- 990
I'm fairly familiar with government work and the "benes" are not bad.
Your idea of humour?
Yep, as a govt. health exchange employee, you'd be minted, the rest of us broke ...
Last edited:
HR 3962 Role of Agents Preserved - Good News
- Thread starter Dave020
- Start date
Your idea of humour?
Yep, as a govt. health exchange employee, you'd be minted, the rest of us broke ...
- Thread starter
- #22
- 3,384
Humour? Not sure what you mean? That is me middle front row on overseas deployment with the US Air Force (I am currently serving in the USAF as well as running an insurance agency). I'd say that constitutes "working for the govt". Just pointing out that I have experience at it and the "benes" are good (Tricare, TSP, World Wide Travel, Free Flu Shots and a lot more)
- 990
As it should be and thanks for your service.
What I'm saying is that the govt. takes care of its own and the rest of us ...
Ala Barry and bunch would have it so that they have the
creme de la creme coverage and the rest of us can have what ever is left over via their current version of "reform."
- Thread starter
- #24
- 3,384
I know, I am just playing around. For me, I am used to writing GI product at much lower commission levels, so the change, if agents are still in the equation, would not be so difficult. Many other agents, it would be an adjustment.
I suspect that GI will pay a commission on lower level privately (around 4%) or the public plan will pay same or some kind of referral fee. I also suspect the carriers may offer a tier of underwritten plans offering very rich benefits (since no GI level people would apply or get them) for those in very good health. That tier probably would be in the 10% long term range.
I see the possibilities as being:
A. Things stay basically the same
B. Stay in business but earn less per case
C. Go find "other work" (thus quoth Hillary)
I prefer either A or B to C and this article simply tells me that it's not going to be C.
I suspect that GI will pay a commission on lower level privately (around 4%) or the public plan will pay same or some kind of referral fee. I also suspect the carriers may offer a tier of underwritten plans offering very rich benefits (since no GI level people would apply or get them) for those in very good health. That tier probably would be in the 10% long term range.
I see the possibilities as being:
A. Things stay basically the same
B. Stay in business but earn less per case
C. Go find "other work" (thus quoth Hillary)
I prefer either A or B to C and this article simply tells me that it's not going to be C.
- 3,863
I don't think the bills currently being discussed would permit such non GI underwritten options. That's how I read it anyhow...
- 2,908
It is hard to tell because some aspects of the Senate bills (there are two) are known to only God and Harry Reid despite all this hoopla about transparency. And then there is the House bill which will be marked up in conference if the Senate votes on that first, unless they vote on one of the Senate bills first in which case the conference committee will be to reconcile the senate bill with the house bill versus the senate amended version of the house bill. Having fun yet?
Anyway. To me the whole thing about underwritten hinges on mandate. If there is mandate, then the underwritten plans are not going to fly because you will need to get one of the government approved plans which will all be guaranteed issue. If there is no mandate, you might be able to get an underwritten plan but you wont get any tax credit or subsidy for it so when you do the math you might as well "choose" one of the "creditable plans. Now we are having fun!
My guess is that there will be no mandate out of the gate and the government will see what it can accomplish through carrot and stick and bludgeon. It is more politically palatable for them to pretend that there is choice when there is none. It is the same with abortion, covering illegals etc. The hard core lib ideologues wont be able to yield but most of the dems will come around to the idea that this is a great change to take over one sixth of the economy and then clean it up later. They dont have the votes to come at this thing all in one shot anyway. That's my view anyway. My larger view is that it is all about the economy and the dems are about to find that out. Take the half loaf and consolidate your gains as Bill Clinton suggested, idiots.
Change you can believe in.
Last edited:
- 7,790
Dave, are you the bald one? I hear that the Hair Club is giving big discounts.I'm fairly familiar with government work and the "benes" are not bad.
Dave, thanks for your service! I live next to 2 military bases and see our troops around all of the time. You guys area all heroes to me.
The prob with any Gov bennies is that they are paid for with tax dollars. In a shrinking economy, with unemployment at 10.2% (actually over 15%), that means there are fewer working people paying taxes and more and more people taking tax dollars in the form of unemployment benefits, health benefits etc. This creates a giant leech on those that are left still working ang paying the taxes. As the demand for the Gov benefits increase, the way to pay for them shrinks faster and faster. I can't think of one thing the Gov runs efficiently.Why would anyone think that allowing the idiots in DC run 1/6th of our nations economy whenthey couldn't even run the stupid Cash For Clunkers program without it going broke?
I also heard today that the Gov has spent somewhere around $6 billion to save or create a whole bunch of jobs in districts that do not even exist. Yeah, I would trust them to run everything.
The prob with any Gov bennies is that they are paid for with tax dollars. In a shrinking economy, with unemployment at 10.2% (actually over 15%), that means there are fewer working people paying taxes and more and more people taking tax dollars in the form of unemployment benefits, health benefits etc. This creates a giant leech on those that are left still working ang paying the taxes. As the demand for the Gov benefits increase, the way to pay for them shrinks faster and faster. I can't think of one thing the Gov runs efficiently.Why would anyone think that allowing the idiots in DC run 1/6th of our nations economy whenthey couldn't even run the stupid Cash For Clunkers program without it going broke?
I also heard today that the Gov has spent somewhere around $6 billion to save or create a whole bunch of jobs in districts that do not even exist. Yeah, I would trust them to run everything.
Similar threads
