Showing posts with label medicaid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label medicaid. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Wrongmart

walmart-donationsA Walmart store in Cleveland is conducting a food drive for their own “Associates in Need” so they can enjoy a Thanksgiving Dinner. This simple act of asking patrons to donate food not for the homeless, not for the poor but for their own employees has caused, and rightfully so, an outrage not only in Cleveland but all over the United States thanks to the Social Media where this picture has spread like wild fire.

Walmart should be embarrassed that their employees don’t make enough money to have a decent Thanksgiving dinner! But of course, the only thing Walmart cares about is to make an obscene profit! Walmart employees, as well as those employees of most of the giant chains will be working during the holidays while most of us will be with our families.

Walmart is advertising the “breaking prices” they will be offering during Black Friday, urging people to buy more Chinese junk. It is extremely sad to see in the news the imbeciles that spend the night waiting in line for those doors to open. Have they ever stopped to think, for just a minute, that this “fantastic sale” could have been held on Saturday? No, people are insensitive and think only of themselves… They are much to blame for these workers having to work during the holidays for crap.

Walmart offers their employees part-time jobs at minimum wage; hence most of their employees need assistance from the government because they are at or below poverty level. It is sad that a person that works has to receive assistance to survive. Many receive not only food stamps but also Medicaid that we, as taxpayers, pay for. The country’s financial situation its not stable enough to be subsidizing workers because they happen to work for a corporation that refuses to offer them a full time job and decent wages.

Workers Cost Month Total
Food Stamps 1,500,000 $160 12 $2,880,000,000
Medicaid 1,500,000 $75 12 $1,350,000,000
Handling & Processing 1,500,000 $25 12 $450,000,000
TOTAL $4,680,000,000 

This has to stop and fast. Walmart owes us, for one year alone, about $4,680,000,000. If the Federal government starts demanding a reimbursement for what we spend on their employees, I am sure that Walmart and the others will pay fair wages and offer full time jobs.

Friday, April 6, 2012

The Path to Prosperity... But Whose?


Paul Ryan has presented in Congress what he calls “The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal.” This Budget Report has been in the news too much lately, which piqued my curiosity to know what exactly was in it. As most of us do, I tend to listen to what others have to say and I confess that at times, I am too lazy to do my own research. Having Medicare and Medicaid jeopardized by this proposal, I overcame my apathy and decided to read it and scrutinize it myself to reach my own conclusions. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me, after all this is a public blog and all views are welcome, but ultimately it is mine and I always say things as I see them if you don’t like it, move on.

Anyone who reads this report lightly and without giving it too much thought or analyzing the significance of what is being proposed, would think that he is presenting a great remedy for what ails our economy today. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The tax reforms Mr. Ryan is proposing, will mostly affect the lower income families. He is proposing a maximum cap of 25 percent for those that make an obscene amount of money, including the new “people” on the block: Corporations. The rest of us, which are the ones being over-taxed and practically sustaining this economy, will pay 10 percent across the board. This approach doesn’t sound too bad, except that his proposal still includes and “improves” incentives for the "job creators" and we all know what that really means. Corporations will still be getting large sums of money in the form of tax breaks for them to honor us by giving us a job, usually at minimum wage and at times not even a full-time position (avoiding having to offer us health benefits.) Basically these companies will be getting cheap labor, which at times and thanks to the “incentives” these workers wages will be paid by the working class in the form of taxes paid, which in turn the government will pay the Corporations to hire new workers, and the vicious cycle keeps repeating itself. It is sickening!

In this report, Ryan also proposes an Energy reform, which not surprisingly, offers to lift all precautionary regulations. He is proposing to remove the Environmental Protection Agency and allow the private sector to develop sources of “American-made” energy. We have seen how "responsible" the private sector is when it comes to the environment and safety. It is well known that when it comes to the environment and safety, if unregulated, corporations will be more interested in saving money and how much profit they can make if they overlook the impact their projects will have on the environment and safety. I cannot say that all corporations behave this way, but sadly, most of them do. They must be regulated.

As we have grown accustomed to by now the GOP, and in particular in this report, Ryan is proposing to get rid of the National Labor Relations Act. It is no secret that Republicans despise Labor Unions, and we should not be surprised that they keep attempting to remove any representation that workers have to fight the injustices perpetrated by the freshly introduced “people” in this nation. In Ryan’s own words “Because a majority of union members in the United States now works for the public sector, organized labor has become an increasingly powerful force on behalf of bigger government and higher taxes. Policymakers must make sure America has a public sector that works for the people it serves – not the other way around.” The question I have is, since corporations are now people, when he refers to “a public sector that works for the people” which people is he referring to, the workers or the corporations?

In the same breath, he continues to mention all the benefits that will entail getting rid of the NLRA, which according to him will increase revenues and fees by lifting moratoriums and bans on energy supplies, again claiming that the energy corporations (oil companies) are environmentally responsible. I wonder what planet Mr. Ryan lives on!

Mr. Ryan didn’t overlook protecting the banking giants either. Wall Street and the financial companies will also see a protection from this “reform.” This path to prosperity ensures that the financial institutions will be free to do whatever they want once more and help them get rid of the government ‘micromanagement’ which has impede their rapid growth. He closes this section with these words: “to ensure that the costs to the private sector and to the taxpayer do not outweigh their benefits, and that regulations are both essential and not unduly burdensome.” If this passes, we will be back to building a castle from a deck of cards!

There is one section of this report that I kind of agree with, that is if my understanding of it is correct. Mr. Ryan proposes a freeze in the federal workforce for the next three years, I am not necessarily pleased with that but, if what follows is true, then I am all for it: “The federal government’s responsibilities require a strong federal workforce. Federal workers deserve to be compensated equitably for their important work, but their pay levels, pay increases and fringe benefits should be reformed to better align with those of their private-sector counterparts.“ Ryan goes on saying that "Immune from the effects of the recession, federal workers have received regular salary bumps regardless of productivity or economic realities." As far as I know, Congressmen and women ARE Federal employees and this means that they will lower their own salaries and hopefully their raises will be based on merit, which it's long overdue. Of course, I know he is referring to the ‘lower class’ Federal workers and not the fat cats sitting in Congress but if this portion goes through, we can demand the same be applied to them.

The farmers did not escaped unharmed on this “path to prosperity.” The report proposes to reduce the help that farmers receive from the government. While we know that there are giants in the farming industry that really do not deserve a hand from the government and yet they take it, we also know that many family owned farms do need help or they will be overtaken by the giants. We need to help our farmers, the ones that are struggling to continue to supply us with fresh and organic vegetables and grains. These farmers are just beginning to make a positive impact in our health and they deserve any help they can get, otherwise we will continue ingesting GM foods, and there would be only one winner, Monsanto.

We all know that most crops are solely dependent on Mother Nature. We have seen what drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, cold weather, floods and natural disasters can do to crops. Well, Ryan is proposing that the government stops the crop insurance offered to farmers, making a farmer responsible for “management risks” as other businesses do. The difference between a farmer and, for example, a banker is that the farmer cannot control nature; the banker can control the market.

What brought me to read the report in the first place was the healthcare, Medicare and Medicaid reforms. According to Ryan, the current system that we have is displacing “the family, civic and religious institutions that serve communities across the nation.” Really, how? The only thing that comes to mind is the now infamous contraceptives and the 'right" for a religious institution to tell a woman that no contraceptives will be included in her insurance because what goes against the views of the employer supersedes the right of any woman.  This report gives an institution more rights than a human being.

After reading the section in its entirety, and you can do the same by following the link I’ve provided, I concluded that what its being proposed – regarding Medicare and Medicaid – is simply what has been proposed so many times before: privatization of these services. The report is proposing that the government with a voucher or check will cover your private insurance premiums. If the person selects a coverage that is higher than the value of the voucher, he or she will have to assume the difference. If you choose a lower coverage, then you will get a check from the government for the difference. The people that have money will be able to afford better plans and those that don’t will have to accept the less desirable insurance. It’s like having a PPO or a HMO, simple.

Mr. Ryan ensures that under this reform, insurance companies will not be able to deny services or increase their premiums for pre-existing conditions. I believe that has been taken care of by President Obama’s Healthcare Reform.

Mr. Ryan ends his report by giving praise to the Republican Party’s god: Ronald Reagan and his Reaganomics: "In 1981, President Ronald Reagan inherited a stagnant economy and a tax code that featured 16 brackets, with a top rate of 70 percent.  When he left office in 1989, the tax code had been simplified down to just three brackets, with a top rate of 28 percent.  Reagan's major tax reforms, enacted with bipartisan support without raising taxes, proved to be a cornerstone of the unprecedented economic boom that occurred in the decade during his presidency and continued in the decade that followed.

While it is true that Reagan inherited a “stagnant economy” this was primarily due to the global oil crisis that resulted from the turmoil in Iran. In 1979, as a consequence of massive protests and the imminent threat of a civil war, the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi fled Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini took over of the country. This event inflicted a significant impact on the production of oil and the global economy.

Reaganomics, according to Wikipedia, consisted of four simple pillars: Reduction of government spending; reduction of income tax and capital gain tax; reduction of economic regulations and control of the money supply to reduce inflation. That’s it. While it sounds perfect and we are all for “reductions” it is far from perfect, no matter how much the Republicans try to sanctify it, it is still bad economics.

During the eight years that Reagan was president, he single-handedly managed to raise our national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion. Thanks to Reaganomics, the United States shifted from being the largest international creditor to being the largest debtor, but you will never hear a Republican say that.

The same can be said about spending. Reagan’s GDP from 1981-1988 averaged 22.4%, 1.8% above the highest GDP from 1971 to 2009; public debt also saw a staggering increase during the Reagan's years, from 26% GDP when he took office to a whopping 41% (from $712 billion to $2,052 billion) by the end of his second term. Reagan holds the honor of being the only president who didn’t increase the minimum wage.

Reagan was not a man for the working class or the poor. If anyone thinks differently they hold the man in a very different light than he deserves.  In an interview Reagan gave to the New York Times by the end of his second term, he was asked about the homeless problem facing the nation, his response should be enough to know that while Reagan had charisma, his heart was as dark as his artificially colored hair. His reply to that question was: “[the homeless] make it their own choice for staying out there."

That statement personifies the core values of the Republican Party and we are foolish if we think that they could ever have a heart.


To see the names of the Congressmen and women supporting this proposal, click here.
Edited by J. Schapiro

Monday, March 26, 2012

Let’s play ball!


It is incredible how many people are still protesting against the Health Care Reform Act and carrying big signs denouncing the unconstitutionality or their outrage for this bill.

I can understand up to a point that the people feel upset that they will be forced to get health insurance. What I can’t understand is their outcry that they don’t want government to get involved in their health issues… That outrage of course lasts until they reach their golden years and retire. The sad thing is, these seniors and retirees that are screaming that they don’t want government “making their health care decisions” have Medicare, and God forbid that someone takes that away from them! What do these people think Medicare is? Medicare is what all of us would have been entitled to if it wasn’t for all the morons that were against single payer or public option. The stigma of the government involved in our health issues was greater than the benefits we could have enjoyed.

Since we couldn’t get the public option or single payer because of all the false allegations that the political liars used to instill fear on the elderly and the gullible, we now have to pay for private insurance… because the rights of the health insurance companies were far more important than our own personal interests.  We have the Tea Party and Republicans to thank for that one. The same people that didn’t want to have a single payer or public option and don’t want to be forced to get health insurance claiming it is unconstitutional. Why is health insurance unconstitutional and not, let’s say, automobile insurance? Why is it that health insurance is an evil thing that government shouldn’t mandate or impose on all of us when not having it affects us ALL yet, it is OK to be forced to have auto insurance for every single vehicle we own?  Why is it OK for one type of enforced insurance but not the other?

When a person that doesn’t have health insurance is hospitalized and can't or won't pay the bill, we end up ‘picking up’ that tab. Every year hospitals nationwide ‘lose’ millions of dollars in unpaid balances incurred by uninsured people incapable or unwilling to pay their debt. The reality is that no hospital really loses money, they just increase the price of their services making all of us that have insurance to pay for those that didn’t. And all of us, those that incurred in the bill and those who see their premium increase pay again in the form of taxes, the government assumes a lot of those loses... kind of a bail out for hospitals.

If you have an automobile or motorcycle and you have a traffic accident, chances are that there will be two cars involved.  Usually, the person that hits pay for the repairs or medical needs of the injured through their insurance and their insurance premiums most likely will increase when they renew their policies.  Automobile insurance companies raise the premiums nationwide according to the accident ratio within that city or state.  Most of us hate them, but since it is the law to have it, we conform... Except if you live in New Hampshire where having automobile insurance it's an option, I think I will move there!

It seems that for Americans protecting an object is far more important than protecting themselves.  We hear people say all the time when their vehicles have been stolen things like "thank God I had insurance!"or "I don't worry because I'm insured."  Why don't they think the same way when it comes to their own person, their own bodies?  Once again, an object is far more important than a person.  No wonder they granted "personhood" status to corporations and we, the workers, have become the property of these corporations!

And now, here we are again fighting against the “Obamacare” as it has been "baptized". This bill has been taken to the Supreme Court to deem it unconstitutional.  It is sad that most likely they will win and repeal the law, after all the Supreme Justices enjoy having Public Option until the day they die.

I believe that is a shame. Many people that could be insured with preexisting conditions will  have no insurance and that includes babies and children. These people once again will have no insurance and perhaps due to being uninsured they may lose their lives.  We can place this injustice on those same people that are constantly yelling how precious every life is: the pro-life people. Once again they have proven that the only life they care for are the one before it passes the birth canal, once you take a breath you are on your own!


I suggest that all the judges and politicians that are fighting and claiming Obamacare as unconstitutional to have their insurance revoked. No more government insurance for them since it is so evil. We progressives and liberals are always trying to work for the people and if these people don’t want insurance especially insurance provided by the government, then we should take that burden away from them. The same can be said about all the senior citizens that have fought so vehemently against government subsidized insurance; let’s cancel their Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps. What do they think those are, manna?  I am sure they will be thrilled since in their opinion they do not use any government assistance and want government out of their lives, let’s be nice and give them what they want.

Let’s repeal Obamacare but do what I suggest above. All congressmen that are against Obamacare, revoke their insurance. Every citizen that has signed anything against Obamacare, let’s cancel his or her government provided insurance. Let’s start playing their game. Let's begin by automatically canceling health insurance of all the fat cats in Congress that have done nothing but inflict fear in their constituents and of all the seniors that claim that government should stay away from their health insurance.  When they stop getting these benefits, they will be begging for the Single Payer Option, not Obamacare which is the watered down version of what was original intended… Let the games begin!