Crown

Board: Other Sports Cars Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread


    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    quote]
    Mmmm... and where are these extra $$$$ going to come from?

    Besides, I would not put too much trust into the average American (or European for that matter). You KNOW most of them are going to invest them in strippers or lottery tickets (remember the post-Katrina handouts?). And once they p*ssed it all away, they'll ask for more. From you. If they don't ask, they will steal. Either by force, or by legislation.

    I don't care whether it's a pay-as-you-go system, a state pension fund, or a mix or both, as long as the burden is spread equally between all citizens and all companies, regardless of how many employees each individual company used to have 20 years ago. That's the only way to remove the cost advantage US-built Hondas have over US-built Chevys.



    The money will come from what all US companies currently pay in health care premiums. Give the money to the employee instead of spending it on managing health care plans. Much of the cost associated with health care is managing the plans for employees. Give the employee the money that goes into the health plans themselves, take away the managment costs completely. Let the employee buy health insurance on their own through private competition. Make the big health care companies compete for your business.

    We are already responsible for getting car insurance, life insurance, home insurance and so on. Let Geico sell you a full premium package that includes health care suited to your lifestyle like buying coverage for your $150 Porsche.

    This may force the health care companies to be more competitive and reduce overhead and run an efficient business. The only downside are those who are not employed, elderly, retired and such. You would have to build into your 401K a savings plan to pay for health care when you retire...but this will happen anyway, as companies in the US will never offer retirement benefits in the near future.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    The money will come from what all US companies currently pay in health care premiums. Give the money to the employee instead of spending it on managing health care plans. Much of the cost associated with health care is managing the plans for employees. Give the employee the money that goes into the health plans themselves, take away the managment costs completely. Let the employee buy health insurance on their own through private competition. Make the big health care companies compete for your business.


    I'm going to push your argument to its logical completion: if going from 1 plan per company to 10 plans in the country is going to save on management costs, imagine what having only a single plan could do! Hell, imagine what having ZERO plan could do!

    IMHO most people cannot be trusted with choosing the right plan. As they say, when the janitor is talking about the stock market, it's time to sell. What you're advocating is just that, making the janitor talk about the stock market (or the right pension plan).

    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    We are already responsible for getting car insurance, life insurance, home insurance and so on. Let Geico sell you a full premium package that includes health care suited to your lifestyle like buying coverage for your $150 Porsche.

    This may force the health care companies to be more competitive and reduce overhead and run an efficient business. The only downside are those who are not employed, elderly, retired and such. You would have to build into your 401K a savings plan to pay for health care when you retire...but this will happen anyway, as companies in the US will never offer retirement benefits in the near future.


    Yes, your system is nice, if you happen to be a good risk. What you call "the only downside", I call several million people that will riot if you deprive them of what they feel entitled to.

    I'd prefer to have a government-mandated single scheme. People who want more can always purchase additional coverage. However, in order to cut on red tape, the government would farm out the insurance monopoly to insurance corporations. Let them bid for the market of the century every year.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    Quote:
    The Groom said:
    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    The money will come from what all US companies currently pay in health care premiums. Give the money to the employee instead of spending it on managing health care plans. Much of the cost associated with health care is managing the plans for employees. Give the employee the money that goes into the health plans themselves, take away the managment costs completely. Let the employee buy health insurance on their own through private competition. Make the big health care companies compete for your business.


    I'm going to push your argument to its logical completion: if going from 1 plan per company to 10 plans in the country is going to save on management costs, imagine what having only a single plan could do! Hell, imagine what having ZERO plan could do!

    Your not getting my point...the cost is not with 10 plans vs one, it's with large corporations managing health care plans for hundreds of thousands of employees.

    IMHO most people cannot be trusted with choosing the right plan. As they say, when the janitor is talking about the stock market, it's time to sell. What you're advocating is just that, making the janitor talk about the stock market (or the right pension plan).

    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    We are already responsible for getting car insurance, life insurance, home insurance and so on. Let Geico sell you a full premium package that includes health care suited to your lifestyle like buying coverage for your $150 Porsche.

    This may force the health care companies to be more competitive and reduce overhead and run an efficient business. The only downside are those who are not employed, elderly, retired and such. You would have to build into your 401K a savings plan to pay for health care when you retire...but this will happen anyway, as companies in the US will never offer retirement benefits in the near future.


    Yes, your system is nice, if you happen to be a good risk. What you call "the only downside", I call several million people that will riot if you deprive them of what they feel entitled to.

    I'd prefer to have a government-mandated single scheme. People who want more can always purchase additional coverage. However, in order to cut on red tape, the government would farm out the insurance monopoly to insurance corporations. Let them bid for the market of the century every year.



    Your not getting my point...the cost is not with 10 plans vs one, it's with large corporations managing health care plans for hundreds of thousands of employees.

    Those people will riot sooner than you think when companies stop offering health care altogether, go belly up, and don't allow employee's to stay long enough to obtain retirement plans. I work for one of the largest American communication companies (maybe in the world) and I see it happening first hand. They are either buying everyone out or firing them before they meet the years/age to receive retirement benefits. Within 10-20 years, corporate provided health care will become non-existant. So, the only 2 options are state controlled which sucks and will create extremely poor health care, or privatize the solution. The poor already don't have health care, this may in fact lower the cost to give them real choices, not COBRA at $1000 per month for basic coverage.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    Your not getting my point...the cost is not with 10 plans vs one, it's with large corporations managing health care plans for hundreds of thousands of employees.


    I thought you meant that going from 1 plan per company (even large corporations) (i.e. hundreds of thousands of plans in the country) to 1 plan per major insurance companies (i.e. 10 plans in the country) would save on administration costs, not to mention bargaining power.

    My point was that having only one plan would save even more. AND by having a legal monopoly, the end customer would save the money that insurance companies would waste on advertising. This is very important, since for instance Big Pharma spends more on advertising than on R&D (This is the reason medical advertising is fordbidden in my country).

    If you allowed competition for each citizen's dollars, I'm afraid the end result would be that whatever savings achieved would be dwarfed by advertising expenses. You can trust insurance companies will do this, since advertising generally has a better ROI than an increased quality of service, at least on a short-term basis.


    Quote:
    95jersey said:
    Those people will riot sooner than you think when companies stop offering health care altogether, go belly up, and don't allow employee's to stay long enough to obtain retirement plans. I work for one of the largest American communication companies (maybe in the world) and I see it happening first hand. They are either buying everyone out or firing them before they meet the years/age to receive retirement benefits. Within 10-20 years, corporate provided health care will become non-existant. So, the only 2 options are state controlled which sucks and will create extremely poor health care, or privatize the solution. The poor already don't have health care, this may in fact lower the cost to give them real choices, not COBRA at $1000 per month for basic coverage.


    State-controlled health care does not have to suck. I had a better quality of service in the US (private) than in Germany (state), but it was even better in France (also state). Of all three countries I've worked in, France was also the cheapest. And there, even the poorest are covered.

    I agree this is not going to last, though. Given the general aging of the population in the West and in Asia, all systems, whether state-run or privately-run, will face huge financing problems. However, since the elderly will not only be more numerous, but also never miss an election, I expect a state system to be set up... at the expense of the working-age population.

    Democracy only works when it's two wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner. I'm afraid we're about to find out what happens when two lambs try to make a wolf eat grass. Hint: the well-armed wolf will contest the vote.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    France was the cheapest? For you maybe but someone was paying for it indirectly. The only answer is to privatize everything, healthcare, pensions, road contruction etc. Why would anyone let the government (a 10cent on the dollar outfit) care for the poor, the sick the elderly when private industry could do it for much less and do it without stealing from one to give to the other. Let's start being responsible here. Do you have any idea what kind of car you would be driving if the governemt provided one for you free? I would look and drive like a YUGO and cost taxpayers 100K each. How can anyone on this board be for socialism? Profit is not a dirty word! Study economics and you will see that I am 110% correct. Imagine if you could have banked the social security you have paid in along with your employer and let it generate interest while you were working. By 55 you could retire a millionaire and actually have assets you can will to your children.
    If GM and Ford want to compete the need to pay competive wages and benefits as well as make good products. If you introduce socialism to America via healthcare or otherwise you will make the entire country less competive not just the automakers and the increase in healthcare costs paid by taxpayers (largely for others and adminstrators benefits) will be quite large. Next time you are out in your fancy car think about the old USSR and the fine cars they had - not to mention health care.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    Your post is sooo wrong on so many levels (this coming from a business owner with an economics degree ) that I don't know where to begin.

    I think I'll just write this instead:
    I sure hope you did not pay for your education, because if you did, you got robbed. At least here, any 7th grader knows the difference between communism and socialism.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    What in the HELL does any of this have to do with car enthusiast talk. If I want pointless, powerless banter Ill go and watch some good ole BBC on the tele. Or for us USA folk the weather channel.. Sheesh come one bros..

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    While I agree I got carried away (not to mention I never turn down a good flame war ), my original point stands. And it has everything to do with car enthusiast talk.

    Car manufacturers do not operate out of a vacuum. They benefit from, or are penalized by their legal and economic environment. Since companies have to pay for the pensions and benefits of their former employees in the US, those companies that have been operating for a short time in the country enjoy an unfair advantage over those that have been in business for a long time. If healthcare and pensions were socialized, the burden would be spread equally across all American companies and citizens. Then, maybe we'd see some quality vehicles from Detroit again. It's as simple as that.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    Quote:
    997S4KEN said:
    What in the HELL does any of this have to do with car enthusiast talk. If I want pointless, powerless banter Ill go and watch some good ole BBC on the tele. Or for us USA folk the weather channel.. Sheesh come one bros..



    I have to agree to some point. We have an off-topic board, guys...

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    I like pecans.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    I agree that I generally equate socialism with communism - not because I do not know better but because I have no use for either.

    FYI, I was born and educated in Austria - German is my first language. If you want to knock my education please blame the Austrians. My point was that a country which limits it's redistribution of income (lower taxes) will attract more business investment and allow for better products to be produced at lower costs. This relates to GM and all other manufacturers and hence to our enjoyment of fine automobiles. On how many levels is this post wrong?

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    I'm going to be as quick as possible because RC signaled the end of the recess (still, it's going to be way too long).

    First thing, the Big Three's problem is not the wage differential between union labor in Michigan and non-union labor in Kentucky (although it does exist). It's "legacy costs". The Big Three have to pay $1,000 per vehicle to support their former employees. The American subsidiaries of Honda, Toyota, Nissan etc do not, since they haven't been building cars in America long enough to have a significant number of retirees to take care of.

    In other words, the current American pension and healthcare system gives Japanese companies an unfair advantage over their American competitors. And no tax cut is ever going to change that.
    On the other hand, moving to a socialized system would spread the burden across all American companies, including Honda and Toyota of America. In other words, the Big Three would now be free to compete on an equal footing.


    Second, you claimed that the private sector would be best able to address the needs of the poor. But that's BS, since no company has ever been interested in what is by definition INSOLVENT demand. These people have no means to pay for what they, as fellow members of the human species, are entitled to. That's why we, the more fortunate members of society, have to pay for them.
    If you believe taxation amounts to robbery, let me tell you that what you don't give to poorer people, they will forcibly take from you - as evidenced by the high crime rate in America.


    As for the respective merits of a state and a privatized healthcare system, they are both wasteful, although in different ways. While a state system tends to attract lazy employees and demotivate the others, a system where several companies are vying for citizens' money has the disadvantage of duplicating the administration structure, wasting money in commercials, and having less bargaining power when negotiating prices with Big Pharma and healthcare providers. In addition, the insurance market is dominated by an oligopoly, where large corporations have made a tacit agreement to not truly compete. And should I mention the ridiculous executive compensation packages and the litigation excesses in America?

    At the end of the day, I, although a low risk profile (young, fit, non-smoker, non-drinker, never ill), was paying more in America than I am now in France, where as a business owner, I'm clearly subsidizing other people's healthcare. That's the bottom line, and it showed that a private system can manage to be even more wasteful than a state system.

    On the other hand, I believe we could improve the overall efficiency if the state auctioned a time-limited monopoly concession to insurance companies. The state would pay the company a set amount each year for a defined quality of service. The concession would be awarded to the lowest bidder. This would improve the efficiency of the workforce, while enjoying the benefits of a monopoly system (no need to advertise, better bargaining power).


    Last but not least, I am a business owner and happen to have an economics degree. I'm not a socialist, nor a die-hard supporter of free markets. I'm just a pragmatist. There are cases where the state happens to be in a better position to do the job (see Econ. 101: "natural monopolies"), so why not let the state do it?

    I also happen to believe that state services are most wasteful when deliberately underfunded by politicians with an agenda (and powerful campaign contributors). Underfunding a service cripples it. The poor performance is then used as an excuse to further lower its budget, conveniently forgetting what caused the poor performance in the first place. Rinse, repeat until your contributors have completed what would be the heist of the century if it was not happening every year.

    Re: Chevy's 650-hp Corvette

    We certainly have a different viewpoint but our goal is the same, I think. I can appreciate that. You have what is referred to as an entitlement mentality and I do not. That's all. My view of income taxes is that it is theft since I must earn income - as contrasted to sales taxes or tariffs which involve a voluntary exchange. As long as someone else has a right to a portion of your income, decides the size of the portion and can take away your freedom if you don't pay up you are a type of slave (no, I do not equate that with the brutal concept of slavery which first springs to mind).

    In terms of privatization - you can not get away from the fact that the government is a 10 cent on the $ outfit in most all cases. I used to develop software for Medical Billing and I can guarantee that if the government was out of the medical business - except for basic regulation - costs would drop dramatically. Also, and more disturbing, there is no telling how many years of medical progress we have lost due to the government taking part in medicine.

    Most importantly - my fellow humans who are not able to survive without help - Americans give billions of dollars to private charities VOLUNTARILY. This is money which is sent all over the world. There is not one person in America who is hungry, lacks shelter or medical care if they want it. Clearly, charity is not an INSOLVENT venture at all. Perhaps the Government would like us think this is the case (or else how would they be able to steal your money without it looking like theft). It is in their interest to convince everyone that they are the best provider of this type of service (and all services and entitlements they can dream up) but as you point out they are somehow always UNDERFUNDED (easy to do if 90 cents on the dollar is wasted and everyone expects a handout).

    Giving your money to the government and expecting them to do better than your local charity, Church, private Hospital, homeless shelter or soup kitchen is, in my humble opinion, horribly wrong and can only be a function of political propaganda (sponsored by your own tax dollars).

    Perhaps we have lost hope in the goodness of mankind and have become cynical. We do not need to have government steal our money from us to help others. (The threat of tax prison spoils the joy of giving for me) Your fear that the unfortunate will just come and simply take stuff, if the state fails to provide, shows the obvious danger of spreading an entitlement mentality and fails to take into account all the other sources of support and aid other than the state. My personal experience is that the truly needy are far less likely to steal than those who have been wildly successful at stealing - like the state - and THEY are not in need of any more of my money. I'm certain you might mention all the corrupt charities and churches that fail to properly distribute funds but at least when these are uncovered they quickly cease to exist. The state however keeps right on going with, at best, a new team of politicians.

    Once property rights become secondary to the 'greater good' you corrupt both. If you trade freedom for security you get neither. (I think that was Jefferson)

    In the end we both want to take care of all of our societies problems - it's just that I have come to the conclusion that the state is not able to do most jobs as effectively as the private sector (in the EU or US) and if that is the case we owe it to future generations to correct the situation. Do you not agree? In the end facts and reality will influence and dtermine this debates conclusion.

    Hopefully the result of these types of discussions will enable said future generations to enjoy their 2063 'VW' Carreras with 900 HP, getting 80 MPG on 10 lane highways with no speed limit (not to mention 50 cent a gallon gas). - That was my required car reference. Thanks for the input, your ideas on the subject and for not slamming my education or the US in your last post (you are free to do so now, I can take it).

    Drive right and be safe.

    And yes, my winter vacation home is in - you guessed it - Andorra.

     
    Edit

    Forum

    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA (Part II) 4/17/24 7:16 AM
    GnilM
    777119 1798
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 4/7/24 11:48 AM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    441667 565
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Cayman GT4 RS (2021) 5/12/23 12:11 PM
    W8MM
    262765 288
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Porsche 911 (992) GT3 RS - 2022 3/12/24 8:28 AM
    DJM48
    260936 323
    Porsche Sticky The new Macan: the first all-electric SUV from Porsche 1/30/24 9:18 AM
    RCA
    85190 45
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Taycan 2024 Facelift 3/15/24 1:23 PM
    CGX car nut
    5561 50
    Porsche The moment I've been waiting for... 2/1/24 7:01 PM
    Pilot
     
     
     
     
     
    880635 1364
    Porsche 992 GT3 7/23/23 7:01 PM
    Grant
    815896 3868
    Porsche Welcome to the new Taycan Forum! 2/10/24 4:43 PM
    nberry
    390906 1526
    Porsche GT4RS 4/21/24 11:50 AM
    mcdelaug
    389997 1454
    Others Tesla 2 the new thread 12/13/23 2:48 PM
    CGX car nut
    372158 2401
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 7/3/23 12:30 PM
    Porker
    368903 797
    Porsche Red Nipples 991.2 GT3 Touring on tour 4/11/24 12:32 PM
    Ferdie
    289137 668
    Porsche Collected my 997 GTS today 10/19/23 7:06 PM
    CGX car nut
     
     
     
     
     
    261276 812
    Lambo Huracán EVO STO 7/30/23 6:59 PM
    mcdelaug
    240139 346
    Lotus Lotus Emira 6/25/23 2:53 PM
    Enmanuel
    230319 101
    Others Corvette C8 10/16/23 3:24 PM
    Enmanuel
    221178 488
    Others Gordon Murray - T.50 11/22/23 10:27 AM
    mcdelaug
    169203 387
    Porsche Back to basics - 996 GT3 RS 6/11/23 5:13 PM
    CGX car nut
    140998 144
    BMW M 2024 BMW M3 CS Official Now 12/29/23 9:04 AM
    RCA
    117465 303
    Motor Sp. 2023 Formula One 12/19/23 5:38 AM
    WhoopsyM
    108564 685
    Porsche 2022 992 Safari Model 3/7/24 4:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    84138 239
    AMG Mercedes-Benz W124 500E aka Porsche typ 2758 2/23/24 10:03 PM
    blueflame
    75061 297
    Porsche 992 GT3 RS 3/3/24 7:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    53632 314
    Motor Sp. Porsche 963 3/16/24 9:27 PM
    WhoopsyM
    25010 237
    Ferrari Ferrari 296 GTB (830PS, Hybrid V6) 1/21/24 4:29 PM
    GT-Boy
    21170 103
    BMW M 2022 BMW M5 CS 4/8/24 1:43 PM
    Ferdie
    19490 140
    AMG G63 sold out 9/15/23 7:38 PM
    Nico997
    16582 120
    AMG [2022] Mercedes-AMG SL 4/23/24 1:24 PM
    RCA
    13690 225
    Motor Sp. 24-Hour race Nürburgring 2018 5/25/23 10:42 PM
    Grant
    11244 55
    126 items found, displaying 1 to 30.