[jonnycsd]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]The only two major options for affecting what our leaders do is voting them in or out of office, or taking to the streets in armed mobs. A third option is economic, but there is only so much corpor-rat crap we can refuse to buy… gotta eat and drive to work, after all.

And if our vote is rigged and gamed, and we are never presented with any but corporately-approved candidates, what options does that leave us?

[/quote]

IMHO gerrymandering has really shifted power away from the voter and towards the parties and thier clients, which are often corporations and nearly always special interest groups. Generally, the politicians running in a gerrymandered district already know if it will go Democrat or Republican. What matters to them is wining the parties nomination, not winning the election. Gerrymandering pre-allocates seats to each party and effectively removes the need for politicians to respond to ALL of thier consituents and replaces it with the need only to respond to the party they affiliate with.

To fix this, the enire concept of gerrymandering needs to be banished!

[jonnycsd]

[quote=EconProf]If true, this will be a very big blow to San Diego’s economy and real estate market, since these people are high-paid and a lot of auxiliary businesses connected to SAIC will leave too.
Much of the blame must fall on the liberal, anti-business atmosphere of CA. Our high state taxes combined with silly regulations will continue to drive out businesses and the middle and upper classes to friendlier states.
SD Realtor: would the hardest hit neighborhoods be around RB, RP, Scripps, etc.?[/quote]

Highest marginal income tax rate in Virginia is 5.75%, thats about half of California’s tax rate. Sales tax is 5% rather than 8.5% here. Property taxes are about the same in percentage terms, but you get A LOT more house for the money. The public schools in the DC suburbs of northern Virginia are very good. Crime is low. Its a much better deal for the people who work at SAIC. Same reason UPS moved from CT to Atlanta Georgia 20 years ago. Its a smart decision for SAIC, maybe will be a slap in the face for California to realize that current policies need to change and change quickly.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=EconProf]If true, this will be a very big blow to San Diego’s economy and real estate market, since these people are high-paid and a lot of auxiliary businesses connected to SAIC will leave too.
Much of the blame must fall on the liberal, anti-business atmosphere of CA. Our high state taxes combined with silly regulations will continue to drive out businesses and the middle and upper classes to friendlier states.
SD Realtor: would the hardest hit neighborhoods be around RB, RP, Scripps, etc.?[/quote]

Highest marginal income tax rate in Virginia is 5.75%, thats about half of California’s tax rate. Sales tax is 5% rather than 8.5% here. Property taxes are about the same in percentage terms, but you get A LOT more house for the money. The public schools in the DC suburbs of northern Virginia are very good. Crime is low. Its a much better deal for the people who work at SAIC. Same reason UPS moved from CT to Atlanta Georgia 20 years ago. Its a smart decision for SAIC, maybe will be a slap in the face for California to realize that current policies need to change and change quickly.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=EconProf]If true, this will be a very big blow to San Diego’s economy and real estate market, since these people are high-paid and a lot of auxiliary businesses connected to SAIC will leave too.
Much of the blame must fall on the liberal, anti-business atmosphere of CA. Our high state taxes combined with silly regulations will continue to drive out businesses and the middle and upper classes to friendlier states.
SD Realtor: would the hardest hit neighborhoods be around RB, RP, Scripps, etc.?[/quote]

Highest marginal income tax rate in Virginia is 5.75%, thats about half of California’s tax rate. Sales tax is 5% rather than 8.5% here. Property taxes are about the same in percentage terms, but you get A LOT more house for the money. The public schools in the DC suburbs of northern Virginia are very good. Crime is low. Its a much better deal for the people who work at SAIC. Same reason UPS moved from CT to Atlanta Georgia 20 years ago. Its a smart decision for SAIC, maybe will be a slap in the face for California to realize that current policies need to change and change quickly.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=EconProf]If true, this will be a very big blow to San Diego’s economy and real estate market, since these people are high-paid and a lot of auxiliary businesses connected to SAIC will leave too.
Much of the blame must fall on the liberal, anti-business atmosphere of CA. Our high state taxes combined with silly regulations will continue to drive out businesses and the middle and upper classes to friendlier states.
SD Realtor: would the hardest hit neighborhoods be around RB, RP, Scripps, etc.?[/quote]

Highest marginal income tax rate in Virginia is 5.75%, thats about half of California’s tax rate. Sales tax is 5% rather than 8.5% here. Property taxes are about the same in percentage terms, but you get A LOT more house for the money. The public schools in the DC suburbs of northern Virginia are very good. Crime is low. Its a much better deal for the people who work at SAIC. Same reason UPS moved from CT to Atlanta Georgia 20 years ago. Its a smart decision for SAIC, maybe will be a slap in the face for California to realize that current policies need to change and change quickly.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=EconProf]If true, this will be a very big blow to San Diego’s economy and real estate market, since these people are high-paid and a lot of auxiliary businesses connected to SAIC will leave too.
Much of the blame must fall on the liberal, anti-business atmosphere of CA. Our high state taxes combined with silly regulations will continue to drive out businesses and the middle and upper classes to friendlier states.
SD Realtor: would the hardest hit neighborhoods be around RB, RP, Scripps, etc.?[/quote]

Highest marginal income tax rate in Virginia is 5.75%, thats about half of California’s tax rate. Sales tax is 5% rather than 8.5% here. Property taxes are about the same in percentage terms, but you get A LOT more house for the money. The public schools in the DC suburbs of northern Virginia are very good. Crime is low. Its a much better deal for the people who work at SAIC. Same reason UPS moved from CT to Atlanta Georgia 20 years ago. Its a smart decision for SAIC, maybe will be a slap in the face for California to realize that current policies need to change and change quickly.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=patb]

30% of all insurance premiums go to overhead, medicare spends 2%.[/quote]

If the incumbent insurance companies are needlessly spending money on overhead, then you should raise a venture capital fund and go buy one of them, cut out the fat, then resell it and retire wealthy beyond any dream. Hmmm, considering that there are $$billions and $$billions of private equity money sitting on the sidelines then why havent any of them done this? (HINT: Because the 30% figure is either a fiction or reflects a necesary cost of doing business.)

In other words, it is naive to think that there is 30% fat in the premiums charged. If there were, then the first company to cut back thier fat could (and would!) do that, lower thier premiums and grow, or enjoy increased margins (or some combination of both)!

How was the 30% figure calculated? Is there a cite for that data point or is it just parroted from something seen on TV? Likewise on the 2% of premiums paid to Medicare – whats in this number? Most medicare spending is funded by payroll tax not by premiums so that immediately becomes a suspect figure.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=patb]

30% of all insurance premiums go to overhead, medicare spends 2%.[/quote]

If the incumbent insurance companies are needlessly spending money on overhead, then you should raise a venture capital fund and go buy one of them, cut out the fat, then resell it and retire wealthy beyond any dream. Hmmm, considering that there are $$billions and $$billions of private equity money sitting on the sidelines then why havent any of them done this? (HINT: Because the 30% figure is either a fiction or reflects a necesary cost of doing business.)

In other words, it is naive to think that there is 30% fat in the premiums charged. If there were, then the first company to cut back thier fat could (and would!) do that, lower thier premiums and grow, or enjoy increased margins (or some combination of both)!

How was the 30% figure calculated? Is there a cite for that data point or is it just parroted from something seen on TV? Likewise on the 2% of premiums paid to Medicare – whats in this number? Most medicare spending is funded by payroll tax not by premiums so that immediately becomes a suspect figure.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=patb]

30% of all insurance premiums go to overhead, medicare spends 2%.[/quote]

If the incumbent insurance companies are needlessly spending money on overhead, then you should raise a venture capital fund and go buy one of them, cut out the fat, then resell it and retire wealthy beyond any dream. Hmmm, considering that there are $$billions and $$billions of private equity money sitting on the sidelines then why havent any of them done this? (HINT: Because the 30% figure is either a fiction or reflects a necesary cost of doing business.)

In other words, it is naive to think that there is 30% fat in the premiums charged. If there were, then the first company to cut back thier fat could (and would!) do that, lower thier premiums and grow, or enjoy increased margins (or some combination of both)!

How was the 30% figure calculated? Is there a cite for that data point or is it just parroted from something seen on TV? Likewise on the 2% of premiums paid to Medicare – whats in this number? Most medicare spending is funded by payroll tax not by premiums so that immediately becomes a suspect figure.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=patb]

30% of all insurance premiums go to overhead, medicare spends 2%.[/quote]

If the incumbent insurance companies are needlessly spending money on overhead, then you should raise a venture capital fund and go buy one of them, cut out the fat, then resell it and retire wealthy beyond any dream. Hmmm, considering that there are $$billions and $$billions of private equity money sitting on the sidelines then why havent any of them done this? (HINT: Because the 30% figure is either a fiction or reflects a necesary cost of doing business.)

In other words, it is naive to think that there is 30% fat in the premiums charged. If there were, then the first company to cut back thier fat could (and would!) do that, lower thier premiums and grow, or enjoy increased margins (or some combination of both)!

How was the 30% figure calculated? Is there a cite for that data point or is it just parroted from something seen on TV? Likewise on the 2% of premiums paid to Medicare – whats in this number? Most medicare spending is funded by payroll tax not by premiums so that immediately becomes a suspect figure.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=patb]

30% of all insurance premiums go to overhead, medicare spends 2%.[/quote]

If the incumbent insurance companies are needlessly spending money on overhead, then you should raise a venture capital fund and go buy one of them, cut out the fat, then resell it and retire wealthy beyond any dream. Hmmm, considering that there are $$billions and $$billions of private equity money sitting on the sidelines then why havent any of them done this? (HINT: Because the 30% figure is either a fiction or reflects a necesary cost of doing business.)

In other words, it is naive to think that there is 30% fat in the premiums charged. If there were, then the first company to cut back thier fat could (and would!) do that, lower thier premiums and grow, or enjoy increased margins (or some combination of both)!

How was the 30% figure calculated? Is there a cite for that data point or is it just parroted from something seen on TV? Likewise on the 2% of premiums paid to Medicare – whats in this number? Most medicare spending is funded by payroll tax not by premiums so that immediately becomes a suspect figure.

[jonnycsd]

The OT founda great video. I recently saw this one and think it does an even better job of laying out the pitfalls of a nationalized health system . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdx_2cuPgQQ

[jonnycsd]

The OT founda great video. I recently saw this one and think it does an even better job of laying out the pitfalls of a nationalized health system . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdx_2cuPgQQ

[jonnycsd]

The OT founda great video. I recently saw this one and think it does an even better job of laying out the pitfalls of a nationalized health system . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdx_2cuPgQQ

[jonnycsd]

The OT founda great video. I recently saw this one and think it does an even better job of laying out the pitfalls of a nationalized health system . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdx_2cuPgQQ

[Author]

Posts