Had my plan canceled because of BHO-care bullshit.
New plan mandates prescription drugs (I used to select one without this cz I have no need for prescription coverage), and all the other crap that makes it valid under this insanity.
New deductible is $600 (used to be 0).
PCP co-pay is 20 (same), specialist co-pay 40 (x2 what it used to be).
Coverage is 80/20 (used to be 100%).
Max out of pocket is 6K.
And finally, premium cost is up 23% on the year, and I believe this is just the beginning. Mind you, this is a state-sponsored option. Without that, cost would be closer to double 2013.
Fuck you very much, Mister President!
Hope-n-change, local style: a no-executive-experience talking suit with "proper" racial setup (family this time), running within a population with serious incumbent fatigue on promising tax hikes on the rich and free shit for his constituents...will now manage a place with giant financial responsibilities and hard decisions to be made.
Where have I seen this setup before...Did it work?
Так что мэр наш, душка нахуй, 50 миллионов на борьбу со злобным оскалом NRA не пожалел...а так чтоб по прямым обязанностям велополосу почистить, так это уж извините. Я, блядь, даже не говою положить новый асфальт, Боже упаси. Это из заоблачных мечтаний. Хотя бы уберите, суки, песок со старого раздолбанного асфальта, который смыло в нескольких местах ещё во время Айрин...
Скотобаза, а не мэрия.
California voters made more history on election day, giving Democrats what appeared to be gains in Assembly and Senate races that would provide a two-thirds majority in both chambers. That’s enough to let them pass most legislation, including tax measures, without Republican cooperation. The last time the state’s legislature was controlled with a supermajority of the same party was in 1933
Had a post-apocalyptic beer last night with colleagues.
Conversation steered towards gas lines and prices, and "gouging". I said that the government should allow outsiders to bring in gas at a premium to ensure supply. All my colleagues were against it, because that would be unfair, meaning only the wealthy would get the gas at the high prices the station would charge. I said the bottom line is it would be fair, but there would be no gas. They said it's better if people wait for hours at a gas station but know that everyone's chance to get said gas is the same, rich or poor. They also said that if gas prices were up, people would start going crazy because they won't be able to afford it, leading to increase in violence. They also had a problem with people making money at the time of disasters, be it oil/gas producers or the station owners.
I kept saying that no matter what happens, if there is no supply, there is no gas on the ground for people to have, fair or not. The question is -- how do you ensure increased supply? You have to pay a premium, because to me the laws of supply and demand don't stop working because a crisis is on...I said that if they had a problem with prices going up at the pump, perhaps the government can shield the consumers from the increase by paying that premium delta direct to suppliers -- that way they can ensure supply and ensure that everyone pays the same at the pump, maintaining fairness.
Amazingly enough, my colleagues had a problem with that too -- "imagine the PR disaster for the supplier if people found out the oil company charged government extra at the time of crisis". "But there would be gas" -- I said. Still, I don't think I made a dent there.
I am not big on economy, but fuck -- why do people have a problem with crisis-time premiums? Why do they think that supply and demand just magically stop working during crisis times? Why, for the love of God, is it better to have no gas (or little gas) and wait in line for hours to ensure "fairness" than let someone make a profit by supplying gas-starved areas??
And mind you -- these are educated people from financial services industry talking...
-- A writer for the New-York Gazette, in the middle of the deep crisis of 1765