Get PJ Media on your Apple

Roger’s Rules

Obama’s Dependency Agenda

August 22nd, 2013 - 5:32 am

It’s the little things that get you. Yesterday, our former paper of record published a story about the decision by UPS, the big package-delivery company, to restrict or eliminate health care coverage for spouses of its white collar workers. It is thus, the Times reports, “joining an increasing number of companies that are restricting or eliminating spousal health benefits.”

This fact, and the trend it represents, puts the Times in something of a bind. The paper has been one of the most conspicuous boosters for everything Obama, with the result that it has, like the monkeys in the story, adopted a policy of “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” when it comes to the president’s many failed policies and initiatives. Benghazi? It happened because of an anti-Muslim internet video. Trayvon Martin? Murdered by a “white Hispanic” in a fit of racial hatred. The use of the IRS as a political weapon to intimidate and punish conservatives?  Has that even been reported on in the Times?  ObamaCare? What, do you want to deny health care to the poor?

(Pardon us while we disable the non sequitur buzzer . . .)

So, let’s just say the the Times likes ObamaCare. So how do they deal with the many defections, left and right, from its economy- and health-care destroying provisions? Bring on the monkeys! Listen to this:

U.P.S., the world’s largest package delivery company, said its decision was prompted in part by “costs associated with” the federal health care law that is commonly called Obamacare. Several health care experts, however, said they believed the company was motivated by a desire to hold down health care costs, rather than because of cost increases under the law.

Got that? Unnamed “experts” said that UPS “was motivated by a desire to hold down health care costs, rather than because of cost increases under the law.”  And the difference is . . .?

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Health care? Insurance has nothing to do with health care, it is only a payment mechanism. No one is denied care, and hasn't been for decades. Anyone who claims to have been refused real care for real conditions is a liar or an idiot, or both.

Costs are costs. The actual cost of care is what it is. You want to add layer after layer of administrative and dictatorial costs to an already expensive commodity.

What a moroon, to quote bugs bunny.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What is interesting is that a lot of people who voted for the Big 0 will be hurt the most. They should have been careful for what it was they wished.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm not a fan of O-care or any other big govt scheme. I am a fan of facts, though. If you read the UPS announcement they say they are dropping spouses that are covered through the spouse's own plan. So, for instance, if you're married and your spouse has health coverage through their employer, UPS would not offer coverage of that spouse.

I'm still waiting (breathlessly) for the IIA report that breaks-down increases in healthcare costs and properly ascribes them to regulatory burden, normal inflation, and just plain greedy bastards. I'm sure that will be one for the books.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (36)
All Comments   (36)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
You may be an Obama supporter, but are you really willing to support others who will be given your tax money to provide them with health insurance? Your rates go up to support them and your annual deductible amount goes up, too. This isn’t for a single year, but will go on forever if obamacare is not repealed. Since the Democrats will not join the effort, join with us in voting Republican to get enough people in office who want to repeal the law. Vote your pocketbook, not some ideology you have accepted. Remember, it’s your money. This situation is hardly different from being assigned to support an illegal alien.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The University of Virginia, which initially supported Obamacare, has also dropped spousal care, saving 7.3 million dollars.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Dependency or revolutionary ideology? I raised the question here, noting Michelle Obama's interest in black supremacy. Very pan-African and blatantly fascist. Oh well. See http://clarespark.com/2013/02/25/potus-michelle-and-the-end-of-the-democratic-republic/.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The editors of the Times are "held captive by the idea of Obama the savior?" Please. The editors of the Times are hardcore Marxists. There is nothing starry eyed about them, they are not followers. They know exactly where Obama is taking us and REVEL in the destruction wrought. Same for the editors at NBCABCCBSCNN. The long march through the institutions has been achieved and there will be no deviation from the agenda. Final destination? America Dead!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Love the two new words I just learned! Adumbration and ensorcell. Great article.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This power grab called the Affordable Care Act seems to be collapsing because of its own obesity, just as this criminal conspiracy called the Obama Administration appears to be suffering from the same inner turmoil that brings down all entities dependent upon the secrecy of its members. People start talking out of fear and self-preservation. There's no honor among thieves.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Sits back with popcorn and waits for the screams of the "millennials" getting raped by Obamacare.

HEY ASSHOLES! YOU VOTED TO GET RAPED!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
That's a fact. I have no sympathy for them. However, if they can overcome their bias they can help themselves financially by voting Republican in the mid-term. If they vote Democrat they will continue getting the beating they have earned.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
My God! Doesn't anyone, anywhere understand what insurance is and what it does? Pro or anti, no one seems to know that insurance rates are regulated by the states (quite tightly I might add) and are driven by actual cost?

Insurance has nothing to do with health care... nothing. It is but a way to level out the cost. If you get turned down for a procedure, you didn't buy that feature in your policy... It is never about Them stealing from US.


Adding all these administrative functions has to add cost, damit.

Someone down post actually decried Pharmacy Manufacturers GROSS PROFIT being as high as 20%. First it is gross margin and profit is return on risk, risk not taken by the mooks. 20% gross is probably 7-10% net, net net, with which to pay dividends to pension funds.

Get a grip, folk, get a grip.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If you're economically illiterate, you're going to have a hard time understanding the whole mess. And we've raised a lot of people to be economically illiterate and credulous of whatever claims our politicians make.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's a bit unfair, to blame President Obamam for the Hand of God.

Just as in slavery, the US has stubbornly resisted, for a hundred years, doing the right and moral thing. Guess what? NOW IT WILL COST YOU.

The Republicans, and their allies in the Democratic party, have held off civillised health care for about a hundred years now. But, even all bad things, it seems, come to an end.

So deal with it, you bunch of whiners. You had fifty years to pre-empt this problem, but your greed blinded to the will of God. Now, prepare to be smited.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Health care? Insurance has nothing to do with health care, it is only a payment mechanism. No one is denied care, and hasn't been for decades. Anyone who claims to have been refused real care for real conditions is a liar or an idiot, or both.

Costs are costs. The actual cost of care is what it is. You want to add layer after layer of administrative and dictatorial costs to an already expensive commodity.

What a moroon, to quote bugs bunny.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"Got that? Unnamed “experts” said that UPS “was motivated by a desire to hold down health care costs, rather than because of cost increases under the law.” And the difference is . . .?"

This is what the Times, and most MSM, sounds like when it has to eat a steaming lump of feces that they had all spent many column-inches selling to other people as a "tasty cupcake".

Open wide, boys and girls! Yummy-yummy! There's a LOT left on your plate when you're done gobbling these "appetizers".

Close your eyes and think of Pelosi...
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All