Bob's on the radio (again!) in the morning (7:00 AM!!) to talk about today's court ruling outlawing "ObamaCrap." Click here and then hit the "listen live" button.
Breaking News: Judge Rules ObamaCare© Unconstitutional
The good news is that the US District Judge in Florida - you know, the 20+-state case judge? - has ruled the (Evil) Individual Mandate unconstitutional. Further, he found that it was such an integral part of "The Act" as to render the rest moot.
The bad news, if it can truly be deemed that, is that it is not dispositive; that is, the case will continue "upstream" to the Supreme Court, where it will join its sister cases before that august body.
As always, we'll keep you posted.
The bad news, if it can truly be deemed that, is that it is not dispositive; that is, the case will continue "upstream" to the Supreme Court, where it will join its sister cases before that august body.
As always, we'll keep you posted.
HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious in HD?
Maybe she just can't help herself; after all, when you're not the sharpest scalpel on the tray, you're not really expected to make a lot of sense. And, of course, Ms Shecantbeserious is rather dull, which may explain this little non-sequitor:
"[I]f I don’t have a 27-inch TV for the Super Bowl, I can’t demand on the day of the Super Bowl that somebody deliver that TV because I have a right to it. On the other hand, if I don’t have insurance, I come through the door of an emergency room and get treated and get cared for, and somebody else picks up the tab."
What Madame Secretary is referring to is EMTALA, a law that predates ObamaCare© by decades, and requires only immediate, critical care, not a long-term return to health. It should surprise no one, of course, that Kathy thinks that watching the Super Bowl is akin to saving someone's life; after all, these are the folks bringing us Death Panels.
Her point, so far as she actually has one, is that citizens should be forced to buy health insurance, whether they want to or not. It's not clear whether or not she also wants to make watching the Super Bowl mandatory; in such an event, perhaps the Death Panels don't look so bad after all.
It's almost amusing: having lost the "health insurance is the same as auto insurance" debate, the forces of ObamaCare© are reduced to "the Super Bowl is the same as health insurance." What's not funny, of course, is that these are the same folks granting waivers hither and yon, and who think that the public is stupid enough to buy their silly arguments.
Don't bet on it.
FACEPALM!
In the comments, Bob (correctly) points out that he'd made this call some ago. Timeless, and timely.
"[I]f I don’t have a 27-inch TV for the Super Bowl, I can’t demand on the day of the Super Bowl that somebody deliver that TV because I have a right to it. On the other hand, if I don’t have insurance, I come through the door of an emergency room and get treated and get cared for, and somebody else picks up the tab."
What Madame Secretary is referring to is EMTALA, a law that predates ObamaCare© by decades, and requires only immediate, critical care, not a long-term return to health. It should surprise no one, of course, that Kathy thinks that watching the Super Bowl is akin to saving someone's life; after all, these are the folks bringing us Death Panels.
Her point, so far as she actually has one, is that citizens should be forced to buy health insurance, whether they want to or not. It's not clear whether or not she also wants to make watching the Super Bowl mandatory; in such an event, perhaps the Death Panels don't look so bad after all.
It's almost amusing: having lost the "health insurance is the same as auto insurance" debate, the forces of ObamaCare© are reduced to "the Super Bowl is the same as health insurance." What's not funny, of course, is that these are the same folks granting waivers hither and yon, and who think that the public is stupid enough to buy their silly arguments.
Don't bet on it.
FACEPALM!
In the comments, Bob (correctly) points out that he'd made this call some ago. Timeless, and timely.
ObamaTolls©
PowerLine's John Hinderaker gets the WaiverMania impetus exactly right:
"[T]he vicious strategy at the heart of Obamacare [is to] pass terrible legislation, and then collect a toll by exempting your friends--those who pay you lots of money--from that legislation, while your enemies have to live with it."
In this case, the toll actually came before the legislation: look at how many of these waivers go to PresBo's union buddies, who so vociferously (and generou$ly) supported him and his policies. These organizations allegedly represent the interests of millions of workers, those for whom ObamaCare© was ostensibly designed to protect. One wonders how to reconcile these transparently contradictory goals.
I can, however, think of a term which describes it.
"[T]he vicious strategy at the heart of Obamacare [is to] pass terrible legislation, and then collect a toll by exempting your friends--those who pay you lots of money--from that legislation, while your enemies have to live with it."
In this case, the toll actually came before the legislation: look at how many of these waivers go to PresBo's union buddies, who so vociferously (and generou$ly) supported him and his policies. These organizations allegedly represent the interests of millions of workers, those for whom ObamaCare© was ostensibly designed to protect. One wonders how to reconcile these transparently contradictory goals.
I can, however, think of a term which describes it.
Guess what! We're THIS MANY Years Old!
Yes, six years (and 4,000+ posts) later, we're still going strong. Thanks to our readers for sticking by us, and a Special Thanks to my co-bloggers for their great insights.
Abigail and the Kingdom of Fairs
Save a distressed magical Kingdom to find your way back home in Abigail and the Kingdom of Fairs, a wonderful carnival building adventure.
* Visit a magical realm to build fairs in this enchanting Building Management journey.
* Challenge more than 50 wonderful levels in five mercurial locations.
* Build candy shops, magic schools, oracle tents, and more.
* Upgrade structures, instruct new magicians, and vanquish monsters.
* Call in for new supplies and keep the fair-goers happy to find your way home.
Shecantbeserious Channels Barney Fife
When she's not granting ObamaWaivers© to PresBo's minions, HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious manages to help an escaped convict elude Federal Marshals:
"While one federal agency was doggedly hunting a fugitive drug smuggler who fled the country 31 years ago, others arranged for his return to South Florida and even loaned him money for housing when he landed here."
And who were these mysterious "others?" Well, none other than "the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services" under the (ahem) watchful eye of Ms Shecatbeserious.
And these are the folks slated to run our health care system?
[Hat Tip: Ace of Spades]
"While one federal agency was doggedly hunting a fugitive drug smuggler who fled the country 31 years ago, others arranged for his return to South Florida and even loaned him money for housing when he landed here."
And who were these mysterious "others?" Well, none other than "the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services" under the (ahem) watchful eye of Ms Shecatbeserious.
And these are the folks slated to run our health care system?
[Hat Tip: Ace of Spades]
Obamacare - Another One Bites The Dust
Obamacare has led to one more health insurance company withdrawing from the market. This means less competition, fewer choices, higher rates. Aetna is pulling out of the Colorado market as of 2/1/2011. They will no longer offer health insurance for individuals, families or self employed in Colorado.
Aetna decided to withdraw from the small group health insurance market in Colorado last October (2010), so this is a natural progression.
Existing major medical policyholders will be offered one 12 month renewal before their coverage with Aetna terminates.
Aetna is still under a cloud imposed by CMS (Center for Medicare Services) and is enjoined from offering Medicare Advantage plans anywhere in the United States. This sanction has lasted for a year with no indication it will be lifted any time soon.
As for now, Aetna has not indicated they will withdraw from the individual major medical market or small group market in any other states, including Georgia. Given their relatively small market share we would not be surprised in seeing them systematically withdraw from other states over the next few months.
If you currently have Aetna coverage for individual major medical or small group coverage, now might be a good time to consider making a change.
Employer group health plans can move at any time without loss of coverage.
Individuals in GA and other states are not as lucky. Only those who can pass underwriting will be able to move to a new health insurance company. Do not drop your Aetna coverage until you have secured new coverage from a new health insurance company. Do not make application with a new health insurance company until you have had your medical conditions pre-screened by a competent health insurance agent.
Farm Mania: Hot Vacation
Our friends Anna, Bob, Grandma and Grandpa are coming back again!This time while being on vacation they decided to take part in the Best Farmer competition. Help them to prove everyone that they are the best! Travel all over the hot countries together with our heroes, visit Australia, Egypt and China.
Seeing through the MVNHS©
As we've long since noted, our country's cancer survival rates put those of our Cousins Across the Pond to shame. And it's episodes like this one which help explain why:
"At least one of four people whose cancer diagnosis was delayed at Londonderry's Altnagelvin Hospital has since died ... The delays happened after written assessments of 18,500 X-rays were not carried out."
Ooopsy.
Here's a poser:
"It is not yet clear whether the delay in diagnosis contributed to the death."
And yet:
"The huge backlog emerged last July when it came to light that important reports had not been completed by clinicians."
Move along, nothing to see here.
"At least one of four people whose cancer diagnosis was delayed at Londonderry's Altnagelvin Hospital has since died ... The delays happened after written assessments of 18,500 X-rays were not carried out."
Ooopsy.
Here's a poser:
"It is not yet clear whether the delay in diagnosis contributed to the death."
And yet:
"The huge backlog emerged last July when it came to light that important reports had not been completed by clinicians."
Move along, nothing to see here.
Seniors in the Crosshairs - Medicare and Social Security
Seniors are caught up in a financial heart attack over funding for Social Security and Medicare. Reports out of Washington, released AFTER the State of the Union speech, hold daunting news for seniors dependent on SS and Medicare to get by.
As reported by NPR, the CBO has this to say about Social Security.
Social Security will run at a deficit this year and keep on running in the red until its trust funds are drained by about 2037
Based on my family history, I figure St. Peter will call me home about the time Social Security runs out of money, so maybe I am in the clear.
This year alone, Social Security will pay out $45 billion more in retirement, disability and survivors' benefits than it collects in payroll taxes, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said. That figure nearly triples to $130 billion when the new one-year cut in payroll taxes is included.
That doesn't sound good. Wonder how our line of credit with the Chinese is holding up?
This year alone Washington is expected to spend $1.5 trillion more than they take in which means those extra dollars have to come from somewhere.
So how about Medicare?
Well Medicare is sick too.
Medicare's Chief Actuary Richard Foster (the green eye-shade guy) says Obamacrap won't live up to it's promise to save money.
Well, duh!
Foster was asked by Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., for a simple true or false response on two of the main assertions made by supporters of the law: that it will bring down unsustainable medical costs and will let people keep their current health insurance if they like it.
On the costs issue, "I would say false, more so than true," Foster responded.
As for people getting to keep their coverage, "not true in all cases."
Blow me away!
Obamacrap will not reduce health care costs and if you like your plan and want to keep it, too bad.
Seems like the public is getting screwed and no one bothered to buy us a drink or bring us flowers.
And bad news for Medicare beneficiaries as well.
Costs could also increase if Medicare cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and home health agencies turn out to be politically unsustainable over the years. The actuary's office has projected those cuts would eventually force about 15 percent of providers into the red. The health care law funnels savings from the Medicare cuts to provide coverage to uninsured workers and their families.
If the cuts cause Medicare providers to lose money, care to guess what happens then?
Do you suppose it will be harder to see a Medicare doctor?
Yeah, probably.
Doesn't sound good for those with Medicare Advantage plans either.
As for people getting to keep their health insurance plan, Foster's office is projecting that more than 7 million Medicare recipients in private Medicare Advantage plans will eventually have to find other coverage, cutting enrollment in the plans by about half.
Medicare Advantage plans will go poof.
We expect that to hit hard later this year (2011) when Medicare Advantage carriers send out notices of non-renewal.
Charm Tale 2: Mermaid Lagoon
Dive into and explore an underwater country, and help Dorothy find out the truth about her family and save her daughter! Solve different kinds of puzzles and talk to sea creatures, who will guide you to the sea king! Create large chains of gems and collect artifacts in Charm Tale 2 – Mermaid Lagoon. Uncover clues and save the day in this fun and exciting Match 3 game!
Shop it Up
It's the grand opening of the new mall, the customers are already inside, but the mall is not ready! Your skills are needed to open and decorate new shops. Boost profits with dazzling inventory displays and fancy advertisements As the new boss, you’ll need meet challenges from the local business leaders. Fun is in the bag…play Shop it Up!
Jewel Keepers: Easter Island
One day Professor “H”, the world-class expert on Easter Island, received a strange letter from its capital Hanga Roa. It was a cry for help from somebody unknown. It said that something bad was going on the island. Without any hesitation, Professor, together with his assistant Joel and his granddaughter Ivie, rushed to the island, where the puzzles, mysteries and quests awaited them. Can you help him to reveal the biggest secret of Easter Island?
Ceridian's 2-cent Moment
As you may have read, cancer patient Ron Flanagan lost his insurance coverage because his premium payment was $.02 short.
Problem is, that's only part of the story, and as we've seen before, the press rarely looks beyond the popular narrative to see if, perhaps, there's more to the story.
And there is.
First, a quick primer on how COBRA works: when one leaves a COBRA-compliant employer (generally, any company with 20 or more full-time employees) one is entitled to stay on that employer's group plan for up to 18 months, as long as one pays the premium (plus a nominal handling charge) fully and on time. Since tracking this can be a time-consuming (and potentially legally treacherous) course, many employers out-source COBRA compliance to one of the many services which specialize in it. Ceridian is one such service. They are required to follow the law, which they (apparently) did.
I spoke briefly with a Ceridian spokescritter yesterday, who told me that once they were informed of the situation by both Mr Flanagan and the press, they persuaded the employer to reinstate coverage. Unfortunately, the rest of our conversation was off the record. I had hoped to confirm several other pieces of information, but Ceridian doesn't appear anxious to "set the record straight."
Which is a shame, really, because there's some obvious problems that should be addressed by pretty much all the parties involved. I'll start with Ceridian, which really should have more human-centric systems in place to alert them that a "de minimis" (that is "short") payment shouldn't automatically trigger a cancellation. Perhaps this was at the request of the employer (as seems probable), but in this age of automation it doesn't seem far-fetched that this could simply generate an electronic "red flag."
The problem then becomes "what's a de minimis" payment: 2 cents? 2 dollars? 20 dollars? 200 dollars? When you start making exceptions, you open yourself up to a lot of litigation.
Next, let's turn our attention to the Flanagan's. One can certainly sympathize with their plight, and it's easy to make a simple mistake on a check. But they were notified of the shortage and apparently did nothing to confirm that their coverage was still intact until they got to the doctor's office. If someone's suffering a life-threatening illness, doesn't it make sense to make sure that all the i's are dotted and t's crossed? From the accounts that I've read, it appears that Ceridian attempted more than once to alert them to the potential loss of coverage.
It's still not clear to me how this all played out "behind the scenes." For example, was this a self-funded plan, and is that perhaps relevant? Was it fully insured, and thus the cancellation generated by the carrier? Certainly, Ceridian had no reason to arbitrarily cancel the policy: for one thing, they weren't paying any claims; for another, it cost them whatever fees they were being paid on Mr Flanagan's behalf.
Should Ceridian have been more pro-active before issuing the cancellation? Perhaps, but COBRA law and regulations are murky at best, and it's often prudent to simply follow the letter of the law. That's not to excuse anyone, but to acknowledge reality.
Problem is, that's only part of the story, and as we've seen before, the press rarely looks beyond the popular narrative to see if, perhaps, there's more to the story.
And there is.
First, a quick primer on how COBRA works: when one leaves a COBRA-compliant employer (generally, any company with 20 or more full-time employees) one is entitled to stay on that employer's group plan for up to 18 months, as long as one pays the premium (plus a nominal handling charge) fully and on time. Since tracking this can be a time-consuming (and potentially legally treacherous) course, many employers out-source COBRA compliance to one of the many services which specialize in it. Ceridian is one such service. They are required to follow the law, which they (apparently) did.
I spoke briefly with a Ceridian spokescritter yesterday, who told me that once they were informed of the situation by both Mr Flanagan and the press, they persuaded the employer to reinstate coverage. Unfortunately, the rest of our conversation was off the record. I had hoped to confirm several other pieces of information, but Ceridian doesn't appear anxious to "set the record straight."
Which is a shame, really, because there's some obvious problems that should be addressed by pretty much all the parties involved. I'll start with Ceridian, which really should have more human-centric systems in place to alert them that a "de minimis" (that is "short") payment shouldn't automatically trigger a cancellation. Perhaps this was at the request of the employer (as seems probable), but in this age of automation it doesn't seem far-fetched that this could simply generate an electronic "red flag."
The problem then becomes "what's a de minimis" payment: 2 cents? 2 dollars? 20 dollars? 200 dollars? When you start making exceptions, you open yourself up to a lot of litigation.
Next, let's turn our attention to the Flanagan's. One can certainly sympathize with their plight, and it's easy to make a simple mistake on a check. But they were notified of the shortage and apparently did nothing to confirm that their coverage was still intact until they got to the doctor's office. If someone's suffering a life-threatening illness, doesn't it make sense to make sure that all the i's are dotted and t's crossed? From the accounts that I've read, it appears that Ceridian attempted more than once to alert them to the potential loss of coverage.
It's still not clear to me how this all played out "behind the scenes." For example, was this a self-funded plan, and is that perhaps relevant? Was it fully insured, and thus the cancellation generated by the carrier? Certainly, Ceridian had no reason to arbitrarily cancel the policy: for one thing, they weren't paying any claims; for another, it cost them whatever fees they were being paid on Mr Flanagan's behalf.
Should Ceridian have been more pro-active before issuing the cancellation? Perhaps, but COBRA law and regulations are murky at best, and it's often prudent to simply follow the letter of the law. That's not to excuse anyone, but to acknowledge reality.
Email on Email: Retirees and HSAs
About three years ago, we answered a reader's email about HSA's and retiree medical coverage. Recently, we received a follow-up email from another reader:
"Hello,
I just read your ... entry on HSA's and those eligible for Medicare. We have a related question: If the employee is 63 and has an HDHP with an HSA, and his wife is 65 and has Medicare Parts A and B, can she still be on his HDHP? Can he make the family contribution amount into the HSA, ie $6150 plus his catch up contribution since he is the employee and is not on Medicare and he is the eligible employee and she is the dependent?
Or, is she just not able to participate in the HSA so therefore he can only make a single HSA contribution of $3050 plus his catchup contribution?
Thank you,
[Loyal Reader]"
We're always happy to answer our readers' questions, and sometimes (such as in this case) share them as a post (maintaining anonymity, of course). It seems to me that, as the Boomers come of age, a lot of folks will be asking these questions. So, I turned to our own on-call FlexBenefits guru, Alissa Culp of FlexBank. Alissa's graciously answered our questions (which I've already forwarded to our correspondent):
Q: If the employee is 63 and has a HDHP with a HSA, and his wife is 65 and has Medicare Part A and Part B, can she still be on his HDHP?
A: Yes.
Q: Can he make the family contribution amount ... ie $6150 + his catch up contribution?
A: He can make the family contribution only if he has family coverage.
Q: Is she just not able to participate in the HSA ... he can only make a single HSA contribution of $3050 plus his catchup contribution?
A: His maximum contribution into his HSA depends on his coverage type. If he has family coverage, he can contribute the family maximum. If he has single coverage, he can contribute up to the single maximum.
Alissa also sent along a helpful guide that expands on some of this information; drop us a line if you’d like a copy.
Thanks, Alissa and [Loyal Reader]!
"Hello,
I just read your ... entry on HSA's and those eligible for Medicare. We have a related question: If the employee is 63 and has an HDHP with an HSA, and his wife is 65 and has Medicare Parts A and B, can she still be on his HDHP? Can he make the family contribution amount into the HSA, ie $6150 plus his catch up contribution since he is the employee and is not on Medicare and he is the eligible employee and she is the dependent?
Or, is she just not able to participate in the HSA so therefore he can only make a single HSA contribution of $3050 plus his catchup contribution?
Thank you,
[Loyal Reader]"
We're always happy to answer our readers' questions, and sometimes (such as in this case) share them as a post (maintaining anonymity, of course). It seems to me that, as the Boomers come of age, a lot of folks will be asking these questions. So, I turned to our own on-call FlexBenefits guru, Alissa Culp of FlexBank. Alissa's graciously answered our questions (which I've already forwarded to our correspondent):
Q: If the employee is 63 and has a HDHP with a HSA, and his wife is 65 and has Medicare Part A and Part B, can she still be on his HDHP?
A: Yes.
Q: Can he make the family contribution amount ... ie $6150 + his catch up contribution?
A: He can make the family contribution only if he has family coverage.
Q: Is she just not able to participate in the HSA ... he can only make a single HSA contribution of $3050 plus his catchup contribution?
A: His maximum contribution into his HSA depends on his coverage type. If he has family coverage, he can contribute the family maximum. If he has single coverage, he can contribute up to the single maximum.
Alissa also sent along a helpful guide that expands on some of this information; drop us a line if you’d like a copy.
Thanks, Alissa and [Loyal Reader]!
WaiverMania: Catch the Waive! [UPDATED & BUMPED]
By our most recent count, 222 plans had been granted waivers from all or part of ObamaCare©.
You just knew there'd be more, but who could have known just how many?
IB readers had a clue.
And they were right:
"President Obama’s health department made public new waivers for more than more than 500 groups."
Although I was told that there'd be no math, that figure is more than double the previous total. At this rate, we may not have to even worry about ObamaCare© at all: pretty soon, everyone will be waived.
We wish.
The current tally, by the way, stands at over 2 million participants whose plans are not subject to the draconian mandates set forth in the plan we had to "pass to see what's in it."
Never let it be said, though, that HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious has no sense of humor:
"HHS said Wednesday night that it wants to make the waiver process transparent."
Oh, it's transparent, Kathy: we can see right through you.
UPDATE: Well, well, well. Apparently, those Republican party-poopers in Congress aren't catching The Waive:
"The Obama administration’s waivers ... are a “perfect example of special interests” having influence in the administration and will be looked into by Congress"
Sen Charles Grassley of Iowa is calling the Obamastration on its early promise to eschew "special interests," citing the fact that so many of those granted waivers seem to be unions and their ilk. Although the investigations will take place in the House, the Senator has pledged to aid them in their quest to shed some light on the process.
Things could get interesting...
You just knew there'd be more, but who could have known just how many?
IB readers had a clue.
And they were right:
"President Obama’s health department made public new waivers for more than more than 500 groups."
Although I was told that there'd be no math, that figure is more than double the previous total. At this rate, we may not have to even worry about ObamaCare© at all: pretty soon, everyone will be waived.
We wish.
The current tally, by the way, stands at over 2 million participants whose plans are not subject to the draconian mandates set forth in the plan we had to "pass to see what's in it."
Never let it be said, though, that HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious has no sense of humor:
"HHS said Wednesday night that it wants to make the waiver process transparent."
Oh, it's transparent, Kathy: we can see right through you.
UPDATE: Well, well, well. Apparently, those Republican party-poopers in Congress aren't catching The Waive:
"The Obama administration’s waivers ... are a “perfect example of special interests” having influence in the administration and will be looked into by Congress"
Sen Charles Grassley of Iowa is calling the Obamastration on its early promise to eschew "special interests," citing the fact that so many of those granted waivers seem to be unions and their ilk. Although the investigations will take place in the House, the Senator has pledged to aid them in their quest to shed some light on the process.
Things could get interesting...
Sure beats the lizard!
Now this is a great car insurance commercial:
[Major Hat Tip to Russell at Chatswood Moneyblog for the vid]
Family Games – Pen & Paper Edition
* BattleFleet
* Noughts & Crosses (Tic-Tac-Toe)
* Matchsticks
* Squares (Dots)
* 4 In-A-Row
* Nine Men’s Morris (Mill)
* Hangman
* Safe Cracker
Shadow Wolf Mysteries: Curse of the Full Moon CE
Called into a small city from the capitol, you have been put in charge of solving a string of mysterious murders! Around the same time as the murders, a wolf has been appearing around town and spooking the townsfolk. With rumors of a werewolf swirling, it’s up to you to get to the bottom of the mystery and set the record straight in Shadow Wolf Mysteries: Curse of the Full Moon!
California Gold Rush
First we were delivered from the evil health insurance companies by Obamacrap. As originally written and signed in to law, Obamacrap prohibited health insurance companies from excluding pre-existing health insurance conditions from coverage on children under the age of 19.
And the mob was pleased.
But the clowns that wrote the law, which they never read until after it was passed, left the insurance companies an out.
Essentially the way Obamacrap was written, IF a health insurance company issued a policy on a child under the age of 19 they would be required to cover any pre-existing medical conditions.
That was a big "if".
If a condition was overly expensive to treat, creating a situation where the carrier would lose money by issuing a policy, Obamacrap allowed them to just say no.
Enter the chief clown to the rescue.
HHS Secretary Shebullshits issued a decree which applied to all carriers throughout the land. Henceforth, by command of Shebullshits, health insurance companies could not refuse to issue a policy on a child.
In essence, she created a provision by fiat that did not exist in the law.
Carriers again reacted by agreeing to issue policies on children, but only if applied as a dependent of a healthy adult.
Again the mob complained that this was not fair. To deny coverage for sick children was bad, but to require parents as part of the package wasn't right.
Enter the California goon squad to save the day. California declared it was unlawful for carriers to require parents to buy health insurance if they wanted coverage on their children.
Think about the irony for a moment.
A key provision of Obamacrap, and one that has generated the loudest protest, is the individual mandate. Once fully implemented, all citizens of this formerly free nation, will be required to buy health insurance or else pay a tax unto Caesar.
But when an insurance company seeks to apply a mandate that adults purchase health insurance in order to also cover their children, this is also considered unfair.
California officials listened to the mob and henceforth declared a mandate for adults of minor children is unjust and passed a law making the parental mandate illegal.
Just like that, the parental mandate is illegal in CA but the Obamacrap mandate is legal . . . at least for now.
But the fire sale on children's health insurance in California is about to end. When the lefty state declared that carriers MUST cover children they conceded there MIGHT be adverse selection unless a window of opportunity was created.
And that window is about to close.
The LATimes reports Cali lawmakers are urging parents to act responsibly and secure coverage for their sick children, creating, in effect, a new kind of gold rush.
The law, which took effect Jan. 1, allows parents to apply for the coverage during an open enrollment period that runs until March 1, or in the month after their children's birthdays.
"The law is only effective if parents take advantage of it
Well, duh!
So parents of sick children, apply now before it is too late.
The carriers have agreed to comply with this mandate, as if they had a choice, but have come back with their own response.
Blue Shield of California has asked for a 59% rate increase on health insurance plans.
Somehow I doubt they will be the last to ask for a significant rate increase. There is also speculation that Blue Shield will bow out of the individual health insurance market.
And so it goes . . .
ACO's - How They Work
Yesterday we learned how an Accountable Care Organization might be set up. Today we will look at an ACO in practice.
Or maybe not . . .
Magic Sweets
Conquer the Magic Academy’s inhabitants using yummy meals spiced with superb spells in Magic Sweets, a fun Time Management game! Help Dino, a tiny baby dragon, and his mistress cook up some exquisite food and delicious pastries as you master the culinary crafts. Work like mad to keep your clientele content and stuffed full of your amazing treats.
This Just In: ObamaLied©
Not to put too fine a point on it, of course, but here's what the (ostensibly) non-partisan Medicare Actuary just officially announced:
"[ObamaCare©] probably won't hold costs down, and it won't let everybody keep their current health insurance if they like it."
In other related news, the sun is expected to rise in the east tomorrow, and next month is expected to be February.
That is all.
"[ObamaCare©] probably won't hold costs down, and it won't let everybody keep their current health insurance if they like it."
In other related news, the sun is expected to rise in the east tomorrow, and next month is expected to be February.
That is all.
ACO's - Accountable Care Organization
Accountable Care Organizations will deliver a more affordable health care system, save money, and allow Obama to be re-elected.
Well, maybe . . .
Cavalcade of Risk #123 now online
Notwithstanding blog presents this week's roundup of risk-related goodness. Take a chance and stop on by!
And please note: If your post is included, you are expected to link back.
And please note: If your post is included, you are expected to link back.
Protectorate Trooper Concept Art
Just a heads up, I am still casting the Mortis. I have been busy locating a contract caster and have had some success. I will post any available Mortis models here soooo, if you want one of the limited edition models keep your eyes peeled to this blog.
Now on to some concept art.
I wanted to make something for the Protectorate that was immediately identifiable as Soviet era military but with updates to make it sci-fi. The problem with today’s military, is that forces from around the world look strikingly similar when it comes to body armor. Their weapons and camouflage patterns are often the only real visual clue as to the country of origin. In the Iron-Core universe, the factions are separated and evolved distinctively from one another. I felt it was important to keep their visual roots intact while updating the equipment.
In this concept I gave a big nod to the Soviet era by taking some distinctively Soviet traits and turning them into design cues. I turned the fir cap into a hard plate helmet with built in sensors and a hard plate mask that strongly resembles a gas mask. I gave the trooper a chest rig and an updated the ppsh41 machine-gun to an energy weapon. Add the early Soviet style uniform complete with bed roll. Roll in a smattering of plate armor protecting the chest and upper arms, and viola! A Protectorate trooper.
I have never considered myself a digital artist; this is perhaps the third Photoshop painting I have attempted. Although I am fairly happy with the results, when I look at the digital art floating around out there, I feel rather Meh.. about my own work. I would love to improve in this area. Perhaps someday I can head back to school to update my skills using today’s media.
Another One Bites the Dust
Remember that ObamaPromise© that "if you like your health insurance, you can keep your insurance?" And remember when (just 3 short months ago) The Principal and UHC put the lie to that vow? Well, it just got kicked again:
"Today, Guardian announced plans to withdraw our medical insurance product line from all states, pending regulatory approval. This means we will no longer quote any new medical insurance business and we will work to wind down our existing medical business over the next two years."
[ed: That's from an email we just received; so far, this hasn't shown up at the company website]
Around these parts, Guardian wasn't exactly a major player in the medical insurance arena, so the impact is likely to be fairly small. Still, it's one more notch in ObamaCare©'s belt.
To paraphrase Bob, "Poppa Washington: less choice, fewer carriers."
UPDATE: No sooner did I hit the "go" button on this post than another email arrived, this one from UHC:
"UnitedHealthcare Employer & Individual has entered into an agreement to renew medical insurance coverage for The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America's medical plan customers."
Does anyone else see a pattern emerging here? Is anyone else just a wee bit concerned about it?
"Today, Guardian announced plans to withdraw our medical insurance product line from all states, pending regulatory approval. This means we will no longer quote any new medical insurance business and we will work to wind down our existing medical business over the next two years."
[ed: That's from an email we just received; so far, this hasn't shown up at the company website]
Around these parts, Guardian wasn't exactly a major player in the medical insurance arena, so the impact is likely to be fairly small. Still, it's one more notch in ObamaCare©'s belt.
To paraphrase Bob, "Poppa Washington: less choice, fewer carriers."
UPDATE: No sooner did I hit the "go" button on this post than another email arrived, this one from UHC:
"UnitedHealthcare Employer & Individual has entered into an agreement to renew medical insurance coverage for The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America's medical plan customers."
Does anyone else see a pattern emerging here? Is anyone else just a wee bit concerned about it?
1 + 1 = 0
As we've long since noted, one of the (unintended?) effects of ObamaCare© is a shortage of physicians. As we reported last month, "40% of doctors said they would "retire, seek a nonclinical job in health care, or seek a job or business unrelated to health care." Dr Bradley Wertheim, looking at the facts through a slightly different lens, finds that new physician training standards will exacerbate the problem:
"[S]taffing requirements further underpin the argument for 30-hour shifts and 80-hour workweeks. The problem is simple: We have too many patients and too few doctors."
In a related development, FoIB Holly R tipped us to news on the doctor-owned hospital front. Previously, we reported that the "health care overhaul law closes the door on future physician-owned hospitals;" Holly's link expands on that point:
"The construction of physician-owned hospitals, which has been halted or jeopardized due to Section 6001 of healthcare reform, could have provided $200 million in tax revenue and 30,000 jobs to local communities ..."
The point is that it's not just the doc's who are affected by this, but the architects, contractors, carpenters, plumbers ... well, you get the picture. It's a very expensive ripple effect. And it affects us health care consumers, as well: fewer hospitals means less competition, and thus higher prices. And, of course, higher health care costs means higher health insurance costs.
And it's not just those direct costs that matter. According to the Physician Hospitals of America, "physician owned hospitals pour millions into local businesses, collectively spending $4.2 billion per year, or $15 million for every community that has" one. That's a lot of economic impact, now frittered away.
"[S]taffing requirements further underpin the argument for 30-hour shifts and 80-hour workweeks. The problem is simple: We have too many patients and too few doctors."
In a related development, FoIB Holly R tipped us to news on the doctor-owned hospital front. Previously, we reported that the "health care overhaul law closes the door on future physician-owned hospitals;" Holly's link expands on that point:
"The construction of physician-owned hospitals, which has been halted or jeopardized due to Section 6001 of healthcare reform, could have provided $200 million in tax revenue and 30,000 jobs to local communities ..."
The point is that it's not just the doc's who are affected by this, but the architects, contractors, carpenters, plumbers ... well, you get the picture. It's a very expensive ripple effect. And it affects us health care consumers, as well: fewer hospitals means less competition, and thus higher prices. And, of course, higher health care costs means higher health insurance costs.
And it's not just those direct costs that matter. According to the Physician Hospitals of America, "physician owned hospitals pour millions into local businesses, collectively spending $4.2 billion per year, or $15 million for every community that has" one. That's a lot of economic impact, now frittered away.
Oprah, Tom and Tiger vs MLR
What do a talk show host, a movie star and a golf legend have to do with Medical Loss Ratios (MLR)? This clever video has the down low:
My only real quibble with the vid is that it continues the conflation of health care with health insurance. For a more detailed explication of MLR, be sure to check out Mike and Bob's take on the subject.
[Video Hat Tip: Avik Roy]
My only real quibble with the vid is that it continues the conflation of health care with health insurance. For a more detailed explication of MLR, be sure to check out Mike and Bob's take on the subject.
[Video Hat Tip: Avik Roy]
Physics and Heightmaps
When I thought that all problems with heightmaps was over, I stumbled upon something sort of tricky recently. The only thing I had left for heightmaps was to add physics to them. This seemed easy to do as it was basically just a matter of sending the raw heightmap data to the physics engine (newton game dynamics) However just as I had done this I realized that this was not enough: the terrain could have many different physical properties at different places (a spot with dirt, one with rock, etc).The thing is that in physics simulations you give a material per shape, each material having certain properties (friction, etc) and special effects (sounds, etc). The heightmap is counted as a single shape, and thus it only has a single physics material. This was something I had totally forgotten. Luckily, the physics engine supports the assigning of special properties to each point in the heightmap. Once I found the proper info, it was pretty simple to add this (see here).
Now it was just a matter of adding extra material values to the heightmap (basically just an array of single integers, the id of the physics material at each point). My initial idea was that this could be "painted" on as an extra step, and to be sure I asked Jens what he thought about it. His reaction was that this would be way too much work and wondered if it could not be auto-generated instead. We already had a physics material assigned to each render material, so the basic info was easily accessible.
However, when I started to thinking about this, I found the actual auto-generation increasingly tricky. How should we determine which of the many blended materials to set the physics properties (blending was not possible)? Also, how do I get this information, considering that the blend textures can saved as compressed textures, into a CPU buffer?
The way we chose to solve the material picking was that the top visible (meaning over a certain limit opacity) blend material always sets the physics material. This allows map creators to set priority on materials in terms of physics, by simply placing them at different places among all blend materials. For example, if a material like gravel should also have its effects shown no matter what it is blended with, then it should be placed high up in the list. While currently untested this seem pretty nice and can also be tweaked a bit (like having something else determining priority).
The generation of this data was made by rendering the blend textures to an off-screen target and then grabbing the data into normal memory. What this meant is that the GPU would decompress any packed textures for us. This also solved some other problems, like the need to resize the texture according to heightmap resolution. Once the data is grabbed from the GPU it is just a matter to loop through it, check values and write to the final buffer.
Problem was finally solved and physics properties auto-generated!
With this little post I hope to show that there often is more to a problem than what is visible at first. Also, this shows another advantage of using normal texture splatting (more info here), instead of megatextures or similar. With the auto-generation of physics, it is much easier to create and update the terrain, something extremely important when you are a small team like us.
Would be very interesting what other techniques people use (or known of) for setting up physics properties on terrain!
Health Care Reform - Walking Down Memory Lane
Been there, done that.
For those too young to remember, here is a refresher course on health insurance mandates and how it affects small (and large) business.
Godfathers is a large, small business.
Godfather stores are mostly franchises, with about 100 that are company owned. Franchise owners are small business men and women who must balance costs, including payroll, against prices they can charge in a competitive market.
Restaurants have been hit hard during this recession, and increased costs in the form of forced health insurance could very well force those businesses to close down.
Government operates on the basis of spending whatever they wish without regard to balancing a budget and the belief that if they need more money, all that is required is to raise prices (taxes).
The raising taxes part works for them because they do not have competition and they have the power to do whatever they want with impunity (except at election time).
And of course we know how well the balanced budget part is working . . .
Of course Clinton's health care plan never got off the ground, and thank God for that.
Along comes Obamacrap with the same issues as with HillaryCare but an economy that is even less able to absorb the increased taxes and job losses.
Same game, different name.
Stupid Carrier Tricks: Empty Threats Edition
Got this in email from United HealthsCare:
"All Savers will require notification from all groups at renewal, regardless of whether or not a plan change is being made."
AllSavers is UHC's latest rendition of group coverage. At renewal time, groups have several options: stay with the current (or similar) plan, change benefits, and/or shop around. Typically, a group has to respond only if it's going to make changes; absent an affirmative response to the contrary, the carrier will assume that the group wants to "let it ride."
Here, UHC is "requiring" that the group respond, regardless. To which I replied: "Or else what?"
No response is needed, of course, since they can huff and puff all they want, but they can't refuse to renew a group because said group didn't send them a form.
The good news is that this came via email, so all that was wasted were some relatively inexpensive pixels (and my time).
"All Savers will require notification from all groups at renewal, regardless of whether or not a plan change is being made."
AllSavers is UHC's latest rendition of group coverage. At renewal time, groups have several options: stay with the current (or similar) plan, change benefits, and/or shop around. Typically, a group has to respond only if it's going to make changes; absent an affirmative response to the contrary, the carrier will assume that the group wants to "let it ride."
Here, UHC is "requiring" that the group respond, regardless. To which I replied: "Or else what?"
No response is needed, of course, since they can huff and puff all they want, but they can't refuse to renew a group because said group didn't send them a form.
The good news is that this came via email, so all that was wasted were some relatively inexpensive pixels (and my time).
Wherefore art thou, Gramps?
Another ObamaPromise© under the bus:
"After health care reform was enacted on March 23, 2010, we chose to grandfather most of the medical plans in our portfolio ... Since that time, we have seen muted market interest in retaining grandfathered status."
This is from Anthem, but I suspect that other carriers share this experience. It's simple, really: all 'grandfathering" does is tie a group's hands: it can't make substantive changes to bring down rates at renewal, and it adds a whole host of complications to the renewal process itself. And, as we've mentioned, the whole phenomenon will go away in a few short cycles since groups must make changes to rein in costs, thereby "un-grandfathering" their plans.
As a result, Anthem isn't even going to go through the motions any longer. Beginning with April renewals:
"We will release all renewals as nongrandfathered plans."
Sure, they'll still offer groups the option of remaining grandfathered (as opposed to the current "default" position), but that's going to be a bit more complicated going forward, since the carrier, the agent and the group will have to determine whether any changes have already been made that would obviate grandfathered status. In fact, there's a rather extensive "laundry list" of issues that must be addressed in that process.
It's just one more (egregious) example of how ObamaCare© does not, in fact, have anything to do with managing the cost of health insurance, let alone health care.
"After health care reform was enacted on March 23, 2010, we chose to grandfather most of the medical plans in our portfolio ... Since that time, we have seen muted market interest in retaining grandfathered status."
This is from Anthem, but I suspect that other carriers share this experience. It's simple, really: all 'grandfathering" does is tie a group's hands: it can't make substantive changes to bring down rates at renewal, and it adds a whole host of complications to the renewal process itself. And, as we've mentioned, the whole phenomenon will go away in a few short cycles since groups must make changes to rein in costs, thereby "un-grandfathering" their plans.
As a result, Anthem isn't even going to go through the motions any longer. Beginning with April renewals:
"We will release all renewals as nongrandfathered plans."
Sure, they'll still offer groups the option of remaining grandfathered (as opposed to the current "default" position), but that's going to be a bit more complicated going forward, since the carrier, the agent and the group will have to determine whether any changes have already been made that would obviate grandfathered status. In fact, there's a rather extensive "laundry list" of issues that must be addressed in that process.
It's just one more (egregious) example of how ObamaCare© does not, in fact, have anything to do with managing the cost of health insurance, let alone health care.
Benefits Package #4 is up!
Jennifer Benz takes the baton from us, and presents a great roundup of benefits-related posts. Do stop by.
Windmill Tilting?
As tempting as this idea may be on paper, one wonders whether it's the least bit legit:
"Idaho's Republican-dominated Legislature now plans to use an obscure 18th century doctrine to declare President Barack Obama's signature bill null and void.
Lawmakers in six other states -- Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming -- are also mulling "nullification" bills"
The basic premise of "nullification" is that the states themselves empower the Fed's, and that this power can be "switched off" if the latter oversteps its bounds. Even if one accepts this notion (and it's sorely tempting when it comes to ObamaCare©), it's important to recall that the Supremes swatted it down back in the 50's. That was then, of course, and this is now, but it's hard to imagine that the Supremes would renege on their own precedent.
Meantime, FoIB Holly R informs us that my own Buckeye State has also joined the lawsuit against ObamaCare©:
"Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Ohio, Wisconsin and Wyoming will join the coalition of states that have filed a lawsuit in federal court in Florida."
The plot thickens.
"Idaho's Republican-dominated Legislature now plans to use an obscure 18th century doctrine to declare President Barack Obama's signature bill null and void.
Lawmakers in six other states -- Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming -- are also mulling "nullification" bills"
The basic premise of "nullification" is that the states themselves empower the Fed's, and that this power can be "switched off" if the latter oversteps its bounds. Even if one accepts this notion (and it's sorely tempting when it comes to ObamaCare©), it's important to recall that the Supremes swatted it down back in the 50's. That was then, of course, and this is now, but it's hard to imagine that the Supremes would renege on their own precedent.
Meantime, FoIB Holly R informs us that my own Buckeye State has also joined the lawsuit against ObamaCare©:
"Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Ohio, Wisconsin and Wyoming will join the coalition of states that have filed a lawsuit in federal court in Florida."
The plot thickens.
Cavalcade of Risk #123: Call for submissions
Notwithstanding Blog hosts next week's roundup of risk-related blogetry. Submissions are due by Monday (the 24th), and must include:
■ Your blog's url
■ Your post's url
■ The post's trackback URL (if available)
■ A (brief) summary of the post
And PLEASE remember: ONLY posts that relate to risk (not personal finance tips and the like).
You can submit your post via Blog Carnival or email.
NB: The Cav is about risk, but not necessarily or exclusively about insurance. So feel free to think outside-the-box, risk-wise.
■ Your blog's url
■ Your post's url
■ The post's trackback URL (if available)
■ A (brief) summary of the post
And PLEASE remember: ONLY posts that relate to risk (not personal finance tips and the like).
You can submit your post via Blog Carnival or email.
NB: The Cav is about risk, but not necessarily or exclusively about insurance. So feel free to think outside-the-box, risk-wise.
About that RepealIt vote...
Regular readers may be wondering why we haven't yet weighed in on this historic occasion. There is no question that it represents an important first step in the abolition of ObamaCare©. Frankly, though, it's something we've been touting all along, so it's surprising to us only that the new Congress fulfilled a campaign pledge.
I do have some concerns about how one begins to undo the damage wrought so far by this train wreck. For example, will all those 20-somethings now be kicked back off mommy-and-daddy's plan? What will happen to groups and individuals who've already renewed, and are (literally) paying the increased price? Will carriers reinstate lifetime maximums and rescind first-dollar preventive care benefits?
And what about the few people that did sign up for one of the ObamaPools©? Will the states keep them in place until the cash cow runs dry, or simply fold up shop?
Mind you, none of these are earth-shattering in implication, but they are potentially messy loose ends that need to be tied up.
One last thing: despite the fact that it's now up to the Democrat-led Senate, this vote was far from merely "symbolic." The very best take on the "symbolism" comes from Cato's Mike Cannon:
I do have some concerns about how one begins to undo the damage wrought so far by this train wreck. For example, will all those 20-somethings now be kicked back off mommy-and-daddy's plan? What will happen to groups and individuals who've already renewed, and are (literally) paying the increased price? Will carriers reinstate lifetime maximums and rescind first-dollar preventive care benefits?
And what about the few people that did sign up for one of the ObamaPools©? Will the states keep them in place until the cash cow runs dry, or simply fold up shop?
Mind you, none of these are earth-shattering in implication, but they are potentially messy loose ends that need to be tied up.
One last thing: despite the fact that it's now up to the Democrat-led Senate, this vote was far from merely "symbolic." The very best take on the "symbolism" comes from Cato's Mike Cannon:
"The symbolism of today’s House vote is striking. Within a year of ObamaCare’s enactment, the House of Representatives has voted overwhelmingly to repeal it.Amen, brother.
That didn’t happen with Social Security. It didn’t happen with Medicare ...
Today’s vote makes it more likely that someone with the power to scrap ObamaCare will do so"
Silly Interweb Insurance Info
So I log off email, and see this link on the home page: "Seven Insurance Policies That Aren't Worth the Money." Intrigued, I click over, curious to see what profound wisdom is to be had.
Turns out, not much.
Here are the 7 policy types, a brief description of each, the author's take, and my own:
1. "Mini-Med" Insurance
The agent quoted here is not a fan of these policies, claiming that "(b)uyers should know that these policies are best used for minor cuts and scrapes." While I know that there are some cases where this is true, I think this brief and arrogant dismissal misses the mark: for some people, this may be the only kind of coverage for which they qualify or that they can afford.
2. Accidental Death and Dismemberment
I agree with the article that these are - at best - a waste of money. I'd also add that the AD&D rider on life insurance policies has never made sense to me, either: dead is dead, regardless of cause. And how does it make sense that your wife needs more cash if you're hit by a bus than if you die of cancer?
3. Divorce Insurance
The article's agin it; I've never even heard of it. Of course, I hadn't heard of virginity insurance before, either. The idea is that a couple buys the policy and, if they get divorced after 4 years, they get some quick cash. Uh-hunh.
4. Comprehensive or Collision Coverage for Old Cars
I'm not a P&C guy, so I asked my friend Bill M for his take. Bill's a 30+ year industry veteran, a CIC and independent agent. Here's his take:
"I advise customers to consider dropping comp and collision when the value of the vehicle hits $ 3,000 or less. At that point a minor fender bender can total your car. You also need to look at the premium charged versus the potential benefit in that decision."
5. Car Rental Insurance
Again, we turn to P&C guru Bill M:
"As far as the car rental insurance goes, you need to check your rental contract to see if you are responsible for loss of use or diminished value, two items not normally cover by your own auto insurance.
If you are going out of the country you need to check that your coverage extends to where you are going.
All of these items should be discussed with your insurance agent about your specific policy."
6. Term Life Insurance
Is term insurance really a "big waste of money" as the article claims? No more than auto, home or health insurance are: none of those pay off if you don't have a claim, either. I agree that it's often not the best choice ("permanent needs require permanent solutions" as my own mentor used to say), but if you think it's really just money down the rat-hole, consider a Return of Premium plan.
7. Mortgage Insurance
First, there is no such thing as "mortgage insurance." That's simply a marketing wrapper for folks who don't want to buy "life insurance." Second, there's no industry-standard definition of what one means by the term. The article uses it to describe a term plan that's payable to the lender. But you can make any insurance policy payable to pretty much anyone you want to. Back in the day, "mortgage insurance" was a euphemism for "decreasing term life;" that is, the face amount ostensibly declined along with one's mortgage. The premium stayed the same, though, meaning the coverage got more and more expensive with each passing year.
As they say, YMMV.
Turns out, not much.
Here are the 7 policy types, a brief description of each, the author's take, and my own:
1. "Mini-Med" Insurance
The agent quoted here is not a fan of these policies, claiming that "(b)uyers should know that these policies are best used for minor cuts and scrapes." While I know that there are some cases where this is true, I think this brief and arrogant dismissal misses the mark: for some people, this may be the only kind of coverage for which they qualify or that they can afford.
2. Accidental Death and Dismemberment
I agree with the article that these are - at best - a waste of money. I'd also add that the AD&D rider on life insurance policies has never made sense to me, either: dead is dead, regardless of cause. And how does it make sense that your wife needs more cash if you're hit by a bus than if you die of cancer?
3. Divorce Insurance
The article's agin it; I've never even heard of it. Of course, I hadn't heard of virginity insurance before, either. The idea is that a couple buys the policy and, if they get divorced after 4 years, they get some quick cash. Uh-hunh.
4. Comprehensive or Collision Coverage for Old Cars
I'm not a P&C guy, so I asked my friend Bill M for his take. Bill's a 30+ year industry veteran, a CIC and independent agent. Here's his take:
"I advise customers to consider dropping comp and collision when the value of the vehicle hits $ 3,000 or less. At that point a minor fender bender can total your car. You also need to look at the premium charged versus the potential benefit in that decision."
5. Car Rental Insurance
Again, we turn to P&C guru Bill M:
"As far as the car rental insurance goes, you need to check your rental contract to see if you are responsible for loss of use or diminished value, two items not normally cover by your own auto insurance.
If you are going out of the country you need to check that your coverage extends to where you are going.
All of these items should be discussed with your insurance agent about your specific policy."
6. Term Life Insurance
Is term insurance really a "big waste of money" as the article claims? No more than auto, home or health insurance are: none of those pay off if you don't have a claim, either. I agree that it's often not the best choice ("permanent needs require permanent solutions" as my own mentor used to say), but if you think it's really just money down the rat-hole, consider a Return of Premium plan.
7. Mortgage Insurance
First, there is no such thing as "mortgage insurance." That's simply a marketing wrapper for folks who don't want to buy "life insurance." Second, there's no industry-standard definition of what one means by the term. The article uses it to describe a term plan that's payable to the lender. But you can make any insurance policy payable to pretty much anyone you want to. Back in the day, "mortgage insurance" was a euphemism for "decreasing term life;" that is, the face amount ostensibly declined along with one's mortgage. The premium stayed the same, though, meaning the coverage got more and more expensive with each passing year.
As they say, YMMV.
Tech Feature: Undergrowth
Introduction
After a little break with updates on the rendering system, holidays and super secret stuff, I could finally get back to terrain rendering this week. This meant work on the final big part of the terrain system: Undergrowth. This is basically grass and any kind of small vegetation close to the ground.
As always, I started out doing a ton of research on the subject to at least have a chance of making proper decisions at the start. The problem with undergrowth/grass is that while I could find a lot of resources, most were quite specific, describing techniques that only worked in special cases. This is quite common when doing technical stuff for games; while there are a lot of nice information, only a very small part is usable in an actual game. This is especially true when dealing with any larger system (like terrain) and not just some localized special effect. In these cases reports from other developers are by far best, and writing these blog posts is partly a way to pay back what I have learned from other people's work.
Now on with the tech stuff!
Plant Placement Data
The first problem I was faced with was how to define where the undergrowth should be. In all of the resources I found, there was some kind of density texture used (meaning a 2D image where each pixel defines the amount of plants at that point). I did not like this idea very much though, mainly because I would be forced to have lots of textures, one for each undergrowth type, or to not allow overlapping plants (meaning the same area on the map would not be able to contain two different types of undergrowth). There are ways past this (e.g. the FrostBite engine uses sort of texture atlases), but then making it work inside the editor would be a pain, most likely demanding pre-processing and a special editor renderer. I had to do something else.
What I settled on was to use area primitives, simple geometrical shapes that defined where the undergrowth would be. The way this works is that each primitive define a 2D area were plants should be placed. It then also contains variables such as density, allowing one to place thick grass at one place, and a sparser area elsewhere.
I ended up implemented circle and convex polygons primitives for this, which during tests seem to work just fine.
Generating the Plants
The next problem was how generate the actual geometry. My first idea was to simply draw the grass for each area, but there were some problems with this. One major was that it would not look good with overlapping areas. If areas of the same density overlapped, the cross section would have twice the density of the combined area. This did not seem right to me. Also, it was problematic to get a nice distribution only using areas and I was unsure how to save the data.
Once again, the report on the FrostBite engine gave me an idea on how to approach this. They way they did this was to fill a grid a with probability values. For each grid point a random number between 0 and 1 is generated and then compared to to the one saved in the grid. If the generated number is lower than the saved, a plant is generated at that point, else not. Each plant is then offset by random amount, creating a nice uniform but random distribution of the plants!
This system fit perfect with the undergrowth areas and simplified it too. Using this approach, an undergrowth area does not need to worry about generating the actual plants, but only to generate numbers on the grid.
The final version works like this:
There is an undergrowth material for each type of plant that is used on a level. This material specifies the max density of each plant and thus determines how the grid should look. A material with a high density will have a grid with many points and one with a low density will have few grid points. Each point (not all of course, some culling is used) on the grid is checked against a area primitive and a value is calculated. This is then repeated for each area, adding contributions from all areas that cover the same grid point.
This solves the problem of overlapping areas, as the density can never become larger than max defined by the grid. It allows makes it possible to have negative areas, that reduce the amount of undergrowth in a certain place. This way, the two simple area primitives I have implemented can be used for just about any kind of undergrowth layout.
Cache system
Now it is time to discuss how to generate the actual plants. A way to do this is to just generate the geometry for the entire map, but that would take up way too much memory and be quite slow. Instead, I use a cache system that only generate grass close to the camera (this is also how FrostBite does it).
The engine divides the entire terrain into a grid of quads, and then generates cache data for each quad that is close enough to the camera. For each quad, it is checked what areas intersect with it, and layers are made for each undergrowth material that it contain. Then for each layer, plants are generated based on the method described above. The undergrowth material also contains texture and model data as well as a bunch of other properties. For example, the size can be randomized and different parts of the texture used, all to add some variety to the patch of undergrowth. Finally plant is also offset in height according to the heightmap.
This cache generation took quite some work to get good enough. I had problems with the game stuttering as you traveled through a level, and had to do various tricks to make it faster. I also made sure that no more than one patch is generated at each frame (unless the camera is teleported or similar).
Rendering
Once the cache system was in place, rendering the plants were not that much of a problem. Each generated patch comes with the grass in world coordinates, so it is as simple as it can get. The only fancy stuff happening is that grass in the distance is dissolved. This means that the grass does not end with a sharp border, but smoothly fades out.
In the above image you can see how the grass dissolves at distance. Here it looks pretty crappy, but with proper art, it is meant that grass and ground texture should match, thus making the transition pretty much unnoticeable.
Another thing worth mentioning, is that the normal for each grass model is the same as the ground. This gives a nice look to many plants, but an individual plant gets quite crappy shading. Undergrowth is meant to be small and not seen close-up though, so I think this should work out fine. Also, when making grass earlier (during development Amnesia), normal normals (ha...) were used and the result was quite bad (sharp shading, etc).
Animation
Static grass is boring, so of course some kind of animation is needed. What I wanted was two different kinds of animation: A global wind animation (unique for each material) and also local animation due to events in a limited area (someone walking through grass, wind from a helicopter, etc).
My first idea was to do all of these on the cpu, meaning that I would need to resend all the geometry to the graphics card each frame. This would allow me to use all kinds of fanciness for animation (like my dear noise and fractals) and would easily allow for lots of local disturbances.
However, I did some thinking and decided that this would be a bad idea. Not only does the sending of data to the graphics card take up time, but there might be some pretty heavy calculations needed (like rotating normals) for a lot plants, so the cpu burden would be very heavy. Instead I chose to do everything on the GPU.
Implementing the global wind animation was quite simple; i was just a matter of sending a few new variables to the grass shader. But it was a bit harder to come up with the actual algorithm. Perhaps I did not look hard enough, but I could find very little help on this area, so I had to do a lot of experimenting instead. The idea was to get something that was fast (i.e. no stuff like Perlin noise allowed) and yet have a natural random feel to it. What I ended up with was this:
add_x = vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) * VertexPos.z * wind_freq + vec3(13.0, 17.0, 103.0);
offset.x = dot( vec3(sin(fT*1.13 + add_x.x), sin(fT*1.17 + add_x.y), sin(fT + add_x.y)), vec3(0.125, 0.25, 1.0) );
add_y = vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) * (VertexPos..x + vOffset.x) * wind_freq + vec3(103.0, 13.0, 113.0);;
offset.y = dot( vec3(sin(fT*1.13 + add_y.x), sin(fT*1.17 + add_y.y), sin(fT + add_y.z)), vec3(0.125, 0.25, 1.0) );
This is basically a couple of fractually nested sin curves (fbm basically) that take the current vertex position as input. The important thing to note is the prime numbers such as vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) without these the cycles of the sin curves overlap and the end result is a very cyclic, boring and unnatural look.
The offset generated is then applied differently depending on the height of the plant. There will be a lot of swaying at the top and none at the bottom. To do this the base y-coordinate of the plant is saved in a secondary texture coordinate and then looked up in the shader.
Now finally, the local animation. To do this entities called ForceFields are used. (Thanks Luis for the name suggestion! It made doing the boring parts so much more fun to make.) These are entities that come with a radius and a force value, and is meant to create effects on the graphics that they touch. Right now only grass is affected, but later on effects on ropes, cloth, larger plants , etc are meant to be added.
These effect of these are applied in the shader and currently I support a maximum of four ForceFields per cache patch. In the shader I either do none, a single entity or four at once. This means that if three entities affect a patch, I still render the outcome of four, but fill the last one's data with dummy (null) values. Using four is actually almost as fast as using a single. Because of how GPUs work, I can do a lot of work for all four entities in the same amount of instructions as for a single. This greatly cut down the amount of work that is needed.
Again, just like with the global wind, it was hard work to come up with a good algorithm for this. My first idea was to simply push each plant away from the center of the force field, but this looked really crappy. I then tried to add some randomness and animation to this in order to make it nicer. As inspiration, I looked at Titan Quest, which has a very nice effect when you walk through grass. After almost a days work the final algorithm look something like this:
fForce = 1 - distance(vtx_pos, force_field_pos)/force_field_radius
fAngle = T + rand_seed*6.28;
fForce *= sin(force_field_t + fAngle);
vDir = vec2(sin(fAngle), cos(fAngle));
vOffset.xz += vDir * fForce;
Rand seed is variable that is saved in the secondary texture coordinate and is generated for each plant. This helps gives more random and natural feel to it.
Here is how it all looks in action:
And in case you are wonder all of this is ugly, made in 10 seconds, graphics.
End notes
Now that undergrowth is finally done, it means that all basic terrain features are implemented! In case you have missed out on earlier post here is a summary:
Terrain Geometry
Fractals and Noise
Terrain Texturing
I hope this has been of use and/or interest to somebody! :)
Next up for me is some final terrain stuff (basically just some clean-up) and then I will move on to more gameplay related stuff. More on that later though...
After a little break with updates on the rendering system, holidays and super secret stuff, I could finally get back to terrain rendering this week. This meant work on the final big part of the terrain system: Undergrowth. This is basically grass and any kind of small vegetation close to the ground.
As always, I started out doing a ton of research on the subject to at least have a chance of making proper decisions at the start. The problem with undergrowth/grass is that while I could find a lot of resources, most were quite specific, describing techniques that only worked in special cases. This is quite common when doing technical stuff for games; while there are a lot of nice information, only a very small part is usable in an actual game. This is especially true when dealing with any larger system (like terrain) and not just some localized special effect. In these cases reports from other developers are by far best, and writing these blog posts is partly a way to pay back what I have learned from other people's work.
Now on with the tech stuff!
Plant Placement Data
The first problem I was faced with was how to define where the undergrowth should be. In all of the resources I found, there was some kind of density texture used (meaning a 2D image where each pixel defines the amount of plants at that point). I did not like this idea very much though, mainly because I would be forced to have lots of textures, one for each undergrowth type, or to not allow overlapping plants (meaning the same area on the map would not be able to contain two different types of undergrowth). There are ways past this (e.g. the FrostBite engine uses sort of texture atlases), but then making it work inside the editor would be a pain, most likely demanding pre-processing and a special editor renderer. I had to do something else.
What I settled on was to use area primitives, simple geometrical shapes that defined where the undergrowth would be. The way this works is that each primitive define a 2D area were plants should be placed. It then also contains variables such as density, allowing one to place thick grass at one place, and a sparser area elsewhere.
I ended up implemented circle and convex polygons primitives for this, which during tests seem to work just fine.
Generating the Plants
The next problem was how generate the actual geometry. My first idea was to simply draw the grass for each area, but there were some problems with this. One major was that it would not look good with overlapping areas. If areas of the same density overlapped, the cross section would have twice the density of the combined area. This did not seem right to me. Also, it was problematic to get a nice distribution only using areas and I was unsure how to save the data.
Once again, the report on the FrostBite engine gave me an idea on how to approach this. They way they did this was to fill a grid a with probability values. For each grid point a random number between 0 and 1 is generated and then compared to to the one saved in the grid. If the generated number is lower than the saved, a plant is generated at that point, else not. Each plant is then offset by random amount, creating a nice uniform but random distribution of the plants!
This system fit perfect with the undergrowth areas and simplified it too. Using this approach, an undergrowth area does not need to worry about generating the actual plants, but only to generate numbers on the grid.
The final version works like this:
There is an undergrowth material for each type of plant that is used on a level. This material specifies the max density of each plant and thus determines how the grid should look. A material with a high density will have a grid with many points and one with a low density will have few grid points. Each point (not all of course, some culling is used) on the grid is checked against a area primitive and a value is calculated. This is then repeated for each area, adding contributions from all areas that cover the same grid point.
This solves the problem of overlapping areas, as the density can never become larger than max defined by the grid. It allows makes it possible to have negative areas, that reduce the amount of undergrowth in a certain place. This way, the two simple area primitives I have implemented can be used for just about any kind of undergrowth layout.
Cache system
Now it is time to discuss how to generate the actual plants. A way to do this is to just generate the geometry for the entire map, but that would take up way too much memory and be quite slow. Instead, I use a cache system that only generate grass close to the camera (this is also how FrostBite does it).
The engine divides the entire terrain into a grid of quads, and then generates cache data for each quad that is close enough to the camera. For each quad, it is checked what areas intersect with it, and layers are made for each undergrowth material that it contain. Then for each layer, plants are generated based on the method described above. The undergrowth material also contains texture and model data as well as a bunch of other properties. For example, the size can be randomized and different parts of the texture used, all to add some variety to the patch of undergrowth. Finally plant is also offset in height according to the heightmap.
This cache generation took quite some work to get good enough. I had problems with the game stuttering as you traveled through a level, and had to do various tricks to make it faster. I also made sure that no more than one patch is generated at each frame (unless the camera is teleported or similar).
Rendering
Once the cache system was in place, rendering the plants were not that much of a problem. Each generated patch comes with the grass in world coordinates, so it is as simple as it can get. The only fancy stuff happening is that grass in the distance is dissolved. This means that the grass does not end with a sharp border, but smoothly fades out.
In the above image you can see how the grass dissolves at distance. Here it looks pretty crappy, but with proper art, it is meant that grass and ground texture should match, thus making the transition pretty much unnoticeable.
Another thing worth mentioning, is that the normal for each grass model is the same as the ground. This gives a nice look to many plants, but an individual plant gets quite crappy shading. Undergrowth is meant to be small and not seen close-up though, so I think this should work out fine. Also, when making grass earlier (during development Amnesia), normal normals (ha...) were used and the result was quite bad (sharp shading, etc).
Animation
Static grass is boring, so of course some kind of animation is needed. What I wanted was two different kinds of animation: A global wind animation (unique for each material) and also local animation due to events in a limited area (someone walking through grass, wind from a helicopter, etc).
My first idea was to do all of these on the cpu, meaning that I would need to resend all the geometry to the graphics card each frame. This would allow me to use all kinds of fanciness for animation (like my dear noise and fractals) and would easily allow for lots of local disturbances.
However, I did some thinking and decided that this would be a bad idea. Not only does the sending of data to the graphics card take up time, but there might be some pretty heavy calculations needed (like rotating normals) for a lot plants, so the cpu burden would be very heavy. Instead I chose to do everything on the GPU.
Implementing the global wind animation was quite simple; i was just a matter of sending a few new variables to the grass shader. But it was a bit harder to come up with the actual algorithm. Perhaps I did not look hard enough, but I could find very little help on this area, so I had to do a lot of experimenting instead. The idea was to get something that was fast (i.e. no stuff like Perlin noise allowed) and yet have a natural random feel to it. What I ended up with was this:
add_x = vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) * VertexPos.z * wind_freq + vec3(13.0, 17.0, 103.0);
offset.x = dot( vec3(sin(fT*1.13 + add_x.x), sin(fT*1.17 + add_x.y), sin(fT + add_x.y)), vec3(0.125, 0.25, 1.0) );
add_y = vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) * (VertexPos..x + vOffset.x) * wind_freq + vec3(103.0, 13.0, 113.0);;
offset.y = dot( vec3(sin(fT*1.13 + add_y.x), sin(fT*1.17 + add_y.y), sin(fT + add_y.z)), vec3(0.125, 0.25, 1.0) );
This is basically a couple of fractually nested sin curves (fbm basically) that take the current vertex position as input. The important thing to note is the prime numbers such as vec3(7.0, 3.0, 1.0) without these the cycles of the sin curves overlap and the end result is a very cyclic, boring and unnatural look.
The offset generated is then applied differently depending on the height of the plant. There will be a lot of swaying at the top and none at the bottom. To do this the base y-coordinate of the plant is saved in a secondary texture coordinate and then looked up in the shader.
Now finally, the local animation. To do this entities called ForceFields are used. (Thanks Luis for the name suggestion! It made doing the boring parts so much more fun to make.) These are entities that come with a radius and a force value, and is meant to create effects on the graphics that they touch. Right now only grass is affected, but later on effects on ropes, cloth, larger plants , etc are meant to be added.
These effect of these are applied in the shader and currently I support a maximum of four ForceFields per cache patch. In the shader I either do none, a single entity or four at once. This means that if three entities affect a patch, I still render the outcome of four, but fill the last one's data with dummy (null) values. Using four is actually almost as fast as using a single. Because of how GPUs work, I can do a lot of work for all four entities in the same amount of instructions as for a single. This greatly cut down the amount of work that is needed.
Again, just like with the global wind, it was hard work to come up with a good algorithm for this. My first idea was to simply push each plant away from the center of the force field, but this looked really crappy. I then tried to add some randomness and animation to this in order to make it nicer. As inspiration, I looked at Titan Quest, which has a very nice effect when you walk through grass. After almost a days work the final algorithm look something like this:
fForce = 1 - distance(vtx_pos, force_field_pos)/force_field_radius
fAngle = T + rand_seed*6.28;
fForce *= sin(force_field_t + fAngle);
vDir = vec2(sin(fAngle), cos(fAngle));
vOffset.xz += vDir * fForce;
Rand seed is variable that is saved in the secondary texture coordinate and is generated for each plant. This helps gives more random and natural feel to it.
Here is how it all looks in action:
Note: Make sure to check in HD!
And in case you are wonder all of this is ugly, made in 10 seconds, graphics.
End notes
Now that undergrowth is finally done, it means that all basic terrain features are implemented! In case you have missed out on earlier post here is a summary:
Terrain Geometry
Fractals and Noise
Terrain Texturing
I hope this has been of use and/or interest to somebody! :)
Next up for me is some final terrain stuff (basically just some clean-up) and then I will move on to more gameplay related stuff. More on that later though...
Godwin's Law and "Representative" Steve Cohen
Godwin's Law is a well-known (if often misquoted) internet meme that says:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches."
Today, Democrat Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee broke it in the real world, managing also to ignore President Obama's request for rhetorical civility:
“They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels ... You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing, blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing.”
I hereby invoke my own Absolute Moral Authority and soundly denounce the heated, hateful, fact-free and decidedly uncivil rhetoric spewed by the "Representative." It is exactly the same as left-leaning pundits comparing global warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers: it trivializes the real Holocaust and its millions of innocent victims.
It is beyond the pale that the ignorant and self-hating Mr Cohen would liken foes of ObamaCrap to those who actually killed innocents. Recently, a (non-Jewish) politician used the term "blood libel" precisely as it should have been used, both in context and in meaning. Rep Cohen, who should know better, uses it to smear political opponents who recognize that ObamaCrap is, in fact and demonstrably, a government take-over of our health care system.
Rep Cohen, you owe us an apology for this brutal and spiteful shanda.
[Hat Tip: RedState]
Magic Life
Try to become a powerful mage taking part in an ancient tournament of magical conclave. Freedom of action gives a lot of choices for character development. Customizable look and character of the set of game objects do not give you a limited freedom of creativity, especially after the passage of the main storyline of the game in a free life.
More BS from ShecantBeSerious
What to make of this:
"The Department of Health and Human Services study ... concludes that somewhere between 50 million and 129 million non-elderly Americans have a pre-existing condition."
And?
First, way to laser in on the actual numbers there, Kathy! The forces of ObamaCare© have now given up all pretense of rational, fact-based debate and are resorting to just picking numbers out of their Pelosi's.
More critically, why is this even an issue? Either they they have such a condition or they don't. If they do, then how come, in 2000+ pages, you couldn't have given them all immediate coverage? After all, it'd be the right thing to do, wouldn't it?
But wait: you did!
Then why is it that all of these uninsured - and ostensibly uninsurable - folks aren't flocking to the ObamaPools© that have been online since last summer? After all, these wonderful new plans are guaranteed issue and cover pre-existing conditions.
Part of the answer is that, as noted above, there are no "129 million" uninsurables. It's just another example of ShecantBeSerious BS:
"While the title shouts that 129 million people could be denied coverage, the so-called study defines preexisting conditions to include those “that would result in an automatic denial of coverage, exclusion of the condition, or higher premiums.”
Catch that little sleight of hand?
Here it is in slo-mo:
"... the so-called study defines preexisting conditions ... “that would result in an automatic denial of coverage, exclusion of the condition, or higher premiums.”
An exclusion is not a denial, and in the real world, an increased premium is called "pricing the risk." So they're not even competent at making it up. And we're supposed to trust these clowns to actually run our health care system?
What could go wrong?
Avik Roy has his own tremendous takedown of this ShecantBeSerious BS, including this must read insight:
"Sebelius and her HHS colleagues try to morph the definition of “preexisting conditions” into “conditions.” Take this random sample of Sebelius’ assault on the English language:
A person who has health insurance, and later becomes ill, does not have a preexisting condition. He has a condition of the plain old “existing” kind—one that his insurance will help pay for. This is exactly how insurance is supposed to work."
Read the whole thing.
"The Department of Health and Human Services study ... concludes that somewhere between 50 million and 129 million non-elderly Americans have a pre-existing condition."
And?
First, way to laser in on the actual numbers there, Kathy! The forces of ObamaCare© have now given up all pretense of rational, fact-based debate and are resorting to just picking numbers out of their Pelosi's.
More critically, why is this even an issue? Either they they have such a condition or they don't. If they do, then how come, in 2000+ pages, you couldn't have given them all immediate coverage? After all, it'd be the right thing to do, wouldn't it?
But wait: you did!
Then why is it that all of these uninsured - and ostensibly uninsurable - folks aren't flocking to the ObamaPools© that have been online since last summer? After all, these wonderful new plans are guaranteed issue and cover pre-existing conditions.
Part of the answer is that, as noted above, there are no "129 million" uninsurables. It's just another example of ShecantBeSerious BS:
"While the title shouts that 129 million people could be denied coverage, the so-called study defines preexisting conditions to include those “that would result in an automatic denial of coverage, exclusion of the condition, or higher premiums.”
Catch that little sleight of hand?
Here it is in slo-mo:
"... the so-called study defines preexisting conditions ... “that would result in an automatic denial of coverage, exclusion of the condition, or higher premiums.”
An exclusion is not a denial, and in the real world, an increased premium is called "pricing the risk." So they're not even competent at making it up. And we're supposed to trust these clowns to actually run our health care system?
What could go wrong?
Avik Roy has his own tremendous takedown of this ShecantBeSerious BS, including this must read insight:
"Sebelius and her HHS colleagues try to morph the definition of “preexisting conditions” into “conditions.” Take this random sample of Sebelius’ assault on the English language:
An analysis of a survey that follows people over time found that, among healthy people—reporting very good or excellent health with no chronic conditions—today, 15 to 30 percent (depending on their age) will develop a pre-existing condition within the next eight years.So, let’s get this straight. Fifteen to 30 percent of Americans will, in the future, develop a preexisting condition. This only makes sense if the HHS has also invented time travel.
A person who has health insurance, and later becomes ill, does not have a preexisting condition. He has a condition of the plain old “existing” kind—one that his insurance will help pay for. This is exactly how insurance is supposed to work."
Read the whole thing.
Death and Taxes (But Mostly Taxes)
As might be expected, we tend to look at the insurance (and health) aspects of ObamaCare©, but as Bob's pointed out, there are some pretty significant tax issues, as well. Some are hidden, of course, but two readers, Bob D and Sam B, have drawn our attention to some of the more overt tax increases contained in the bill we had to pass to see. As we've discussed before, the (Evil) Individual Mandate is a tax, as is the (Stupid) 1099 Rule. But these are only two examples of the tax perfidy to which we're about to be treated. Here's a handy cheat sheet to many others:
Last year saw a $2.7 billion tax on indoor tanning, and a $22 billion hit on drug innovation companies.
This year will see the implementation of a $5 billion "Medicine Cabinet Tax" (on generic med's under HSA, FSA and HRA plans) coupled with a $1.4 billion spike in HSA withdrawal penalties. We'll also be treated to the new Employer reporting requirements (more on this issue here).
In '12, we'll see the roll-out of much-despised and derided "Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting" requirement, expected to cost over $17 billion.
2013 looks to be a "banner year" for ObamaTaxes©: we'll see the $123 billion Surtax on Investment Income [ed: which has to do with healthcare, how?], an $86.8 billion increase in the Medicare Payroll Tax, a new cap on Flexible Spending Accounts as they relate to special needs kids (why does Barry hate the children?), a $20 billion tax on manufacturers of medical devices (why does Barry hate sick people?), an increase in the itemized deduction requirements that's expected to cost taxpayers an additional $15 billion, along with the elimination of the deduction for employer-provided prescription med benefits that looks to cost $4.5 billion.
Looking ahead to 2014, we see the much anticipated (and Evil) Individual and Employer Mandates in full swing, along with a new tax on certain insurers. That last little goody's looking to cost insurers $60 billion. Wait, did I say "cost insurers?" Just kidding! It looks to cost insureds $60 billion.
And waaay down the road - 2018, to be exact - we have a shiny new, $32 billion Excise Tax to look forward to.
Isn't it grand that we had to pass it to learn all this?
Last year saw a $2.7 billion tax on indoor tanning, and a $22 billion hit on drug innovation companies.
This year will see the implementation of a $5 billion "Medicine Cabinet Tax" (on generic med's under HSA, FSA and HRA plans) coupled with a $1.4 billion spike in HSA withdrawal penalties. We'll also be treated to the new Employer reporting requirements (more on this issue here).
In '12, we'll see the roll-out of much-despised and derided "Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting" requirement, expected to cost over $17 billion.
2013 looks to be a "banner year" for ObamaTaxes©: we'll see the $123 billion Surtax on Investment Income [ed: which has to do with healthcare, how?], an $86.8 billion increase in the Medicare Payroll Tax, a new cap on Flexible Spending Accounts as they relate to special needs kids (why does Barry hate the children?), a $20 billion tax on manufacturers of medical devices (why does Barry hate sick people?), an increase in the itemized deduction requirements that's expected to cost taxpayers an additional $15 billion, along with the elimination of the deduction for employer-provided prescription med benefits that looks to cost $4.5 billion.
Looking ahead to 2014, we see the much anticipated (and Evil) Individual and Employer Mandates in full swing, along with a new tax on certain insurers. That last little goody's looking to cost insurers $60 billion. Wait, did I say "cost insurers?" Just kidding! It looks to cost insureds $60 billion.
And waaay down the road - 2018, to be exact - we have a shiny new, $32 billion Excise Tax to look forward to.
Isn't it grand that we had to pass it to learn all this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
