[SK in CV]

What is the context of your thesis? What time frame are you talking about? When did this ” intended nationalization of banks in the United States” begin? Five years ago? Fifty years ago? What mechanism was implemented for this “nationalization” to occur? Was it legislative or regulatory? In other words, you may have a point, but without context, I have no idea what it is.

[SK in CV]

What is the context of your thesis? What time frame are you talking about? When did this ” intended nationalization of banks in the United States” begin? Five years ago? Fifty years ago? What mechanism was implemented for this “nationalization” to occur? Was it legislative or regulatory? In other words, you may have a point, but without context, I have no idea what it is.

[SK in CV]

What is the context of your thesis? What time frame are you talking about? When did this ” intended nationalization of banks in the United States” begin? Five years ago? Fifty years ago? What mechanism was implemented for this “nationalization” to occur? Was it legislative or regulatory? In other words, you may have a point, but without context, I have no idea what it is.

[SK in CV]

What is the context of your thesis? What time frame are you talking about? When did this ” intended nationalization of banks in the United States” begin? Five years ago? Fifty years ago? What mechanism was implemented for this “nationalization” to occur? Was it legislative or regulatory? In other words, you may have a point, but without context, I have no idea what it is.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CONCHO]
What would happen to a private insurance company that squandered its premium money? They could be sued and some of their executives might wind up in handcuffs. Yet when this is done by our government we all just accept it.[/quote]

LOL!! No! They would get bailed out. And the executives don’t get handcuffs, they get giant bonuses. (See AIG)

But it’s really nothing like private insurance. Social Security was never designed to be a pre-funded insurance (nor was medicare for that matter). But the trustees and congress have f’d up royally and haven’t listened to the actuaries’ warnings for 25 years. Benefits were increased to unsustainable levels. Population growth hasn’t even reached the lower ends of projections. It’s a political hot potato that no congress has ever wanted to deal with.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CONCHO]
What would happen to a private insurance company that squandered its premium money? They could be sued and some of their executives might wind up in handcuffs. Yet when this is done by our government we all just accept it.[/quote]

LOL!! No! They would get bailed out. And the executives don’t get handcuffs, they get giant bonuses. (See AIG)

But it’s really nothing like private insurance. Social Security was never designed to be a pre-funded insurance (nor was medicare for that matter). But the trustees and congress have f’d up royally and haven’t listened to the actuaries’ warnings for 25 years. Benefits were increased to unsustainable levels. Population growth hasn’t even reached the lower ends of projections. It’s a political hot potato that no congress has ever wanted to deal with.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CONCHO]
What would happen to a private insurance company that squandered its premium money? They could be sued and some of their executives might wind up in handcuffs. Yet when this is done by our government we all just accept it.[/quote]

LOL!! No! They would get bailed out. And the executives don’t get handcuffs, they get giant bonuses. (See AIG)

But it’s really nothing like private insurance. Social Security was never designed to be a pre-funded insurance (nor was medicare for that matter). But the trustees and congress have f’d up royally and haven’t listened to the actuaries’ warnings for 25 years. Benefits were increased to unsustainable levels. Population growth hasn’t even reached the lower ends of projections. It’s a political hot potato that no congress has ever wanted to deal with.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CONCHO]
What would happen to a private insurance company that squandered its premium money? They could be sued and some of their executives might wind up in handcuffs. Yet when this is done by our government we all just accept it.[/quote]

LOL!! No! They would get bailed out. And the executives don’t get handcuffs, they get giant bonuses. (See AIG)

But it’s really nothing like private insurance. Social Security was never designed to be a pre-funded insurance (nor was medicare for that matter). But the trustees and congress have f’d up royally and haven’t listened to the actuaries’ warnings for 25 years. Benefits were increased to unsustainable levels. Population growth hasn’t even reached the lower ends of projections. It’s a political hot potato that no congress has ever wanted to deal with.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CONCHO]
What would happen to a private insurance company that squandered its premium money? They could be sued and some of their executives might wind up in handcuffs. Yet when this is done by our government we all just accept it.[/quote]

LOL!! No! They would get bailed out. And the executives don’t get handcuffs, they get giant bonuses. (See AIG)

But it’s really nothing like private insurance. Social Security was never designed to be a pre-funded insurance (nor was medicare for that matter). But the trustees and congress have f’d up royally and haven’t listened to the actuaries’ warnings for 25 years. Benefits were increased to unsustainable levels. Population growth hasn’t even reached the lower ends of projections. It’s a political hot potato that no congress has ever wanted to deal with.

[SK in CV]

This is mostly true.

[quote=CONCHO]
Wrong. Look on the back of your paycheck, you should see both SSDI and MDCR. SSDI taxes combined employer/employee are 12.4% of gross up to the SS limit of $102000. MDCR combined employer/employee is 2.9% of gross up to the SS limit. So the amounts are deducted separately.

However all of this goes into the general fund and can be used to build bridges to nowhere. buy a welfare queen a Cadillac, or bomb goatherders in places that 99% of Americans can’t find on a map.[/quote]

SS and Medicare are deducted separately, though some employers do lump them together for the purpose of showing deductions from paychecks. (which is perfectly legal)

However, technically, neither OASDI nor Medicare taxes go directly into the general fund. Both go into their separate trusts, which, by law, can only be invested in non-negotiable special issue US government securities. So the old canard that the goverment is “raiding” the trust funds is just that. Even if it weren’t required for the current budget, it would still be lent back to the general fund, there is no place else for it to go, even if there was no other federal debt and the budget was otherwise balanced or showed a surplus.

As to the broader point, comparing the financing of Medicare with the financing of the proposed public options is absurd. Medicare is not designed to be a full cost/premium plan. The proposed public option plans (at least with regards to the House plan) is. The actual operation of the reimbursement side is comparable. (Though not necessarily coverage. Ultimately, coverage design may be significantly different.)

And medicare is, and has been for over 40 years, a reasonably efficient operation. Specially when compared to the public perception of government bureaucracies. Reimbursement for most medical providers is close to market rates in most markets, and payment is efficient (specially when compared to private insurance companies). As noted, administrative costs are very low. It does have problems. Fraud has been almost ignored for the last 8 years, though improvements have been significant recently through better enforcement, and it can still get better.

[SK in CV]

This is mostly true.

[quote=CONCHO]
Wrong. Look on the back of your paycheck, you should see both SSDI and MDCR. SSDI taxes combined employer/employee are 12.4% of gross up to the SS limit of $102000. MDCR combined employer/employee is 2.9% of gross up to the SS limit. So the amounts are deducted separately.

However all of this goes into the general fund and can be used to build bridges to nowhere. buy a welfare queen a Cadillac, or bomb goatherders in places that 99% of Americans can’t find on a map.[/quote]

SS and Medicare are deducted separately, though some employers do lump them together for the purpose of showing deductions from paychecks. (which is perfectly legal)

However, technically, neither OASDI nor Medicare taxes go directly into the general fund. Both go into their separate trusts, which, by law, can only be invested in non-negotiable special issue US government securities. So the old canard that the goverment is “raiding” the trust funds is just that. Even if it weren’t required for the current budget, it would still be lent back to the general fund, there is no place else for it to go, even if there was no other federal debt and the budget was otherwise balanced or showed a surplus.

As to the broader point, comparing the financing of Medicare with the financing of the proposed public options is absurd. Medicare is not designed to be a full cost/premium plan. The proposed public option plans (at least with regards to the House plan) is. The actual operation of the reimbursement side is comparable. (Though not necessarily coverage. Ultimately, coverage design may be significantly different.)

And medicare is, and has been for over 40 years, a reasonably efficient operation. Specially when compared to the public perception of government bureaucracies. Reimbursement for most medical providers is close to market rates in most markets, and payment is efficient (specially when compared to private insurance companies). As noted, administrative costs are very low. It does have problems. Fraud has been almost ignored for the last 8 years, though improvements have been significant recently through better enforcement, and it can still get better.

[SK in CV]

This is mostly true.

[quote=CONCHO]
Wrong. Look on the back of your paycheck, you should see both SSDI and MDCR. SSDI taxes combined employer/employee are 12.4% of gross up to the SS limit of $102000. MDCR combined employer/employee is 2.9% of gross up to the SS limit. So the amounts are deducted separately.

However all of this goes into the general fund and can be used to build bridges to nowhere. buy a welfare queen a Cadillac, or bomb goatherders in places that 99% of Americans can’t find on a map.[/quote]

SS and Medicare are deducted separately, though some employers do lump them together for the purpose of showing deductions from paychecks. (which is perfectly legal)

However, technically, neither OASDI nor Medicare taxes go directly into the general fund. Both go into their separate trusts, which, by law, can only be invested in non-negotiable special issue US government securities. So the old canard that the goverment is “raiding” the trust funds is just that. Even if it weren’t required for the current budget, it would still be lent back to the general fund, there is no place else for it to go, even if there was no other federal debt and the budget was otherwise balanced or showed a surplus.

As to the broader point, comparing the financing of Medicare with the financing of the proposed public options is absurd. Medicare is not designed to be a full cost/premium plan. The proposed public option plans (at least with regards to the House plan) is. The actual operation of the reimbursement side is comparable. (Though not necessarily coverage. Ultimately, coverage design may be significantly different.)

And medicare is, and has been for over 40 years, a reasonably efficient operation. Specially when compared to the public perception of government bureaucracies. Reimbursement for most medical providers is close to market rates in most markets, and payment is efficient (specially when compared to private insurance companies). As noted, administrative costs are very low. It does have problems. Fraud has been almost ignored for the last 8 years, though improvements have been significant recently through better enforcement, and it can still get better.

[SK in CV]

This is mostly true.

[quote=CONCHO]
Wrong. Look on the back of your paycheck, you should see both SSDI and MDCR. SSDI taxes combined employer/employee are 12.4% of gross up to the SS limit of $102000. MDCR combined employer/employee is 2.9% of gross up to the SS limit. So the amounts are deducted separately.

However all of this goes into the general fund and can be used to build bridges to nowhere. buy a welfare queen a Cadillac, or bomb goatherders in places that 99% of Americans can’t find on a map.[/quote]

SS and Medicare are deducted separately, though some employers do lump them together for the purpose of showing deductions from paychecks. (which is perfectly legal)

However, technically, neither OASDI nor Medicare taxes go directly into the general fund. Both go into their separate trusts, which, by law, can only be invested in non-negotiable special issue US government securities. So the old canard that the goverment is “raiding” the trust funds is just that. Even if it weren’t required for the current budget, it would still be lent back to the general fund, there is no place else for it to go, even if there was no other federal debt and the budget was otherwise balanced or showed a surplus.

As to the broader point, comparing the financing of Medicare with the financing of the proposed public options is absurd. Medicare is not designed to be a full cost/premium plan. The proposed public option plans (at least with regards to the House plan) is. The actual operation of the reimbursement side is comparable. (Though not necessarily coverage. Ultimately, coverage design may be significantly different.)

And medicare is, and has been for over 40 years, a reasonably efficient operation. Specially when compared to the public perception of government bureaucracies. Reimbursement for most medical providers is close to market rates in most markets, and payment is efficient (specially when compared to private insurance companies). As noted, administrative costs are very low. It does have problems. Fraud has been almost ignored for the last 8 years, though improvements have been significant recently through better enforcement, and it can still get better.

[SK in CV]

This is mostly true.

[quote=CONCHO]
Wrong. Look on the back of your paycheck, you should see both SSDI and MDCR. SSDI taxes combined employer/employee are 12.4% of gross up to the SS limit of $102000. MDCR combined employer/employee is 2.9% of gross up to the SS limit. So the amounts are deducted separately.

However all of this goes into the general fund and can be used to build bridges to nowhere. buy a welfare queen a Cadillac, or bomb goatherders in places that 99% of Americans can’t find on a map.[/quote]

SS and Medicare are deducted separately, though some employers do lump them together for the purpose of showing deductions from paychecks. (which is perfectly legal)

However, technically, neither OASDI nor Medicare taxes go directly into the general fund. Both go into their separate trusts, which, by law, can only be invested in non-negotiable special issue US government securities. So the old canard that the goverment is “raiding” the trust funds is just that. Even if it weren’t required for the current budget, it would still be lent back to the general fund, there is no place else for it to go, even if there was no other federal debt and the budget was otherwise balanced or showed a surplus.

As to the broader point, comparing the financing of Medicare with the financing of the proposed public options is absurd. Medicare is not designed to be a full cost/premium plan. The proposed public option plans (at least with regards to the House plan) is. The actual operation of the reimbursement side is comparable. (Though not necessarily coverage. Ultimately, coverage design may be significantly different.)

And medicare is, and has been for over 40 years, a reasonably efficient operation. Specially when compared to the public perception of government bureaucracies. Reimbursement for most medical providers is close to market rates in most markets, and payment is efficient (specially when compared to private insurance companies). As noted, administrative costs are very low. It does have problems. Fraud has been almost ignored for the last 8 years, though improvements have been significant recently through better enforcement, and it can still get better.

[SK in CV]

That’s two good questions!! But not being a real estate attorney nor a broker, I don’t know the answers to either question. I suspect you are only required to disclose what you know. If you learn that the defects are significant, you probably won’t want to buy the house. If you learn they’re insignificant there’s nothing to disclose. But get better advice before you sell the house you haven’t purchased yet 🙂

[Author]

Posts