Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Health Care Reform: A Penny For Your Thoughts?
#1
What if we abolish the penny, which costs the U.S. Mint 1.6 cents to produce, as Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. have already done, round up all retail purchases to the next higher nickel (and round all paychecks etc. down to the next lower nickel) and use the resulting breakage to reimburse health care facilities for giving charity care to the poor?

No mandates, no penalties, no unwieldy bureaucracy, and as they would say across the pond, it's jolly regressive - a 96-cent cup of ramen noodles becomes $1.00, while a $4,999.99 diamond ring becomes $5,000.00 - taking the right's #1 argument away: That it would "redistribute wealth."  Plus it would maintain the "charity" paradigm that the moral judgmentalists require.
"It was better with them that were slain by the sword, than with them that died with hunger, for these pined away being consumed for want of the fruits of the earth" - Lamentations 4:9
Reply
#2
(12-10-2016, 11:09 AM)Anthony Wrote: What if we abolish the penny, which costs the U.S. Mint 1.6 cents to produce, as Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. have already done, round up all retail purchases to the next higher nickel (and round all paychecks etc. down to the next lower nickel) and use the resulting breakage to reimburse health care facilities for giving charity care to the poor?

No mandates, no penalties, no unwieldy bureaucracy, and as they would say across the pond, it's jolly regressive - a 96-cent cup of ramen noodles becomes $1.00, while a $4,999.99 diamond ring becomes $5,000.00 - taking the right's #1 argument away: That it would "redistribute wealth."  Plus it would maintain the "charity" paradigm that the moral judgmentalists require.

I'm all for abolishing the penny, but it will never happen for the same reason we will never switch to only using $1 coins or to using the colorful plastic bills other developed countries are now using, we are a stupidly stubborn people and the moment the idea is floated you will get the usual screams about "UN BLACK HELICOPTER COMMUNISTS TURNING US INTO EUROPE!!!".
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#3
We'd be using dollar coins if they had made them pound coin sized instead of slightly overgrown quarters.
Reply
#4
Actually, we should have used the really small $1 gold coin, which had a diameter of 13 millimeters (by comparison, the dime measures just under 18 millimeters across), and was last produced in 1889, as the model - and since the nickel is also a loser for the Mint, it needs to be changed to stainless steel, which was used in Italy's last lira coins before Italy went on the euro.
"It was better with them that were slain by the sword, than with them that died with hunger, for these pined away being consumed for want of the fruits of the earth" - Lamentations 4:9
Reply
#5
Perhaps off topic, but isn't cash in any form just so 20th century?  I doubt we will be using any physical medium for much longer.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#6
(12-11-2016, 02:07 PM)Anthony Wrote: Actually, we should have used the really small $1 gold coin, which had a diameter of 13 millimeters (by comparison, the dime measures just under 18 millimeters across), and was last produced in 1889, as the model - and since the nickel is also a loser for the Mint, it needs to be changed to stainless steel, which was used in Italy's last lira coins before Italy went on the euro.

The gold dollars?  Even better.  Put a few cents of actual gold content in them, just to tie into tradition, and people would love them.  Just make sure they can easily be told from dimes by feel.
Reply
#7
(12-10-2016, 11:15 AM)Odin Wrote:
(12-10-2016, 11:09 AM)Anthony Wrote: What if we abolish the penny, which costs the U.S. Mint 1.6 cents to produce, as Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. have already done, round up all retail purchases to the next higher nickel (and round all paychecks etc. down to the next lower nickel) and use the resulting breakage to reimburse health care facilities for giving charity care to the poor?

No mandates, no penalties, no unwieldy bureaucracy, and as they would say across the pond, it's jolly regressive - a 96-cent cup of ramen noodles becomes $1.00, while a $4,999.99 diamond ring becomes $5,000.00 - taking the right's #1 argument away: That it would "redistribute wealth."  Plus it would maintain the "charity" paradigm that the moral judgmentalists require.

I'm all for abolishing the penny, but it will never happen for the same reason we will never switch to only using $1 coins or to using the colorful plastic bills other developed countries are now using, we are a stupidly stubborn people and the moment the idea is floated you will get the usual screams about "UN BLACK HELICOPTER COMMUNISTS TURNING US INTO EUROPE!!!".

I've been opposed to abolishing the penny, because then the nickel just becomes the penny, and the mindset of inflation just makes it so. But, it might be time now.

In any case it's irrelevant; changing our methods of currency is not going to abolish Reaganomics.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#8
(12-13-2016, 01:53 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(12-13-2016, 01:02 PM)David Horn Wrote: Perhaps off topic, but isn't cash in any form just so 20th century?  I doubt we will be using any physical medium for much longer.

Been to a Chinatown lately?

Cash is king.

True for now, but for how long?  I was in CT in NYC in October, and had no trouble using plastic.  Prices may have been a bit cheaper with cash, but I bargained first so probably not.  No one balked.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#9
(12-13-2016, 08:30 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(12-13-2016, 06:04 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(12-13-2016, 01:53 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(12-13-2016, 01:02 PM)David Horn Wrote: Perhaps off topic, but isn't cash in any form just so 20th century?  I doubt we will be using any physical medium for much longer.

Been to a Chinatown lately?

Cash is king.

True for now, but for how long?  I was in CT in NYC in October, and had no trouble using plastic.  Prices may have been a bit cheaper with cash, but I bargained first so probably not.  No one balked.

Here in the Bay Area there are many "ethnic" restaurants (Chinese and other types) that are cash only, or, cash only up to $20 or $30.

Many nightclubs here are cash only.

As the customer, I expect to have some control.  If any business makes demands I find repugnant, I walk.  That may not be the case here, but ...
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#10
(12-14-2016, 01:30 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: The reason is the fees charged by the credit card issuers. Small operation restos and clubs operate on very slim margins and therefore, such fees can be a significant factor. Furthermore, the patrons of such places also do not want such fees peanut buttered into the prices. By the same token, in most cases I prefer restaurants without liquor licenses due to the generally lower prices on the menu. One other thing I find is I get better service using cash, whether or not the place is cash only. Very little imagination is required to realize why this is. Such places love cash. The taxman? Not so much ....
I take it that you are a non-drinker, correct? When I go out to dinner, I like to have a nice glass of wine with my meal. It's worth paying a little bit more.
Reply
#11
OK, I admit it.  I sent a real hot flame to Sen Lankford and got more than the usual form letter.  I think somebody actually read my email. Big Grin 

[Image: EmailHeader211.30.PNG] 
 
April 28, 2017

Dear Mr. Rags,

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns on prescription drug prices. 

I understand the fear that life-saving medications may become unaffordable, particularly when costs skyrocket unexpectedly for no apparent reason.  Whether a patient utilizes Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance, we should improve access to safe and affordable medications while providing as many choices as possible for quality health care.

Developing new and ground-breaking drugs is a costly and time-consuming process.  Companies that make the significant investment to craft new and innovative cures and treatments must have the reasonable expectation of obtaining a return on their sizable investment, which can lead to high initial costs.  

As you may know, Senator Bernie Sanders (VT) introduced S. 469, the Affordable and Safe Prescription Drug Importation Act on February 28, 2017, which seeks to approve the importation of "affordable and safe" prescription drugs.  As Americans monitor prescription prices, we are constantly vigilant to ensure pharmaceutical companies offer drugs at a fair price.  

S 469 was referred to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, where it awaits further action.  I do not serve on that Committee, but if S. 469 comes to the Senate floor for a vote, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind  

As we work toward affordable drug prices we must also ensure we provide Americans with prescription drugs that have been safely and responsibly manufactured, come from clean distributors and pharmacies, and have been tested and proven safe for human consumption.  Some states have tried various programs that provide drugs from outside of the United States, but to date there has not been a successful program.  

A handful of states actually terminated their programs after spending more than $1 million from taxpayers. While many in our nation look to drug importation to lower the cost of prescription drugs, the cost to ensure imported drugs are safe and effective would likely outweigh any potential savings.  Furthermore, importations could greatly increase the risk of counterfeit drugs entering the United States or drugs that do not meet FDA's health and safety standards.

You might be interested to know that in 2003 the Secretary of Health & Human Services received the authority to pursue and implement a drug importation program.  However, no Secretary since that time has found it feasible to safely implement such a program, citing a wide array of long-standing obstacles that prevent the Department from fully ensuring the safety of imported medicine.

The United States has the highest quality physicians, hospitals, and prescription medications in the world.  Unfortunately, we also face high costs, a vast uninsured population, and essential prescriptions that are too expensive.  That is why I believe we need a patient-oriented healthcare system that put patients' needs first, not the desires of government bureaucrats and the pharmaceutical industry.  Free-market alternatives are important to keep the costs of medication down for those who need them most.  I look forward to the conversation in the U.S. Senate to find solutions to high prescription drug costs and help Oklahoma families.

I will continue to press the FDA to ensure we provide proper congressional oversight of the prescription drug approval process to help Oklahomans have access to the medications they need at a cost they can afford.   Please feel free to contact me again via email at www.lankford.senate.gov for more information about my work in the United States Senate for all of us.



In God We Trust,
[Image: SenatorSignature48.jpg]
James Lankford
United States Senator

[Image: youtube24.png][Image: twitter24.png][Image: flickr24.png][Image: Instagram24.png]


 
 1.  I sent a real hot flame to SEn Lankford.   I think that's how I got an actual reply instead of some lame form letter. It took a while, but like Eric's letters , I managed to get past the usual bureaucratic nonsense. Big Grin

2.  I see the usual Neo-Liberal excuses for keeping drug prices sky high.  I'll do a follow up on why "Free Market" crap doesn't work.  What good are new drugs if nobody can afford them , comes to mind. I'll tell Sen. Lankford that Big Pharma has no concern for the working poor.  I'm sure that using economic class will drive this Rebpug. crazy, ... later on.

3.  Access to "Health Insurance"...   I have a bone to pick there as well. I'll reiterate that "health insurance" != health care.  I think he needs to think outside the bubble here.

4. I will thank him for a reply that's not a fucking form letter, but an actual reply. Credit is where credit is due. I think somebody actually read my flame.

[Image: iqtrk.gif?crop=15882.12373586.7475859.9721638]

5. "Highest quality of ..."  Yeah, I'll get back to him on that.  What good is highest quality, when nobody can afford it?


.... Hahahahahahahahahah.  Rags, the trouble maker. I think I got the formula down to getting real replies. Y'all should have seen that flame I sent to him. It's just like the flames I write here.  Yo, Eric,  Red and Black auras work, you know. I know you send stuff  as well. Next up, the rest of my congressional delegation.

6. Uh, what's this  "In God We trust".  Meh, Rags is a New Ager like Eric.   Tongue


7. Dunno, perhaps going to the local Oklahoma Democrats may work?  Will it? Can it? Work? Focus like a Lazar beam on economics. 

8. So... it seems that the liberal use of expletives and citing bill numbers may be the key. Long live economic progressives. I wish the Democratic party would just ditch this stupid regressive liberalism shit. Illegal alien rights don't play in fly over country.  May the regressive black bloc get a serious beat down from wherever.  I hate losing agendas like ILLEGAL ALIEN RIGHTS.  SO, LIBERALS, PICK AND CHOOSE. ILLEGAL = ILLEGAL.  AS A STRATEGIC MOVE, DEPORT ANY ILLEGALS.  Now, support liberal labor union rights, shut down H1-B's. etc. The Democratic Party is being stupid. I support the Wall, but the US should pay for it, since we are the beneficiaries
Also, all US troops out of the MIdeast.  It's a hellhole, there's no solution.  Fuck the MIdeast. Rags don't give a rat's ass about a bunch of backward goat fuckers.  Burn, baby , burn, Mideast Oilfields.  .


Red and black man.  It can get results...
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#12
People will simply be priced into quack medicine, if not more directly into the grave.

The Trump Administration, the Republican Party, and the lobbyists who pull the strings on Congress and most state legislatures, recognize only one guiding principle in American life: profit for the elites. They are realizing the Marxist stereotype of capitalism, one in which anyone not in the Master Class is expendable on behalf of people of great wealth and power -- but no conscience. The same elite typically demands selfless sacrifice by the masses on behalf of the ruling elite.

Except perhaps for organized crime (whose political affiliations are murky) that elite consists of plutocrats, rural and urban landowners, professional enforcers, and an executive nomenklatura. These groups successfully bar anyone unwelcome to their midst and tend to destroy alternatives.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#13
(04-28-2017, 11:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:09 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: <snip>

Is he Rep? Reason I'm wondering is the hat tip to Bernie. Good ol' Bernie's still got some miles left in him. Who knows, maybe coalition politics will help us emerge from these dark times.

I'm not quite sure what "Rep" means.  It would mean 2 things, so I'll answer what I see as 2 questions:

1. If "Rep" means Republican, then yes.  All Oklahoma Senators and House representatives are Republicans. Eric is quite correct.  Oklahoma voters aren't the sharpest tools in the shed.

2. If "Rep" means a house representative, then no, he's one of our 2 Senators.

3. I think this platform may be the key to getting some wins in Red States. I know I like it. It also seems to match Bernie's platform when he ran. Prairie populism isn't dead, but is alive and well.  Note to Eric:   I can go along to get along with gun control in exchange for the other platform planks. I don't expect anything to be perfect. I can compromise. Cool
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#14
(05-05-2017, 04:42 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 11:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:09 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: <snip>

Is he Rep? Reason I'm wondering is the hat tip to Bernie. Good ol' Bernie's still got some miles left in him. Who knows, maybe coalition politics will help us emerge from these dark times.

I'm not quite sure what "Rep" means.  It would mean 2 things, so I'll answer what I see as 2 questions:

1. If "Rep" means Republican, then yes.  All Oklahoma Senators and House representatives are Republicans. Eric is quite correct.  Oklahoma voters aren't the sharpest tools in the shed.

2. If "Rep" means a house representative, then no, he's one of our 2 Senators.

3. I think this platform may be the key to getting some wins in Red States. I know I like it. It also seems to match Bernie's platform when he ran. Prairie populism isn't dead, but is alive and well.  Note to Eric:   I can go along to get along with gun control in exchange for the other platform planks. I don't expect anything to be perfect. I can compromise. Cool

Rags is having a good day Smile
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#15
What does a really-good investor (Warren Buffett), one of the richest people in the world have to say of medical care in America?





Although corporate income taxes have been a shrinking share of the economy (4% to 2%), health-care expenses have gone from 5% to 17%... and they are crippling American competitiveness. There is no cost control.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#16
(12-10-2016, 11:09 AM)Anthony Wrote: What if we abolish the penny, which costs the U.S. Mint 1.6 cents to produce, as Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. have already done, round up all retail purchases to the next higher nickel (and round all paychecks etc. down to the next lower nickel) and use the resulting breakage to reimburse health care facilities for giving charity care to the poor?

No mandates, no penalties, no unwieldy bureaucracy, and as they would say across the pond, it's jolly regressive - a 96-cent cup of ramen noodles becomes $1.00, while a $4,999.99 diamond ring becomes $5,000.00 - taking the right's #1 argument away: That it would "redistribute wealth."  Plus it would maintain the "charity" paradigm that the moral judgmentalists require.

-- how bout rounding paychex up to the next higher nickel too? I'm tired of getting screwed
Heart  Bernie/Tulsi 2020    Heart
Reply
#17
(07-05-2017, 04:33 PM)Marypoza Wrote:
(12-10-2016, 11:09 AM)Anthony Wrote: What if we abolish the penny, which costs the U.S. Mint 1.6 cents to produce, as Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. have already done, round up all retail purchases to the next higher nickel (and round all paychecks etc. down to the next lower nickel) and use the resulting breakage to reimburse health care facilities for giving charity care to the poor?

No mandates, no penalties, no unwieldy bureaucracy, and as they would say across the pond, it's jolly regressive - a 96-cent cup of ramen noodles becomes $1.00, while a $4,999.99 diamond ring becomes $5,000.00 - taking the right's #1 argument away: That it would "redistribute wealth."  Plus it would maintain the "charity" paradigm that the moral judgmentalists require.

-- how bout rounding paychex up to the next higher nickel too? I'm tired of getting screwed

Think big.  Chucking pennies saves money.  That means "image is everything" is something old that be new again. Just have the Republicans introduce legislation called "Penny Elimination Act to Reduce the Size of Government."

The act as named is factually true. The mint can fire the penny punches,save on zinc, and save on minting the things.
The Republicans should then be nagged into a tax cut which matches the savings from penny making.
Since Republicans always say that tax cuts bring in more revenue they cost should take that into consideration. They're Republicans, so they think that way. Anyhow, nudge them into a  tax credit based on being a US citizen. One penny tax credit per US citizen, every year, based on the projected savings that year and of course, adjusted to inflation. 

Democrats can just say in private that the Republicans bagged them small, but there kind of thing, national minimum income.
---Value Added Cool
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)