# Obamacare could have made us all wealthy



## Sentry18 (Aug 5, 2012)

I was talking with a guy the other day who works for a some kind of money management firm. He was joking that the US gov't has spent over $650 million so far on Obamacare (from trying to get it passed through today). That if the gov't would have just divided that up amongst the people (US population is 319 million), we would have each received approx. $2,000,000. That if we each invested that money with his firm and did not touch the principal it would add approx. $20,000 to each of our annual incomes for life. He also said that the average annual expense on healthcare for someone in the Midwest is $6,800. Which is approx. 1/3 of our annual payout. I don't know if his math all holds up or not, but all of that sounded a lot better than just pissing away the money like out gov't is currently doing.


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

Sorry to burst your bubble right off the bat but your math is incorrect. 650million dollars divided by 315 million folks is about $2.00 each, not $2,000.000. There are other Govt. programs that waste...err... spend TRILLIONS of dollars... to keep us safe of course. Now, if we took those dollars (fiat ones of course) and spread them around, there would be lots of money available for 'entitlement programs' like SS where money was extorted from us with the promise that we would get it back in the future. But, who am I to think logically, our beloved Govt. knows what is best for us.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

If you mean $650 billion, not million, which is less than what it is supposed to cost over a decade, the point holds.


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

BILLION?!?!????? Wholy cow! We could have invaded another country an took over their gold backed currency for that amount!!


----------



## ralfy (Oct 12, 2012)

U.S. total debt:

http://grandfather-economic-report.com/debt-nat.htm

Note household and business debts, and add future liabilities of around $200 trillion and banks exposed to almost $400 trillion in unregulated derivatives.

The only way out for the U.S. is to cut down heavily on borrowing and spending (up tp around 80 pct) across the board (meaning households, businesses, and government, including the military) for the next few decades.


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

ralfy said:


> U.S. total debt:
> 
> http://grandfather-economic-report.com/debt-nat.htm
> 
> ...


The worst problem is the unfunded liabilities for social security, medicare, medicaid, and federal pensions. Those unfunded liabilities are increasing by about $5 trillion a year. There's no way to fix that without massive changes to our entitlement programs and that's obviously not happening.

One solution to the national debt would be to sell Hawaii to China. If the government confiscated all private property on Hawaii it could all be resold for the good of the rest of the country. Not something I'm in favor of but desperate times lead to desperate measures.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

The entitlement programs will change, though we'll probably have to go through some sort of crisis to bring that about. Think of Social Security, etc. As promises that will be reneged and the numbers get manageable.


----------



## weedygarden (Apr 27, 2011)

BillS said:


> The worst problem is the unfunded liabilities for social security, medicare, medicaid, and federal pensions. Those unfunded liabilities are increasing by about $5 trillion a year. There's no way to fix that without massive changes to our entitlement programs and that's obviously not happening.
> 
> One solution to the national debt would be to sell Hawaii to China. If the government confiscated all private property on Hawaii it could all be resold for the good of the rest of the country. Not something I'm in favor of but desperate times lead to desperate measures.


Am I wrong? Isn't Social Security funded by the hard working people in America, required to pay into for THEIR retirement, but railroaded by the government for their misspending?

Yes, changing the entitlement programs would cause such social upheaval in America, it would not be safe to live in many places. I believe the powers that be have a plan to do something about this. I don't know details, who, when, how, but I believe it is in the works. Too bad this wasn't handled correctly instead of driving America into the ground. I am preaching here: The bible says those who don't work don't eat. That is my take on the situation. Give someone a free life for decades and then change it up. Not easy and not happening without social upheaval.

What? You won't give me a check for having babies? What? You won't feed my 12 babies I had without ever going to a real J.O.B. (as they say in the inner city)?


----------



## Sentry18 (Aug 5, 2012)

Woody said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble right off the bat but your math is incorrect. 650million dollars divided by 315 million folks is about $2.00 each, not $2,000.000. There are other Govt. programs that waste...err... spend TRILLIONS of dollars... to keep us safe of course. Now, if we took those dollars (fiat ones of course) and spread them around, there would be lots of money available for 'entitlement programs' like SS where money was extorted from us with the promise that we would get it back in the future. But, who am I to think logically, our beloved Govt. knows what is best for us.


Maybe it was billion, maybe he was joking, maybe Obama had the NSA edit my post so as to hide the truth. If you hear about me killing myself after a short murderous rampage, then the media tells all about my "arsenal" and how I was a "survival nut" you will know for sure it was the NSA. Either way it's all money getting flushed down the toilet.


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

Billion? BILLION??? IF it cost 'US' this much for a failed system, how much more will it cost for a WEBSITE that actually works???

I refrain from letting out a string of obscenities that would get me banned. This whole thing might have been cheaper for our illustrious government to give everyone $100,000 and say hey, deal with it yourself.

And, for the 'unfunded liabilities'. They are neither 'liabilities' or 'entitlements'. I have had money from my paycheck EXTORTED for over 40 years with the 'promise' that that money TAKEN FROM ME WITH THREAT OF IMPRISONMENT IF I DID NOT PAY would be paid back, WITH INTEREST. I did not make this agreement, it was made for me. If that cannot be done, give me back, in 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 dollars what I have paid in. Impossible? It sure is.

Sorry. I am going top make a cup of tea and take the puppy outside for a last rainy romp before dark. I'm thinking Passiflora Incarnata with a touch of chamomile so I can relax.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

The website has cost something like $650 Million and will probably cost a couple Billion to get functional.

Obamacare as a whole will cost over a Trillion over a 10 year span.

The liabilities of Social Security, etc. Are huge and appear un manageable until you realize that Congress can just change the rules any time it chooses.

The original point of having the money invested on our behalf instead of wasted is particularly apparent in Social Security, where virtually any money manager could beat the return without even breathing hard. That was the reason for the Bush era suggestion of Privatizing a part of Social Security. Of course that suggestion was rejected by the folks who can't handle math.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

weedygarden said:


> Am I wrong? Isn't Social Security funded by the hard working people in America, required to pay into for THEIR retirement, but railroaded by the government for their misspending?


Sorry weedy, you are absolutely wrong.

Social security was sold as a "savings plan", but actually constructed as Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Today's benefits are paid by today's workers. Nothing guarantees tomorrows returns. As long as you have an expanding and growing income source, the Ponzi scheme continues. Our population has for all practical purposed peaked, but even worse, median income is dropping, substantially dropping.

Current estimates are 200+ Trillion of unfunded liabilities. If you were king for a day, how would you pay that debt... keep in mind that you only bring in 3T in revenue and currently deficit spending by approx 1T per year?

Cut spending, you also cut revenue, so start cutting.


----------



## VoorTrekker (Oct 7, 2012)

6.5 x 10 (9) divided by 2.3 x 10 (6) = 2.8 x 10 (3) = 28,000

Social Security was established in 1935. An 18 year old beginning the job "market" paying SS would retire at age 65 would begin collecting in 1982.

Has anyone began collecting before 1982? Yes, millions of people. Unfunded liabilities is correct. It cannot be paid without a deficit spending; ask Jerry Brown of Commiepornfornia how he did it. Maybe Gov. Brown should be the Secretary of Federal Spending.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

What one needs to understand is that virtually every government social program is NOT intended to make us better off overall, though that is always claimed. The purpose of these programs is to resdistribute funds from people who have earned them to others, with a bit of political patronage thrown in.


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

And those 'others' are the people in government who NEED money to pay for programs that they wish to implement. As well as pay for themselves and their cronies who make a paycheck from those of use who actually work for a living to support them. Bernie Madoff was nothing compared to these guys. BUT! THEY did it 'legally'!!!


----------



## ralfy (Oct 12, 2012)

In addition,

http://lexicon.ft.com/term?term=triffin-dilemma

That is, the U.S. is a reserve currency economy, which means borrowing and spending to ensure economic "growth" is inevitable. Hence, increased borrowing across the board from '81 onward:

http://blogs.reuters.com/rolfe-winkler/2009/09/30/krugman-and-the-pied-pipers-of-debt/


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

I would not invest with that guy's firm if all I get is a 1% return. I can get that in a savings account


----------



## Tirediron (Jul 12, 2010)

Maybe the dude Sentry posted about work for the government in a financial position and just pretends to have an investment company, cause the math fits the .gov financial plan pretty well:scratch


----------



## weedygarden (Apr 27, 2011)

partdeux said:


> Sorry weedy, you are absolutely wrong.
> 
> Social security was sold as a "savings plan", but actually constructed as Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Today's benefits are paid by today's workers. Nothing guarantees tomorrows returns.  As long as you have an expanding and growing income source, the Ponzi scheme continues. Our population has for all practical purposed peaked, but even worse, median income is dropping, substantially dropping.
> 
> ...


I hate when the idiots in charge design a mandatory plan that works out like this.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

The government budget today is basically a military attached to an insurance program. The insurance "products" include everything from Social Security, to welfare, to Obamacare. All of the insurance "products" simply transfer money from some set of taxpayers to whoever gets the benefits.

Obamacare is distinct primarily in the fact that they tried to not call it a tax, lied about how it would work, and totally fouled up the implementation.

The government has lied mostly about the accounting for the other programs, so what you see is the huge deficits and not much else that bothers the average citizen. However, if they did the accounting right people would be incensed about all of these programs.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

cnsper said:


> I would not invest with that guy's firm if all I get is a 1% return. I can get that in a savings account


Getting a 1% or less return is what you get from Social Security. Obamacare isn't that good.


----------



## millertimedoneright (May 13, 2013)

Has anyone thought about how similar our current government is to the old roman government structure? They do what they want and fund it with the citizens money...they "buy" votes thru entitlement programs...etc


----------



## tsrwivey (Dec 31, 2010)

partdeux said:


> Sorry weedy, you are absolutely wrong.
> 
> Social security was sold as a "savings plan", but actually constructed as Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Today's benefits are paid by today's workers. Nothing guarantees tomorrows returns. As long as you have an expanding and growing income source, the Ponzi scheme continues. Our population has for all practical purposed peaked, but even worse, median income is dropping, substantially dropping.
> 
> ...


Yep, the reality of the situation is if you are 55 or younger & hope to ever retire, you'd better be putting money aside for that. Otherwise, you'll be working till the day you die. Retiring on Social Security is a pipe dream & has been for a long time. We will pay into SS, provide for the retirement of our parents & grandparents, & never see a dime. You can b!tch, whine, & complain about it or ya can just focus on taking responsibility for your retirement. There's dignity in providing for your own retirement instead of having Uncle Sam steal it from someone else.


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

What makes those of us over 55 special?


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Woody said:


> What makes those of us over 55 special?


The younger you are the worse the return. There's nothing magic about 55.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

Best plan I've heard,

Take the oldest person alive, pay him or her 100% of the money they put into social security... keep going until the reserve runs out. First time I heard that proposal, I completely dismissed it... I've warmed up to it. At the time it was estimated the money would run out around 58 years old.


----------



## millertimedoneright (May 13, 2013)

Combine all forms of "entitlements" with social security on an individual basis...pay in throughout your life...you can only take a maximum of the amount you have in your account at any given time...whatever is left you draw out for your ss...don't contribute you don't receive any benefits...this will prevent these career welfare people from sucking up all the benefits and never putting in any work while also securing each persons social security checks


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

millertimedoneright said:


> Combine all forms of "entitlements" with social security on an individual basis...pay in throughout your life...you can only take a maximum of the amount you have in your account at any given time...whatever is left you draw out for your ss...don't contribute you don't receive any benefits...this will prevent these career welfare people from sucking up all the benefits and never putting in any work while also securing each persons social security checks


Then why have the programs? The whole point is to take from some to give to others. If you aren't going to do that, then just phase them out entirely. If thes programs are to be just a place to park your money until you need it, banks do a fine job of that and we don't need government.


----------



## invision (Aug 14, 2012)

Geek999 said:


> Then why have the programs? The whole point is to take from some to give to others. If you aren't going to do that, then just phase them out entirely. If thes programs are to be just a place to park your money until you need it, banks do a fine job of that and we don't need government.


Precisely. I max contributed to SS - meaning I hit max possible withdraw and max SSI right around age 30. At 42, now, having had multiple HA's and a bypass, like I will ever see the money I contributed? And I have been paying taxes since I was 12 years old... Long story but true.


----------



## millertimedoneright (May 13, 2013)

If I had a choice I wouldn't pay a dime to the government but they are gonna take our money regardless...I just threw out my idea for a "welfare" system...the fact is the freeloaders are killing the system...no one can find a job yet their is signs everywhere of people hiring...in this country if you can't find employment you don't want it bad enough...why would welfare people want a job they have it made? Free food, cell phone, housing, and in many cases free utilities while the whole time they get to sit at home doing what they want...I was raised with a sense of pride in earning my living...I graduated high school and had a job within 3 days cuz I busted my tail looking for work and didn't take no for an answer....9 1/2 years later and I have had a 6 figure salary for the last 4 years...I got this not cuz of luck or knowing anyone but cuz I wanted it and refused to settle...anyone can get or do anything they want in this country if they want it and refuse to quit...it's time we quit feeling sorry for the lazy


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

As a recently laid off tech worker I can add insight to this. Yes, there are lots of jobs advertised, there are lots of jobs out there. Yes, most are part time, yes many are good full-time positions. But landing an actual career position these days is not as easy as stopping into the office, having a chat and shaking hands. It was years ago! I got my last job 12 and a half years ago doing just that. Today is a whole different ball game.

Post your resume online and send to job offerings. There is no stopping into an office to see someone about a position. You might hear back within a week, sometimes two or more. Then there is the initial phone interview. If you make the short list, several more phone interviews to follow. A month or two later you may actually get to go for a face to face with someone. This will not be with the person offering the job, it is with HR to screen you. A week or two later you may hear back, maybe not, about if you have the job or not. Then you get called back to discuss terms... This is for an actual career opening.

Getting a 'job' is easier. I landed a 'job' within a week of losing my last position. These are the positions where you fill out a paper copy of an application (first requirement you can read and write!). Turn it in and sit back waiting for a call. They call you in, offer you a wage and you accept it or don't, they have many more folks waiting for that position. They are part time. There is no wiggle room for hours, this is what they are, take it or leave it. Some of these employers are willing to work with people who have more then one job, which many folks do.

So, yes, I am employed. Yes, I am working. Yes, I am counted in the official Govt. numbers. But! I do not make enough to pay expenses. I do not have a huge home, I live in a trailer with mortgage payments much less than most folks car payments. My car is paid for but I still have insurance on it, insurance on the trailer also as well as property taxes... With utilities, a garden and being frugal (spelled CHEAP :-})) I am losing money each month I work. It actually costs me to have a 'job' today.

Could I cut back more and save money? SURE! I could drop the phone, but how would anyone contact me, that is $35 a month. I could drop internet, that saves $50 a month. But, how would I be able to post to PS, as well as search for my career. I could not use any electricity, that would be huge! But, switch to what, solar, where would I get the cash to buy a system? There is only so much you can drop in society today and still live. My biggest 'luxury' is satellite TV, $66 a month. I used to say if I can not afford to go out to dinner once a month, what the heck am I working for? Now, I say, what can I buy for $20 that will last all week. *IF* I had set my life up different, as many here have, I could live on much less 'money'.

I have not tried going the 'entitlement' route... yet. I do hear that you can survive well off of the many programs available. You still need an income but that money takes the place of a job.

Sorry for the long winded response. I am just trying to point out that 'today' is not 9 or 12 years ago. This is todays job market. I have skills but it takes time to land an actual career position. Maybe not where you are, but in this area, yes. There are lots of skilled folks searching for positions. Yes, many are just 'job hopping', meaning younger folks who spend a year or two here them move. Me, I am old school, unfortunately. I am looking for a career where I am there for the long run. Perhaps I need to change my old school, company man thinking but that is just the way I was raised.


----------



## invision (Aug 14, 2012)

Woody said:


> As a recently laid off tech worker I can add insight to this. Yes, there are lots of jobs advertised, there are lots of jobs out there. Yes, most are part time, yes many are good full-time positions. But landing an actual career position these days is not as easy as stopping into the office, having a chat and shaking hands. It was years ago! I got my last job 12 and a half years ago doing just that. Today is a whole different ball game. Post your resume online and send to job offerings. There is no stopping into an office to see someone about a position. You might hear back within a week, sometimes two or more. Then there is the initial phone interview. If you make the short list, several more phone interviews to follow. A month or two later you may actually get to go for a face to face with someone. This will not be with the person offering the job, it is with HR to screen you. A week or two later you may hear back, maybe not, about if you have the job or not. Then you get called back to discuss terms... This is for an actual career opening. Getting a 'job' is easier. I landed a 'job' within a week of losing my last position. These are the positions where you fill out a paper copy of an application (first requirement you can read and write!). Turn it in and sit back waiting for a call. They call you in, offer you a wage and you accept it or don't, they have many more folks waiting for that position. They are part time. There is no wiggle room for hours, this is what they are, take it or leave it. Some of these employers are willing to work with people who have more then one job, which many folks do. So, yes, I am employed. Yes, I am working. Yes, I am counted in the official Govt. numbers. But! I do not make enough to pay expenses. I do not have a huge home, I live in a trailer with mortgage payments much less than most folks car payments. My car is paid for but I still have insurance on it, insurance on the trailer also as well as property taxes... With utilities, a garden and being frugal (spelled CHEAP :-})) I am losing money each month I work. It actually costs me to have a 'job' today. Could I cut back more and save money? SURE! I could drop the phone, but how would anyone contact me, that is $35 a month. I could drop internet, that saves $50 a month. But, how would I be able to post to PS, as well as search for my career. I could not use any electricity, that would be huge! But, switch to what, solar, where would I get the cash to buy a system? There is only so much you can drop in society today and still live. My biggest 'luxury' is satellite TV, $66 a month. I used to say if I can not afford to go out to dinner once a month, what the heck am I working for? Now, I say, what can I buy for $20 that will last all week. *IF* I had set my life up different, as many here have, I could live on much less 'money'. I have not tried going the 'entitlement' route... yet. I do hear that you can survive well off of the many programs available. You still need an income but that money takes the place of a job. Sorry for the long winded response. I am just trying to point out that 'today' is not 9 or 12 years ago. This is todays job market. I have skills but it takes time to land an actual career position. Maybe not where you are, but in this area, yes. There are lots of skilled folks searching for positions. Yes, many are just 'job hopping', meaning younger folks who spend a year or two here them move. Me, I am old school, unfortunately. I am looking for a career where I am there for the long run. Perhaps I need to change my old school, company man thinking but that is just the way I was raised.


When you say tech, you mean IT right? If so, the "career" track - meaning keep a job for life was killed in the dot com craze for those of us in that field. It's the plain old truth. My resume looks like this
1995-1995 6 months at a company doing tech support via phone 2 promotions 
1995-2000 at a company first doing tech support via phone to ending a staff engineer (9 promotions)
2000-2000 3 months at a startup - paper millionaire as a Project Manager
2000-2005 iT Director - bored made a phone call to a CIO buddy at law firm
20005-2005 -IT executive management position with Top 40 law firm - amazing 3 months 
2005 to now - CEO of a company I founded. Also during this time started 2 other companies - sold one and one didn't get funded.

Today's market is who you know, and how to try to back door into a job without having to fight the competition. But that works only with small companies, true story, my wife had a guy that worked for her back in MS, one of those, where you take that person with you types when you leave. Dude called her a few months ago, said he was getting 86'd and she just happened to have an open position, fast tracked the Hiring process - both CFOs liked him, got to take the HR tests - background (dealing with billions of dollars per month) passed...take the department accounting standards test... Passed... Takes the management standards test... Passed. Then the personality tests required for the position - failed. Could not hire him... Two C levels and my wife wanted him, and HR said nope.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

invision said:


> Then the personality tests required for the position - failed. Could not hire him... Two C levels and my wife wanted him, and HR said nope.


Geez!!! Whattheheck was on *that* test!!! That stinks!


----------



## invision (Aug 14, 2012)

LincTex said:


> Geez!!! Whattheheck was on that test!!! That stinks!


From my understanding each position has different personality trait requirements - a sr manager like the position must show natural leadership traits, aka type A personality..A account agent must have a determination of follow through, not afraid to talk to everyone, etc ect. According to my wife, he was more of a team player and showed more "follower" traits than leader, take charge etc. what is worse, she told him how to answer the questions, knowing what was required for the position... Because he followed his own path, he lost a 6 figure job working directly for my wife leading 2 of her 4 different departments in Accts Receivables.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

you have to love Government Accounting were two plus two equals 7.2 trillion


----------



## millertimedoneright (May 13, 2013)

I agree that finding a "career" may be a little tough but finding a good paying job isn't...it may not be what u want or where u want but they are there...their is so many thousands of "jobs" in the oil industry that they can't beg people to take...jobs making 18 an hour and up...my buddy walked in and was hired within an hour making 2000 a week salary with company truck...the problem is people refuse to travel to work and they refuse to do jobs "beneath" them...everywhere I look people are hiring...my company hires 20-30 people a month within a year maybe one of those original 30 will still be around cuz it's a job where you have to work away from home...starting pay at my job is around 35k a year but within 4 years it nothing to be making 130k+ a year...take any job you can find until something better comes along and work ur way up to where u want to be financially...


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

*I recently*

I recently took a job teaching at a local trade school.

It is part time but pays well and is something I can do to augment my disability. (spinal stenosis )

It is part time two nights per week during the fall and winter months.

I have never had a problem finding a job. People don't want to work.


----------



## millertimedoneright (May 13, 2013)

I know many people with all sorts of disabilities from back problems, heart problems, to mental retardation and they all have jobs and find work so a healthy individual had no excuse


----------



## invision (Aug 14, 2012)

millertimedoneright said:


> I know many people with all sorts of disabilities from back problems, heart problems, to mental retardation and they all have jobs and find work so a healthy individual had no excuse


Amen to that. I have had not 1 or 2 Heart attacks, but 3 including a quad bypass - all by the age of 42. It has never entered my mind that I could possibly "ride the system" nor would I. I am not disabled, I just have a high stress, don't eat as well as I should and still smoke... But that doesn't keep me from working hard at what I do.


----------

