On May 13, 2009, our local paper published lists of property owners in our county who had unpaid property taxes.
The lists comprised about 60 pages (regular newspaper page size), 4 columns per page. On only 1 1/2 pages there were abou 150 property owners listed. Between just those property owners the amount of unpaid property tax was about $1,463million dollars .
Those property owners had some of the best, most valuable property in the county, many of the properties being beach front or in fancy gated golf communities.
After seeing these tax lists and especially after seeing how many of the property owners (who can only be described as rich) who had not paid their taxes, I am thoroughly disgusted. I am totally sick of hearing the rich wimp and moan about how they bear an "unfair" share of the tax burden.
Yeah, you rich folks DO owe a lot of taxes. And why not, when you can afford to buy a property valued in the million dollar range in the first place! But to not pay your property taxes is a disgrace. Just who the devil do you people think you are, anyway?
And, in effect, ALL of us are paying for these tax scofflaws to not pay their property taxes on time.
Our government runs on tax dollars. G0venments, large and small, have only taxes as their source of income. So what, you say? Who cares if the government does not get the money? Well, how about if the fire department refused to come to your fancy home when it is on fire, unless you can prove you paid your taxes (which pays the firefighters salaries). That actually happened in the "olden days", when a plaque had to be mounted on a home to prove the taxes were paid, before the fire fighters would try to put out a fire at that property. Or how about if the cops just do not respond to your complaints, large or small, or your 911 calls, because you have not paid your taxes (which pay the cops salaries). Or, how about if the government just cuts off the water to your fancy home, since you do not see fit to pay the taxes that make good, clean, potable water available to every home in the area.
And how about if the clerk at the DMV just tells you to take a hike, or the highway crew guys just tell you to fix your own road!
And why should this also bother ALL taxpayers? When the government sets its budget each year they do so with the expectation of receiving tax dollars to pay for all the services they provide. And when the taxes are not paid, in order to continue to provide those services the governments must BORROW the money to keep their physical plants operating and to pay government worker salaries. And just who do you think helps pay the interest on all that borrowed money?
US, that's who, the regular taxpayers who just pay our taxes on time and quit the griping and moaning and nit-picking about where the taxes go. Oversight is one thing, and it's good. But the constant carping about taxes is insane and selfish.
So, given the horrid state of the economy, I am sure there are many 'regular' folks who are having a hard time coming up with their taxes. (Of course, anyone with a mortgage should be having their taxes paid out of escrow), and it is very sad and those who have lost their jobs or have other hardships maybe should be getting some kind of tax break.
But for the rich, who expect everything to be their way, to just ignore paying their taxes until THEY get ready to pay them, is very selfish and not at all responsible as citizens.
Maybe what we need in this country is a tax debtor's prison. And maybe those who HAVE money but still refuse to pay their share, should be housed in the prison until they get their attitude straight!
Monday, June 15, 2009
Government health insurance, good or bad.
I know that the idea of the government 'interfering' in our health care is something many people do not even like to think about. But would it be all bad?
First, one of the main concerns people have is that some bureaucrat would be making decisions about their health care. Exactly how would that be any different than some claims clerk making those same decisions. Do people really think that a DOCTOR looks at every medical claim submitted to private insurance companies, and determine if the claim and the treatment are valid? That is certainly NOT the case.
Perhaps a broad determination is made, based on a broad set of criteria. But every time we see our doctor, every time we get a prescription, or every time we need surgery, the decisionm to pay or not is certainly not made on an individual basis by some doctor who has our well being at heart.
So, if we had the same or similar set of criteria, but within a government plan, the decisions would also not be made on a case-by-case basis by a doctor, but by a claims clerk. The same as we have now with our private insurer.
Second, with a single payer system the amount of time and paperwork required to process a claim should be cut drastically. And the additional time it takes for claims to be processed in the event that a patient has multiple coverages would also be cut. That could not help but cut the cost for coverage, plus be "green", as the amount of paperwork would be cut.
For example, in 2007 I saw my primary care physician. The bill was something like $200, and I had TWO coverages, Medicare and the insurance from my husband's employment. Because his employer had more than a certain number of employees, that made his work insurance my PRIMARY insurer, and Medicare my secondary. Although I clearly explained that to the insurance CLERK, the claim was filed incorrectly, with Medicare as first and the employers insurance second. It was denied by both, for the reason that the primary coverage was the employer.
So, I got two denials. I called the billing for my primary care physicain. I explained what they had done wrong. They said they would refile the claim correctly. They did refile, incorrectly. Another round of denials, and another call to the claims office. Another assurance that the claim would be filed correctly. It was not.
Third time is a charm. The third time I called them the claim was actually filed correctly, first to the employer insurance, and the doctor finally received payment from the primary coverage. The insurance claim department now will file the secondary claim to Medicare. Medicare will then pay their portion. The latest correspondence on this 2007 claim? One week ago, two years and one week after the actual doctor's visit!
With a single payer this could NOT have happened. When you take into account the time wasted, the fact that the doctor did not get paid for two years, and the patient frustration in having to try to get the "professionals" to file the claim correctly, it is clear that a single payer system would have been much better in this case, and I suspect in many cases.
Third, although there is a lot of concern about the government not having a say in your health care, in my experience with Medicare it is efficient, pays claims promptly, and the explanations of benefits is understandable. That makes it much easier for the patient, the doctor and all providers to be paid in a timely manner.
Another situation that would be mitigated by a single payer system is that for each medical issue the claim would be the exact same amount for everyone, instead of the way it is not, where each plan may pay more or less of a claim. That is, maybe plan "A" pays doctors $100 per office visit, while plan "B" pays only $75. If there was a single payer the amount paid would be the same no matter what. That would eliminate the need for claim filers to keep track of the different amounts they are to bill depending on what insurance the patient has!
Under a single payer system there could also be great savings on other medical claims, like prescriptions. If there is a single payer the pharmaceutical companies would get a flat rate for their drugs. Period. No multiple costs that have to be 'negotiated' all the time.
As to how to pay for a single payer system, it seems clear that whatever people are now paying, and to whom, would then be paid to the single payer. The cost then could be spread out over a HUGE patient base (everyone) and while some people would pay a little more, some would pay a lot less. A percentage could be paid by employers, based on factors like number of employees, annual gross income etc. That way even the smallest companies could pay part of the cost and their employees would have the same benefits as people employed by huge corporations.
And for those who say they don't want to pay for someone else to be insured or have health care, they already DO. Whether they understand it or not, through their taxes they already pay to help the poor who cannot afford private health care, AND they pay to cover those employees of small companies that cannot afford to offer health care for their employees. So, that would not change, except that the small employers would now be contributing at least something to the plan, whereas now they contribute nothing, and their employees are forced to rely on public assistance for health care.
So, think about this. If you agree, call your Congressman and urge them to back some sort of single payer, government run health care insurance program. It is a national disgrace that we, in the leading country in the world, do not have this coverage that citizens of many other industrialized nations have had for years!@
First, one of the main concerns people have is that some bureaucrat would be making decisions about their health care. Exactly how would that be any different than some claims clerk making those same decisions. Do people really think that a DOCTOR looks at every medical claim submitted to private insurance companies, and determine if the claim and the treatment are valid? That is certainly NOT the case.
Perhaps a broad determination is made, based on a broad set of criteria. But every time we see our doctor, every time we get a prescription, or every time we need surgery, the decisionm to pay or not is certainly not made on an individual basis by some doctor who has our well being at heart.
So, if we had the same or similar set of criteria, but within a government plan, the decisions would also not be made on a case-by-case basis by a doctor, but by a claims clerk. The same as we have now with our private insurer.
Second, with a single payer system the amount of time and paperwork required to process a claim should be cut drastically. And the additional time it takes for claims to be processed in the event that a patient has multiple coverages would also be cut. That could not help but cut the cost for coverage, plus be "green", as the amount of paperwork would be cut.
For example, in 2007 I saw my primary care physician. The bill was something like $200, and I had TWO coverages, Medicare and the insurance from my husband's employment. Because his employer had more than a certain number of employees, that made his work insurance my PRIMARY insurer, and Medicare my secondary. Although I clearly explained that to the insurance CLERK, the claim was filed incorrectly, with Medicare as first and the employers insurance second. It was denied by both, for the reason that the primary coverage was the employer.
So, I got two denials. I called the billing for my primary care physicain. I explained what they had done wrong. They said they would refile the claim correctly. They did refile, incorrectly. Another round of denials, and another call to the claims office. Another assurance that the claim would be filed correctly. It was not.
Third time is a charm. The third time I called them the claim was actually filed correctly, first to the employer insurance, and the doctor finally received payment from the primary coverage. The insurance claim department now will file the secondary claim to Medicare. Medicare will then pay their portion. The latest correspondence on this 2007 claim? One week ago, two years and one week after the actual doctor's visit!
With a single payer this could NOT have happened. When you take into account the time wasted, the fact that the doctor did not get paid for two years, and the patient frustration in having to try to get the "professionals" to file the claim correctly, it is clear that a single payer system would have been much better in this case, and I suspect in many cases.
Third, although there is a lot of concern about the government not having a say in your health care, in my experience with Medicare it is efficient, pays claims promptly, and the explanations of benefits is understandable. That makes it much easier for the patient, the doctor and all providers to be paid in a timely manner.
Another situation that would be mitigated by a single payer system is that for each medical issue the claim would be the exact same amount for everyone, instead of the way it is not, where each plan may pay more or less of a claim. That is, maybe plan "A" pays doctors $100 per office visit, while plan "B" pays only $75. If there was a single payer the amount paid would be the same no matter what. That would eliminate the need for claim filers to keep track of the different amounts they are to bill depending on what insurance the patient has!
Under a single payer system there could also be great savings on other medical claims, like prescriptions. If there is a single payer the pharmaceutical companies would get a flat rate for their drugs. Period. No multiple costs that have to be 'negotiated' all the time.
As to how to pay for a single payer system, it seems clear that whatever people are now paying, and to whom, would then be paid to the single payer. The cost then could be spread out over a HUGE patient base (everyone) and while some people would pay a little more, some would pay a lot less. A percentage could be paid by employers, based on factors like number of employees, annual gross income etc. That way even the smallest companies could pay part of the cost and their employees would have the same benefits as people employed by huge corporations.
And for those who say they don't want to pay for someone else to be insured or have health care, they already DO. Whether they understand it or not, through their taxes they already pay to help the poor who cannot afford private health care, AND they pay to cover those employees of small companies that cannot afford to offer health care for their employees. So, that would not change, except that the small employers would now be contributing at least something to the plan, whereas now they contribute nothing, and their employees are forced to rely on public assistance for health care.
So, think about this. If you agree, call your Congressman and urge them to back some sort of single payer, government run health care insurance program. It is a national disgrace that we, in the leading country in the world, do not have this coverage that citizens of many other industrialized nations have had for years!@
Saturday, November 15, 2008
I am SICK of hearing that people "bought more home than they could afford!
If you, or someone you know, has lost or is losing their home to foreclosure, I would like to hear their story.
Perhaps just for statistical purposes, or perhaps to write about their experiences, so that other people can see what is REALLY happening.
MANY people whose homes have been foreclosed on are in that situation not because they were trying to live beyond their means, but because of other circumstances such as illness or a job loss. Or perhaps they are in that situation because of predatory lending, that got them into an ARM loan by saying that "interest rates are going down", but not telling them that even if interest rates reached zero, THEIR PARTICULAR mortgage would NEVER have a rate decrease!
And, why are so many other people ANGRY at those kicked out of their homes? Have we really become a nation of such MEANIES?
So, if you read this, and if you or a friend or aquaintance has lost their home or is losing their home, I want to hear about it.
Perhaps just for statistical purposes, or perhaps to write about their experiences, so that other people can see what is REALLY happening.
MANY people whose homes have been foreclosed on are in that situation not because they were trying to live beyond their means, but because of other circumstances such as illness or a job loss. Or perhaps they are in that situation because of predatory lending, that got them into an ARM loan by saying that "interest rates are going down", but not telling them that even if interest rates reached zero, THEIR PARTICULAR mortgage would NEVER have a rate decrease!
And, why are so many other people ANGRY at those kicked out of their homes? Have we really become a nation of such MEANIES?
So, if you read this, and if you or a friend or aquaintance has lost their home or is losing their home, I want to hear about it.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Some of our most powerful people rip us off time after time.
Why do we continue to allow this? Why, when some of the most powerful people in this country have shown time and time again that they are willing to rip off the average "Joe Six-pack", do we continue to worship at the altar of their public image?
For example, in the S&L meltdown in the 80s and early 90s, several people were involved who were never penalized for their involvement, and who have maintained their sway over many of the American people. Like the Bush family, which was named as being involved in that scandal, as well as John McCain, and others. And some of those same names are popping up with regard to the current economic situation. Yet no matter how flagrant their involvement in a fiasco that cost many people their savings, those same people today are still singing their praises.
I am starting to believe there is a very simple reason for this. I think it is an attitude very similar to the American people's obsession with the "outlaws" of days gone by. Like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Billy the Kid, Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger (and a host of others), we seem to hold the Bush family in reverence as if they are some kind of saints!
The afore mentioned folks were just that, crooks, and thieves and murderers and yet they have gained a place in the folklore of this country. I see this same kind of folk awe when I talk to random people about our politicians. It never seems to bother them that MANY of our politicians have been investigated and censured for their involvement in what can only be termed thievery, that seems to make no difference. The people are STILL fans of the crooks!
I think this is a sad and dangerous attitude for people to have. I think we need to STOP being ostriches, get our heads out of the sand, look at these folks with clear eyes and understand that as long as we REVERE them, they will continue to ROB us.
For example, in the S&L meltdown in the 80s and early 90s, several people were involved who were never penalized for their involvement, and who have maintained their sway over many of the American people. Like the Bush family, which was named as being involved in that scandal, as well as John McCain, and others. And some of those same names are popping up with regard to the current economic situation. Yet no matter how flagrant their involvement in a fiasco that cost many people their savings, those same people today are still singing their praises.
I am starting to believe there is a very simple reason for this. I think it is an attitude very similar to the American people's obsession with the "outlaws" of days gone by. Like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Billy the Kid, Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger (and a host of others), we seem to hold the Bush family in reverence as if they are some kind of saints!
The afore mentioned folks were just that, crooks, and thieves and murderers and yet they have gained a place in the folklore of this country. I see this same kind of folk awe when I talk to random people about our politicians. It never seems to bother them that MANY of our politicians have been investigated and censured for their involvement in what can only be termed thievery, that seems to make no difference. The people are STILL fans of the crooks!
I think this is a sad and dangerous attitude for people to have. I think we need to STOP being ostriches, get our heads out of the sand, look at these folks with clear eyes and understand that as long as we REVERE them, they will continue to ROB us.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Our economy is strong?
What do the candidates mean, especially McCain, when they say our economy is strong?
Just about every day there is news of some corporation or other being 'bailed out' by the government. Or maybe just going belly up and filing bankruptcy. And these are not your mom-and-pop businesses, they are some of the biggest corporations in American history!
I can't help wondering just exactly what it is going to take to wake up the American People , and make them DEMAND that there be accountability for these huge defaults. It is obscene that, while FNMA and FreddieMac have failed, their CEOs and other head honchos are collecting HUGE "Golden Parachutes". Of course, making those folks give back the money they obviously have NOT earned is just a drop in the bucket compared to the huge losses the corporations have endured, but it is a start!
IMHO, those in charge at FNMA, FreddieMac, Lehman Brothers, Merril Lynch, WaMu, Countrywide etc., should all be charged with fraud and mismanagement of funds, and sent to jail, and have all their assets (those we could find!) stripped.
The American People need to stand up and DEMAND that no one profit when a corporation goes down the tube.
Can't you see those executives laughing all the way to their (offshore) bank?
Just about every day there is news of some corporation or other being 'bailed out' by the government. Or maybe just going belly up and filing bankruptcy. And these are not your mom-and-pop businesses, they are some of the biggest corporations in American history!
I can't help wondering just exactly what it is going to take to wake up the American People , and make them DEMAND that there be accountability for these huge defaults. It is obscene that, while FNMA and FreddieMac have failed, their CEOs and other head honchos are collecting HUGE "Golden Parachutes". Of course, making those folks give back the money they obviously have NOT earned is just a drop in the bucket compared to the huge losses the corporations have endured, but it is a start!
IMHO, those in charge at FNMA, FreddieMac, Lehman Brothers, Merril Lynch, WaMu, Countrywide etc., should all be charged with fraud and mismanagement of funds, and sent to jail, and have all their assets (those we could find!) stripped.
The American People need to stand up and DEMAND that no one profit when a corporation goes down the tube.
Can't you see those executives laughing all the way to their (offshore) bank?
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
It is possible to just disappear?
In this day and age you would think it would be impossible to just disappear. After all, we are constantly told how we are in data bases, how our information is known by anyone who wants to find it, and other scary things that make us feel like we are in a goldfish bowl.
Well, maybe it is that way now but in 1969 when my aunt died and left behind 5 sons, it must not have been that way, because those sons have vanished as surely as if they were spirited away by a magician.
My aunt's name was Sandy and at her death she was (we think) married to a man named Al Marsh. They lived in the Virginia Beach area.
Her obituary names her survivors. Sons Randy Hurst, Michael Hurst and Kevin Hurst (by a previous marriage) were listed, as well as sons David and Richard Marsh. The obituary indicated that Randy Hurst was married and lived in Norfolk VA. ( I believe he was married to Myrna Neff, his high school sweetheart when they attended Towson HS in Baltimore County, MD). Michael Hurst also lives in Norfolk.
Kevin Hurst lived in Virginia Beach and was about 16 years old. We believe that perhaps David and Richard were twiins, and about 4 or 5 years old at the time of my aunt's death.
I have learned that after my aunt died her husband, Al Marsh, took Kevin Hurst (his step-son) and the two younger boys and moved to the Baltimore area, perhaps to either White Marsh or Perry Hall.
And that is the point at which everyone seems to have disappeared. Since that time no one has ever seen Randy Hurst and his family, Michael Hurst or either of the two younger boys, Richard and David Marsh.
Kevin Hurst has been located.
If anyone knows the whereabouts of Randy (Philip Randall) (and Myrna) Hurst and their daughter, Michael Brandon Hurst, Richard Marsh or David Marsh I would like to contact them.
We believe the two youngest boys would not be about 40 years of age. We believe that Randy Hurst was born in about 1847-48 and that Michael Brandon Hurst was born in about 1950.
Well, maybe it is that way now but in 1969 when my aunt died and left behind 5 sons, it must not have been that way, because those sons have vanished as surely as if they were spirited away by a magician.
My aunt's name was Sandy and at her death she was (we think) married to a man named Al Marsh. They lived in the Virginia Beach area.
Her obituary names her survivors. Sons Randy Hurst, Michael Hurst and Kevin Hurst (by a previous marriage) were listed, as well as sons David and Richard Marsh. The obituary indicated that Randy Hurst was married and lived in Norfolk VA. ( I believe he was married to Myrna Neff, his high school sweetheart when they attended Towson HS in Baltimore County, MD). Michael Hurst also lives in Norfolk.
Kevin Hurst lived in Virginia Beach and was about 16 years old. We believe that perhaps David and Richard were twiins, and about 4 or 5 years old at the time of my aunt's death.
I have learned that after my aunt died her husband, Al Marsh, took Kevin Hurst (his step-son) and the two younger boys and moved to the Baltimore area, perhaps to either White Marsh or Perry Hall.
And that is the point at which everyone seems to have disappeared. Since that time no one has ever seen Randy Hurst and his family, Michael Hurst or either of the two younger boys, Richard and David Marsh.
Kevin Hurst has been located.
If anyone knows the whereabouts of Randy (Philip Randall) (and Myrna) Hurst and their daughter, Michael Brandon Hurst, Richard Marsh or David Marsh I would like to contact them.
We believe the two youngest boys would not be about 40 years of age. We believe that Randy Hurst was born in about 1847-48 and that Michael Brandon Hurst was born in about 1950.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
