agree with you 100%, but the buck needs to stop somewhere and that somewhere in my opinion needs to be our elected officials. The non-elected officials, department heads and bureaucrats get their funding from the elected officials. The elected officials need and must look past the ends of their nose and look into the budget requests coming from each department before signing off on the request by giving a yes vote on the expenditure.

I truly enjoy it when you and I can reach past our difference in opinions occasionally and agree on something. It gives me hope that all is not lost.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 731
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 01:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I don't know how it is now, but, in the past, a Dept. head's salary was based on how many people he had working beneath him and how much money they made. It's the same in big business. If a supervisor has high paid people working beneath him he, he is high paid. If the people beneath him make less, he makes less.
It just makes sense to have the people below you well paid in these scenarios.

(Message edited by frosted_flakes on December 13, 2009)
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

todd_r
Pro Poster
Username: todd_r

Post Number: 96
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 02:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

the fact still remains that he asked a question that is appropriate to ask. He was removed by an armed guard after asking a simple question.
Was it appropriate to ask? Was the floor open for questions? Based on his position on the floor, the sparce audience and the nearly empty panel that is set up for numerous panelists, its clear it is not a question/answer period following any presentation. The blue shirts were coming for him before he even got the question from his lips. It then states the professors assistant tries to stop the questioning. Is that his assistant? There is no way of knowing that. It looks to me the professor had no obligation to answer rogue questions, but did so anyway.
Then the text states he waits for a follow up question, but with the people milling about, it again appears it is hardly any formal question/answer period. He is then scolded about his camera by an armed guard, but its pure speculation to say he was removed because of the question he asked. I heard there were over 1 thousand arrested and jailed this week in Copenhagen. I'm sure security was tight, as it should be.

The former Vice President gave an answer and Phemlim McLeer attempted to ask a follow up as is standard in these events.
The Gore clip did appear to be a formal question/answer session. You say McLeer attempted a follow-up question, but in my opinion, it seemed more like he wanted to debate whether or not an endangered animal that had a recent increase in population is really endangered. McLeer refused to answer Gore's counter question about whether or not he thought Polar Bears were endangered.

Gore's film was around 90 minutes (?) compared to McLeer's 1 minute 35 seconds, so it was hardly a few snibets, like you say. I agree there were some non-factual speculative portions of it. I might add, the deniers always attack Gore, yet the believers never cite Gore as their source of data.

My issue is I don't think it completely caused by humans.
I agree. The reasons to move away from fossil fuel energy are more than just climate change (its running out, we fight wars over it, its dirty, its unhealthy, its getting more and more expensive, its not sustainable, etc....) It would be nice if such a move was without cost or pain, but thats not realistic.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

todd_r
Pro Poster
Username: todd_r

Post Number: 97
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 03:21 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I stand corrected. It was a formal question/answer period and a larger context of the exchange is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GH6fCE02xIA
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 555
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Sunday, December 13, 2009 - 03:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I thing this whole debate about global warming and whether it is caused by man or not, should be separated into two unigue issues.

1. Is the global temperature increasing?
I believe that is a fact that everyone has to agree on.

2. Is the earth becoming more and more polluted, and is it caused by man?
Again, I believe that is a fact that everyone has to agree on.

If you don't agree that the two are related to each other, fine. Fix the one that you do believe in.

If you believe that neither is true, next time you pull your head out of the sand, take a look around.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 212
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Monday, December 14, 2009 - 08:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I dont have time to delve into the health care reform. But I do have one question... Are we, as middle class americans, going to be taxed on our health care benefits? If my health care benefits are valued at $10,000 annually and I earn $50,000 per year, will I be paying tax on $60,000?

I have heard this is the case but really dont have time to find out. There are some very knowledgeable people on this board that might have the answer.

If you have the answer, please let us know but also, please prove your answer. Please let us know where you got your information. A hyperlink would be great.

Again, I dont know the answer to this but sure would like to.

thanks,
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 489
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, December 14, 2009 - 06:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Well, Jerry, I have a bit of time, but sometimes lack the discipline to be efficient with it. I did, however, do a bit of googling on the topic of "taxing of healthcare benefits".

This is one item I found, that starts to explain some of the details of proposals:

***********

Senate Democrats have been considering two options. The first would be to tax premiums above a certain level, such as the value of the standard family plan offered to federal employees, which will be about $15,000 in 2013, Senate aides said. That would raise about $420 billion over 10 years. The other option would be to apply the cap only to families earning more than $200,000 a year ($100,000 for individuals), which would raise about $160 billion over 10 years.

A senior Baucus aide said the committee is leaning toward the former option, which would do more to "bend the curve" of soaring health costs.

In either case, workers would see any insurance premiums in excess of the cap added to their wages and taxed as income. That could increase their tax bills by hundreds or thousands of dollars a year, said Paul Fronstin, director of health research at the nonprofit Employee Benefit Research Institute.

this is from the Washington Post, this past June

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061402769_ 2.html

***********

I know we are to refrain from doing cut and paste jobs for posting here, and I apologize, but I have included the link so you can check for yourself, if you wish. This is from just part of the article, and is explaining a couple of the most likely routes to take. It also said that such a move - though it could raise a whole bunch of money would also be an extremely unpopular move for whoever does it. It is something that has been on the drawing board for Bush and McCain, as well as Obama, so it has bipartisan appeal, making it a good ploy to include this kind of provision in order to pass other reform provisions.

This topic is recognized as a kind of "poison pill" (my words) for any politician to propose or support such an idea. The first couple of pages of Google links all date from summer of last year to as late as summer of this year. There were over a hundred million hits on this topic, so I just glanced briefly at the first few hits, as being the most likely to address the issue.

I do not think that anything is written down in any current serious legislative proposal yet.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 213
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 06:41 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So if I read that Post article (thanks Tom) correctly, we still dont know if the middle class will be taxed or not on employer paid benefits.

In the article, it talks about taxing benefits valued above a certain dollar amount (I think $15,000 was used). I would like to see an employer provided health care plan that doesnt cost that much. I would have to do some checking but I think the lousy plan the County has provided (and believe me, it is LOUSY) is valued above that. The State of Minnesota values health care at $16,500/year. Every state employee would have $1500 bill added to thier tax bill annually. And what happens when that valuation (cost) goes up.. so will our tax burden. This is what really frosts my tucus.

At the risk of alienating some here, I am going to put on my Conservative hat here. I find it appalling if I have to pay taxes on my health care benefits. I pay enough out of my pocket already and now the piddly little tax return I do get will be erased and I will owe the government money??? All in the name of health care for everyone???? Sorry I can NOT get on board with that. I work hard for what I have. Nobody "gave" me anything. I earned it. I dont want to sound "mean spirited" but MY first priority is to provide for MY family, not someones elses. Sorry, but I wasnt raised that way.

Anyway, I do not want to let this drop. I really would like to know if that "benefit tax" is in the version that Pelosi got passed and if its in the Senate version. If it is, Mr. Oberstar (whom I have voted for every term) and I are going to have a very frank discussion. ( I would contact Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken too but.. well, Klobuchar I would because I think she really wants whats best for Minnesotans, Franken... not hardly)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 734
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 12:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I pay taxes on my health care premiums. Why am I being singled out? Why me and not you?
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 556
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 01:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

My medical insurance premiums are deducted from my paycheck, pre-tax, so I do not pay tax on them. If your medical costs, including your premiums is more than 7% of your income, you can also deduct the excess from your tax bill when you file your taxes. Unless, of course, your premiums are deducted pre-tax. The company I work for, is self-insured. Not exactly sure how this works, but I think they pay the minor bills that are encountered, and they have another insurance company that manages this fund, and perhaps covers the major stuff. However it works, I like it. My contribution to the premiums for the family are less than $400 per month. This company, because they are self-insured, has a vested interest in the wellness of their employees. The have wellness seminars which encourage people to eat right, excercise, and get check ups. They hold flu shot clinics every year which are free to the empoyees. And they also encourage employees to stay home if your are sick. This company has been offereing this type of coverage since the very beginning when they were a start up with less than 100 employees. So why is it, that other small business companies can't or wont offer the same coverage? This may be why we are now dealing with the national health care plan.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 490
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 07:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jerry, I do not know how far the idea of taxing health care benefits has gone. Most of the info I found was several months old, and as far as I know, nothig concrete has passed both houses, yet. I would earnestly suggest contacting your representatives, though, as you were talking about... even Franken.

When I was working for the DM&IR the company was self-insured, too. The way it worked was the company paid an outfit like Blue Cross and Blue shield to administer the program, and when a claim was filed and deemed legitimate by the administrator, the company would simply pay for the bill, within whatever parameters the plan covered. If there was no claim, there was no expense to the company - except for what was being paid to the administrator of course. Now several years ago, the administrator was BC&BS of Western Pennsylvania, and their policy was to automatically deny every claim submitted, on some flimsy pretext. The claim would be resubmitted and generally denied again. The idea was to make a claim so difficult that the employee would drop it, and file under the wife's plan, if there was one. Well, it got so bad that our union had a little talk with the State Attorney General, and pretty soon claims were getting paid. I think that the administrator got changed to BC&BS of Illinois. The company wanted us to change to a plan administered by Aetna, but nobody went for that, as Aetna was considered to be worse than the Western Pa. plan.

Our insurance was "valued" at so many thousands of dollars, but there was no such money being paid as premiums by the company. The only expense was whatever fee the company paid to the administrator, plus whatever actual medical expenses the company paid out - which averaged much less than what the "value" was deemed to be per employee. The company did not try to save heath expense money by keeping us healthy, it tried to save money by not paying claims and by going to a cheap plan if possible. By the way, I am one of two track guys who retired healthy in the track department, between about 1995 and 2007. Everyone else went out on a disability, or died.

It sounds like you are in a good situation, hotr, with a good plan and an employer who seems interested in your well-being.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 735
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 10:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The "value" the RR put on our bennies, Tom, were computed in this manner; All the bennies paid to workers, present and retired, contract and management, was added up. Then, that number was divided among the contract employees. We got charged for everyone's bennies.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 214
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 06:29 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

FF... we are talking about different things. I am saying the plan is to tax the value of the benefit, not the premium. For example, if my benefit is valued at $1.00, I am going to pay income tax on that $1.00. If I understand your statement properly, if your premium is $1.00, you would pay sales tax on that. You are purchasing a service of your choosing. I am getting a compensation package for my services. Apples and Oranges....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 215
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 06:46 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Continuing... how is taxing my income, over and above the tax rate already established for my income, going to "stimulate" the economy. How is this going to want me to go out and buy a new car, or snowmobile or boat or re-do my kitchen etc etc etc ? We are a capitalistic society, if I dont do any of the above things, how are the manufacturers going to stay in business, how are the retailers going to stay in business in no one comes through their doors because potential customers are sending thier discretionary income to the government to pay for valued benefits. It doesnt make sense to me when the administration is preaching jobs and, yet, potentially are going to take money from the working class of America to pay for the non-working class... the working class simply can not afford to do that and still spend money to keep people in jobs... its a vicious cycle that tax and spend policies wont fix, especially in this instance.

If you want to health care reform, in my opinion, it should be a competitive bid process. When you make a major purchase, such as a car, do you look at the sticker and say ok? No you dont, you go to various car dealers and play one against the other. Why not do that with the health care insurance providers. They have been "fleecing the lamb" for years. BC/BS is a prime example. You should see the ridiculous premiums they say the County employees need to pay for health insurance... yet, Health Partners, a different health care insurance provider, has a vastly lower premium rate. Why is that? Dont they still pay the doctor bills, just like BC/BS? YEP! so why the difference? because there is no checks and balances or oversight on the industry.. maybe, just maybe, we should be looking at this direction instead of taxing the s*** out of the working man.

Hope I didnt ruffle too many feathers. I am not using partisan political tactics here. I dont care who comes up with it, but Health Care Reform should be just that, Reform. Not rebuild.

thanks
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 738
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 10:53 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jerry, yes you are getting compensation for your services. Are your wages not compensation? The fact is, when wages are negotiated so are bennies. You take a few less dollars for a few more bennies. Yet, a dollar is still spent to provide those bennies. If you take a dollar from your left pocket to buy some chips and a dollar from your right pocket to buy a soda, are they both not still dollars? If the county told you that they would no longer be providing health insurance, you would soon be asking for higher wages so you could provide your own. Not apples and oranges. It's all wages. When I was working, I sure as hell would be mad if my medical was taxed, and I am not saying it's right, but you can not argue with the facts.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 491
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 12:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

In my opinion (key words, here, "my" and "opinion") taxes are not for the purpose of stimulating the economy, taxes are for the purpose of paying for government goods and services. Period. We are a society which values a certain amount of freedom and choice, consistent with certain needs and wants which we think should be provided by our government - and which goods and services must be paid for with taxes. Our economy, outside of government spending, is stimulated and driven by consumerism, the buying and selling of stuff. Advertising is used to get us to think we want or need a thing. Sometimes advertising is just to tell us a thing exists and is now available. In any case, advertising is a big driver of our economy.

Some things are best left to the private sector - the manufacture and distribution of pickles and lawnmowers and dancing lessons. We insist that these things be safe and to be what the manufacturer tells us they are. Knowing that some manufacturers are a little dishonest, we have decided that some government agency will have the power to make sure that things are safe and honest - so there is one level of government involvement in the private sector.

Some things are best left to a non-profit monopoly power which we can have some degree of control over. The classic case is our military, and law enforcement. Good arguments are also made to support the idea of similar situations for education, emergency response services like fire fighting and ambulance service and safety standards for consumer goods and workplace environments. Lots of other things get on and off this list over the years. An argument is often made that the private sector can do these things cheaper and better, because they are trying to make a profit and will seek the best possible efficiency. What has too often been the case, though, is that in the quest for best profit, shortcuts are taken to the detriment of the consumer plus a serious degradation in the delivered goods or services.

Part of the cost of getting the desired efficiency and cost benefit of government-delivered goods and services besides the obvious cost of taxes is constant vigilance and participation in the effort of monitoring and controlling the government activity. We have to stay informed. We have to vote. We have to stay in touch with our elected representatives. We have to be willing to prosecute the slackers and the crooks. We have to be able to recognize when we are being scammed and misled by those we are paying with our taxes.

Health care is an issue of national and strategic importance. More importantly to us, it is the method of paying for healthcare. As practiced now, commercial for-profit health insurance companies are in business because it is a way of making a lot of money. This is the American way, and I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with is that payment for healthcare, like military power, is something that should not be done because it is a way of making a lot of money. We all pay taxes to support our military forces. A LOT of taxes. We don't all pay the same amount of taxes, but we all get the same quality of military services. Paying for healthcare should be the same setup.We all would pay a certain amount of taxes and this tax money would be used to pay the health care providers for the goods and servces provided. With private insurance, the insurance company dictates what procedures you can have, and who will provide them. Further, if you use a lot of medical services you face two very real possibilities - either you will have a lifetime cap on how much the insurance company will pay, or the insurance company will find a way to drop your coverage because you are a bad risk - an expense to the company. Further, some medical providers will not accept your insurance coverage because the insurance company may have a bad reputation for slow payment or inadequate payment. We are being told that with government insurance, care will be rationed. Hell, care is already rationed by the insurance companies! Every other industrialized nation is insured by their respective governments, some as far back as the 19th century, for pete's sake! While profit is a wonderful thing, it is an inefficiency in the delivery of healthcare, as not one cent of profit goes towads anyone's health or well-being. The good health of the whole American population is as important to the good of our nation as a strong and well-trained military force is.

I'm perched on this soap box, and ain't comin' down.

tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 558
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 - 09:30 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just read, that the stimulus money allocated to the high speed internet project is starting to be doled out. Anyone heard if Lake County is still on the list of those getting grants?
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 217
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 - 11:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

FF... so we are talking about the same thing. If they are going to tax my benefits, then let me pick the level of benefit that I require. Our health care package was shoved down our throats and we were told that this is what we get. If I have to pay tax on that, then shouldnt I get to choose. Using your analogy, if I want a bottle of orange soda and bag of chips, I dont want to have to pay tax on a grape soda and pretzels. Much less, pay for your pop and bag of chips...

We kind of have gotten off track here... I just want to know if I have to pay "income" tax on my health care benefit in this health care reform bill. If so, then I should get to choose what I pay tax on... not the government! after all, it is MY money.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 741
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 - 12:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

OH! You are so wrong, Jerry. The money you have left is your money. ROFLMAO
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 560
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 - 01:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I just found this on MSNBC news site. It kind of explains the issue of taxes on health coverage.

Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus said the Senate bill's tax on high-cost insurance plans won't really be a tax on insurance. "After a while, there wouldn't be any tax, because companies just would find a way to avoid it," Baucus said, by which he meant employers will trim their insurance plans to keep them under the taxable threshold and instead will pay workers more in cash. Brookings Institution economist Henry Aaron agreed, saying, "Workers will receive a larger proportion of their compensations in the form of taxable wages, rather than untaxed health insurance. That's where the revenue gain comes from." The Senate bill would, in effect, be an income tax increase, as the House bill would. But the House bill would hit high-income people, while the Senate bill would have an impact on some middle-income workers who happen to have high-cost insurance.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 220
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 10:14 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

And what I have left is part of what I have to send to Uncle Sam when I fill out my taxes for the year... there is a reason that there is an uprising in the US about this current plan... a majority of the citizens dont want it.. only the politicians want it and those numbers are waning... even some of the Obama Democrats dont think this plan should pass and, hopefully, Pelosi doesnt have enough arm twistin power to get it passed like she did on the cap and trade bill... which, by the way, is going to just about double your electric bill according to a LOCAL utility company expert....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 221
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 10:19 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Brian,

Baucus is full of horse dung. Do you really think that businesses are going to offer less insurance package and then, out of kindness of their hearts, give more money to wages.. more like they will offer a lesser insurance package and say "that's it" here you go.. dont like it? go work someplace else. Thats what Lake County does. they shoved VEBA 823 down our throats and said "too bad if you dont like it".

Whats to stop private industry from doing the same? Baucus will say anything to get his bill passed so he can go down in history as the man who orchestrated health care reform..problem is he doesnt realize that wont be a good thing for this country.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

lloyd_christmas
Regular Poster
Username: lloyd_christmas

Post Number: 6
Registered: 12-2009
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 12:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jerry private business already does that. If we don't like the plan my company offers we can either decline it and find our own plan, without any money from the company or find another job. The company I work for hired a broker to shop the different insurance companies each year for the best rate. The way I understand it is that since the business I work for is a health care facility, we are grouped in with other like businesses and that is how they determine the rates we will be charged. If you are grouped in with consumers who use a lot of health care services, you pay higher premiums. We have had huge increases in premiums over the last few years, however this year the premiums actually went down (I think it is because the insurance companies saw what was happening in Congress, but my company says that isn't why.) The plan has very high deductibles and out of pocket expenses. Each year deductibles and out of pocket expenses go up, meaning employees pay more before Medica pays. I think it is a shame that the public option and medicare buy in has been dropped by the Senate, but the insurance lobby has bought off enough Senators to make sure that happened. The only hope now is that if the Senate does pass their bill and when the bill is reconciled by the Senate and House commitees is that it will resemble the House bill more than the Senate.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jackburton
Regular Poster
Username: jackburton

Post Number: 27
Registered: 06-2009
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 02:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Health Insurance is a scam. Sort of like Mafia protection scams. You either "pay up" or if you get sick the health care system will bankrupt you and your family. Health Insurance companies add layers of useless paper work for both the health care provider and the insurance company itself. This cost is a lot of why American health care costs are way above any civilized nations. Small employers are hard put to afford coverage for their workers. Public employees and employees of large firms usually get good group rates, but most people don't get those good plans. If you are so lucky enough to get group rates, then count your blessings. If not for Medicare, elderly people would literally die in the streets. That is a government health plan. How many elderly are demanding to be put into the free market? Show me one.
Single payer works just a few miles up the highway. Unless you believe the lies of the health insurance paid liars. Single payer would save hundreds of billions and our $$$ would be spent on delivery of care not insurance company profits and paper work.
We have the best system in the world! Ha! Ha! Ha! The joke is on you if you believe that. Shows how well CNN,FOX,MSNBC,and Rush can lie and get you to believe it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

sparky
Rookie Poster
Username: sparky

Post Number: 4
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 03:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Current bill has no cap on lifetime benefits but none on annual benefits. Not good. Too many holes in Senate's version.

Healthcare is not a right in our constitution, good or bad. This effort by Obama is not health REform, it's health CONform. Wealth redistribution unfortunately. Work hard, save money, have it taken away, repeat.

I've written to Klobachar and Franken more than once about an issue not discussed and very important. No plan is any good if the provider does not pay for claims that are eligible. Providers are fighting patients on legit claims and services to save money. You can either fight on forever and fix it, pay an attorney,try to work out a payment plan, or give up and go to collections. Most give up. Stats show 63% of bankruptcies are medical and 50% of those had insurance. Hard to think this will change.

Insurance is only as good as the viable claims it pays.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 223
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 05:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Gary,

I agree with you how it works... ours is the same as yours but here is the kicker.. in addition to all that we pay now, the government will give a value to our health care and tax us on the value. So if your "benefit" is valued at $10,000, you are going to have to pay an additional income tax on that $10,000. That's what I want to know, if that language is in the bill.... while I agree that the health care industry needs to be overhauled.. taxing the people that work hard and pay for their health care shouldnt have to pay for those that dont. I know that sounds harsh but my responsibility is to MY family. I have a responsibility to them.. not to someone that lives on the other side of town...

Coming up for Winter Frolic? We can have a beer together. Also, there is movement afoot to have a "Born in 60" party next summer..sounds like fun.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 561
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 05:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

According to a AP news item, it looks like Jerry will be in the winners category.

"Longshoremen. They were added to the list of workers in high-risk professions who are shielded from the full impact of a proposed new tax on high-value insurance plans. (Electrical linemen were already included, along with policemen, firefighters, emergency first responders and workers in construction, mining, forestry, fishing and certain agriculture jobs.)"

Unless of course he meets the criteria below.

"
_People making over $200,000 a year. A proposed 0.5 percent increase in the Medicare payroll tax was bumped up to 0.9 percent in the latest version, putting the tax at 2.35 percent on income over $200,000 a year for individuals, $250,000 for couples."
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

lloyd_christmas
Regular Poster
Username: lloyd_christmas

Post Number: 8
Registered: 12-2009
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 - 07:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

HTR I saw that too in the St. Paul paper today. Some jobs that are high risk will not be taxed. Jerry, I believe the house bill does not tax insurance coverage to the extent that the Senate version does. I know the unions were coming out hard against the Senate version, because this would have affected many middle income people who have good health plans. If the Senate passes their bill, some type of compromise is going to have to be worked out with Houses' bill. Only God knows what the bill is going to look like. Mr. Burton you spelled it out very well. Single payer, something like Medicare would have been real reform and best for Americans, in my opinion, but the Dems gave that up before negotiations even began. Not that it ever had a chance though.


Skip too bad about your Pack today. That was quite a game though. I hope the Vikes don't meet up with them in the playoffs.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

lloyd_christmas
Regular Poster
Username: lloyd_christmas

Post Number: 11
Registered: 12-2009
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:22 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jerry I forgot to answer your winter frolic question. Jay is trying to put a team together for the boot hockey tournament so if he can round up enough guys I hope to come up and play. A beer sounds good. I talked to double R when I was up in Oct and he said the party is on for Heritage weekend. Sounds like they are going to have another float.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

fritz
Pro Poster
Username: fritz

Post Number: 147
Registered: 09-2002


Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 02:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Sparky, does Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness sound familiar? What do you think our founding fathers meant by "Life". I'd like to think at the very least, in the greatest country on earth, people should not have to die because they can't afford to live. And, shuffling into the E.R. with stage IV Cancer and no hope of survival because you couldn't afford preventive care is not an option, in my humble opinion.
Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything. - George Bernard Shaw
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

spiderzero
Regular Poster
Username: spiderzero

Post Number: 38
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 05:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

oh those crazy ACCIDENTALS on the public access channel. they can still rock!!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

webman
Moderator
Username: webman

Post Number: 836
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:47 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yeah Spider, I watched them one evening too. I loved it! I am still kicking myself for not seeing them live. I am hoping for a repeat performance next summer.
The trouble with life is, there's no background music.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1403
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 09:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

webman do you want to kick me also!! I loved the Accidentals.
Hubby has watched that program twice already!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

skipper
Pro Poster
Username: skipper

Post Number: 414
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 12:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Forgive me for a dumb question but who are the Accidentals? Can you put a link on here?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

webman
Moderator
Username: webman

Post Number: 837
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The Accidentals are an old-time Two Harbors rock band that formed in the very early 60's I think. They won the Battle of the Bands at the old Armory in Duluth in 1962 (I think that's right). The only member I really know is my cousin Tom Anderson (also Mayor Bolen's father-in-law). These guys hadn't played together in what, maybe 20 years? Something like that. So they ended up together again and played to a very happy crowd at the Mayor's Block Party. I don't know that anything much is available online, unless there might be something buried back in Randy's facebook.
The trouble with life is, there's no background music.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 747
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Who are the Accidentals? Only the best garage band ever. That's who.
They rocked the Teenage Center, the VFW and the Legion for many years.
Skipper, if you are who I think you are, ask your dad who the Accidentals are.

(Message edited by frosted_flakes on December 23, 2009)
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

skipper
Pro Poster
Username: skipper

Post Number: 415
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I was at the block party with the mailman but never seen them...Double F, I will ask my dad if he remembers them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 748
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 10:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

And did the mailman deliver?
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

sparky
Regular Poster
Username: sparky

Post Number: 6
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 05:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Fritz, I agree with you everyone should have health coverage, just not the way it is being developed in Congress. They all admittedly have not read all the bill and neglect to announce anything to the public other than the historic value of this legislation. To me it doesn't matter what party puts it together, just do a better job of it. Another issue I have is with the lack of accountibilty in the proposed bills regarding insurers, patients, claims processers and the government facilitators. The people that need help should get it but I sense more entitlement and scamming coming down the pike. We all know people that do it and there is too much already. At least we know Nebraska will get all it's Medicaid paid for by you and me forever. That's real smart. Oh well, I guess we'll see what comes out of this. Franken and Klobuchar need to be smart about this. My prayers are with them and us all.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

strwblue
Pro Poster
Username: strwblue

Post Number: 627
Registered: 05-2003


Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 05:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

What seems odd to me is that here in Two Harbors some get crazy over a change in the parking ordinance, which can't be more than a few pages. Yet no big public out cry over a 2000+ page healthcare bill that as sparky has pointed out will not even address the shortfalls and abuses going on in the current entitlement programs.
Disclaimer: In as much as I am the Two Harbors Public Access Coordinator I am not now or have I ever spoken for the City of Two Harbors on this board.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

bassman
Moderator
Username: bassman

Post Number: 931
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 07:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It is supposes to cover 30 million who are now not covered. But there will still be about 19 million who will not be covered.

The new health plan when agreed upon by the House and Senate will not take effect until 2014. But, they will start collecting taxes starting in 2010. (Seems to me I recall Obama saying that he would not sign any Health care bill if it had any new taxes attached to it. I guess we will see if that hold true when it finally gets to his desk.)

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the Senate measure would extend coverage to about 31 million Americans who lack it, while cutting federal deficits by $130 billion over a decade and possibly much more in the following 10 years. Premiums would rise for some, but fall for many others, particularly when the effects of federal subsidies are factored in, the agency says.

Literally hundreds of issues remain to be settled in the two bills, a House measure that ran to 1,990 pages and a Senate version of 2,074, not counting 383 pages of revisions that Reid unveiled over the weekend.


Both bills also rely on hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts in future payments to doctors, hospitals and others who care for Medicare patients, with the largest reduction falling on insurance companies who provide a private alternative to traditional Medicare.
(I am sure all of the retired seniors are going to be happy with that one.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 750
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 05:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

This guy gets on in Amsterdam for Detroit. He was banned from entering Great Britain. His father reported to the American Embassy that he may be a threat. Yet he had a visa to enter the US.
There is all this talk about security.
I think it is more basic than that.
What we, as a Country, should be asking ourselves is this; What in the hell did we need this guy in the States at all for? For that matter; What real need do we have for the thousands of people entering the States, legally, every day? Cut down the people coming in by at least half. First qualification for someone coming in; Do we need you? People coming into the States for an education. Bull tweet. There are collages all over the globe. People of collage age can tend to be radical. Go away. We have enough goof balls already. Bad enough that we import apple juice and orange juice.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 563
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 05:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The thing that really bothers me. When I fly, which isn't very often anymore, I feel like I am getting the third degree. Yet as much security as they think they are putting us through, it is really not enough for the ones that really want to do some damage. The last time I traveled, it was for work, and I carried my laptop. If I were an explosive expert, how easy to load up the battery pack with the chemicals need to create an explosion?
I don't know if they still prohibit fingernail clippers, but if I were to want to hurt someone, how much damage could you do with a #2 wooden pencil, sharpened? Or how about a simple leather belt, a garrot! If you have been in the military, some of the basics learned were how to dispatch someone within 5 seconds with your bare hands. What are they going to do, handcuff us all before getting on the plane? I don't need an explosive to cause damage.
The first level of security should be, scrutinize, where are they coming from?, then ask why? Maybe we should be more like Canada. If you've had a DWI in the past 5 years, you can't go there either.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

strwblue
Pro Poster
Username: strwblue

Post Number: 629
Registered: 05-2003


Posted on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 05:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Does anyone on this board really believe at this stage of the game we can actually keep people out of this country if they wish to be here. I mean come on honestly.
Disclaimer: In as much as I am the Two Harbors Public Access Coordinator I am not now or have I ever spoken for the City of Two Harbors on this board.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 751
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 06:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Perhaps we can't, but we sure as hell can keep them of a plane coming here.
Another thing; Profiling is politically incorrect, but we need to start using it. Your Muslim or come from a Muslim country, you get a closer look.
Do gooders would have you believe that you are a bad person if you are against immigration. A few years ago, MN had the most Asian youth gangs of any state in the Union. I wonder why that is? I wonder what benefit we got for having them here.
The worm has turned, but it looks the same on both ends.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 226
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 06:23 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

MN still has the largest Hmong population in the United States.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

sparky
Regular Poster
Username: sparky

Post Number: 10
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 03:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Maybe the Prez needs to get back to wiretapping the profilees and let the CIA do their job without fear of reprisal. Set up some more exotic locales for minor questioning. The Somalis in Minneapolis are still being treated with kid gloves so "we don't offend them". Soon there won't be any young ones left as they go on vacation to the homeland and never come back. They are also starting to kill one another off like their cousins.

The alleged bobmer apparently was trained by two released Gitmo detainees from Yemen. Lovely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

nat_sherman
Pro Poster
Username: nat_sherman

Post Number: 319
Registered: 02-2007


Posted on Saturday, January 02, 2010 - 09:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

http://whitehouse.gov1.info/camp-david/index.html

Anyone want to stay at Camp David. Yes, the same Camp David the President stays at.

2 nights for 1500.00 which includes meals and activities. Seems like a lot, but the cabins sleep up to 8 people and the price says 1500 per weekend NOT per person so it sounds like the price includes up to 8 people.

Might be a fun weekend.
Magna est veritas, et praevalet
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1412
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Saturday, January 02, 2010 - 09:33 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Now I have heard it all. Wait, something will happen there letting the publice have access to it.
I see on the list of things you can't bring in, is gum!!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 500
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 02, 2010 - 12:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yee haw! Please note a statement in the upper right hand corner of the web page that it is a parody website. On the upper left banner of the site is a statement, "Not the Whitehouse President Obama." Then, there is a clear disclaimer at the bottom of the site telling us that it is a parody site.

Folks have fallen for it like an egg from a tall chicken.


I love it.

tom koehler

(Message edited by Tom_koehler on January 02, 2010)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

blondie
Pro Poster
Username: blondie

Post Number: 1414
Registered: 01-2007


Posted on Saturday, January 02, 2010 - 12:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Afraid not tom...I was sitting back here laughing.

(Message edited by Blondie on January 02, 2010)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tom_koehler
Pro Poster
Username: tom_koehler

Post Number: 502
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Sunday, January 03, 2010 - 09:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

In addressing issues about making this town a destination for tourists, I had a revelation of sorts that was very sobering. Bad sobering.
In looking at another issue, I had occasion to look at a Google Earth page/map/photo (whatever you want to call it - a satellite pic of our vil.) So, superimposed on the picture are little icons representing various eateries, motels, and general scenic shots. These icons may or may not be placed accurately, that is not the issue. I started reading reviews left by actual tourists over a 4 or 5 year period, on various restaurants and motels here. Not good! Sure, the reviews from several years ago are uniformly pretty good, but the ones from the past 12 months are not good at all! Cold food - except for the salad that was served on a hot plate, and poorly trained wait staff, and lots of poor food, and shabby or unkempt rooms in newer motels, and uncomfortable beds. The whole nightmare gamut of remarks. Now I realize that generally the complainers are going to post on sites like this, but these are the reviews that are read by potential visitors, too. You'd think the Chamber of Commerce would read these kinds of reviews and get the word out to their membership about properly taking care of the visitor.
tom koehler
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

homeontherange
Pro Poster
Username: homeontherange

Post Number: 565
Registered: 09-2004


Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 02:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Not only the Chamber of Commerce, but the individual business as well. If I had such a business, and was getting bad publicity, I would do something about it.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

frosted_flakes
Pro Poster
Username: frosted_flakes

Post Number: 761
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 06:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

If I had such a business, and was getting bad publicity, I would do something about it.

If I had a business it would be, or I would move it to, 7th Avenue. Or, if I was in business to make money, I would move it to Grand Marais.
Two Harbors. Love it or leave it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

jerry_n
Pro Poster
Username: jerry_n

Post Number: 230
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 06:41 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

FF, you have got this thing about 7th Avenue. There is only so much 7th Avenue to go around. Where do you propose these businesses go? Yeah, I know, from the DQ to Amoco. What if the people dont want to move? Are you willing to move the cemetary? Thats prime 7th Avenue property. I just dont get why you want to limit the business community to 7th avenue. Because its the road through town? What happens when the State decides to put a bypass around TH? Should we abandon all of 7th Avenue then and move to the bypass.

Why not have both? Why not try to filter people towards the Downtown area? what does it hurt? It sure as hell is safer to cross the street down there than it is on 7th Avenue.

You and Todd R are quite content to leave this town just at it is (at least thats what I interpret from your posting in the other thread. While that may feel good, it doesnt expand the tax base and provide tax revenue. you know, money to plow our streets, flush out toilets, give us water, protect our property. This is the real world and these real things cost real money. We cant depend on the State to provide. We have to do it ourselves. So we have,basically, a couple of options. Raise taxes or cut costs. Granted there can be a compromise of the two, but expanding the existing tax base surely would be less painful than raising taxes or cutting services.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin

Post Number: 280
Registered: 08-1999


Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 07:07 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Usually we try to close threads at around 100 posts. This one got away from me. I'll start a new one - please continue. Thanks!
I'm addicted to placebos. I'd give them up, but it really wouldn't make any difference . . . .

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration