The Quotable Reich

White racists understand where Trump is coming from. It's identical to the KKK and everybody understands his language.

I think the republicans have succeeded in portraying the unions as a bunch of mob thugs forcing people to belong to unions and pay their dues whether they want to or not. I don't know if there is any truth to that or not, if there is, the answer is not to do away with unions but clean up and reform unions. I agree, no one has been making a union argument and it is also true we had better wages and more bargaining power when there was more unions.

Here in the southern parts of the US, back when there was more unions, we had more people belonging to the democrat party just because of unions. Now it is hardly a consideration. They make the decision of which party to support for dumb reasons like gay marriage and American exceptionalism like Trump talks about "making America great again." They think all the liberal laws have destroyed their way of life when truly it has been big money corporations taking their jobs overseas and making all the laws favorable to the one percent in the labor market and lack of unions with bargaining power.

I belonged to the union, and it really helped with our wages and benefits. It was also found that unions helped nonunion wages and benefits.
I was a biller for several trucking companies when I attended college, because we worked the evening shift, and went to school during the day. The pay was good. I think it was over $8/hour, and that was back in the early sixties. Some people still don't make that much today. I've been retired since 1998.

Any group that represents a large body of people - government, union, church, whatever - is subject to corruption. So, a union or any other such group, needs to be scrutinized, but not destroyed. People tend to want to overthrow an entire organization than repair what needs fixing. That or suffer in silence. All it takes is oversight and a will to make it work.

On wage stagnation.
Workers produced much more, but typical workers’ pay lagged far behind
Disconnect between productivity and typical worker’s compensation, 2000 to 2013

Year Hourly
compensation Productivity

2000 93.03% 179.18%
2001 95.70% 183.50%
2002 99.61% 191.43%
2003 101.80% 200.93%
2004 101.11% 209.10%
2005 100.21% 214.53%
2006 100.31% 216.46%
2007 101.83% 218.75%
2008 101.95% 219.36%
2009 109.88% 225.95%
2010 111.85% 235.39%
2011 109.27% 236.71%
2012 107.53% 240.85%
2013 108.86% 243.13%
Workers produced much more, but typical workers’ pay lagged far behind: Disconnect between productivity and typical worker’s compensation, 1948–2013
Note: Data are for compensation (wages and benefits) of production/nonsupervisory workers in the private sector and net productivity of the total economy. "Net productivity" is the growth of output of goods and services less depreciation per hour worked.

Source: EPI analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of Economic Analysis data

Updated from Figure A in Raising America’s Pay: Why It’s Our Central Economic Policy Challenge

I agree 100%, I also agree there hasn't hardly been anybody that I am aware of talking about unions. Obama has in some of his speeches but it hasn't ever went anywhere nor has any plans been put forth that I am aware of.

I just hope we win the WH and the senate and enough seats in the house to put those planks which is in the democrat platform into policies.

I read some additional information on Atena and Humana, apparently the reason Atena wants to pull out of Obamacare is because the feds are opposing the merger of Atena and Humana.

Aetna CEO threatened Obamacare pullout if feds opposed Humana merger

They were loosing millions of dollars. The merger would have help with that, instead the Obama admin denied the merger and now they are pulling out because they can't afford to continue in the loosing venture that is the Obamacare exchanges...

What's hard to understand about the situation?

That is their official response, sure. The truth is they want to merge with Humana in order to make more of a profit. If there was no profit in it, they wouldn't want to get deeper in Obamacare by taking on Humana with the merger.

Do you think it is a smart business venture to get into something that is going to cost you money and not make it?

I am not sure your question applies because Atena would not want to take on Humana if they didn't think they would make money in it.

Personally, I think our whole cost of health care is too high and it doesn't seem to be something people are addressing. I read earlier that people are going overseas to get operations and other health care services because the cost of our health care is just too high.

Here it is:

Should you go abroad for medical care?

No truth in it Rev. Just made up shyt by conservatives trying to silence the voice of the workers and make them work for the wages they want them to have. I was a union man for more than 60 years and made a decent living until they broke the unions. Were their some crooked union people? Well are their some crooked businessmen? How about the guy running for president. And than there are the Koch brothers. And how many congressmen do you think are not so honest?

In the first quarter of 2016 Aetna made $810,000,000 or $2.30 a share. Maybe you ought to read deeper into it rather than believe whatever fox news tells you.

As a business they made money, but in the area's of the health care exchanges they lost money. That's the problem with the Obamacare, in order for the insurance companies to make money they will have to charge the people who have their own plans and the people who have plans with their employers more to make up the deficit. As it has been pointed out, the cost of insurance has continued to rise and a majority of people are not saving money. How many companies have pulled out of the exchanges? How many states have dropped their own exchanges and moved their people over to the federal exchange? How many healthcare co-ops have gone out of business? The only thing Obamacare has done is cover more people, it has failed in the rest of it's intent and endeavors.

If they made $810 million, it doesn't matter that they lost money in other departments. They're still a pretty good business, and management seems to know what they're doing.
When I worked for Florsheim Shoe Company, it was the most profitable unit of Interco. They still survived because of Florsheim. The competition in the shoe business got so steep, Florsheim started producing their shoes in China to compete in price. They eventually went bankrupt. The brothers bought their name back, and reestablished the brand out of NYC. They're a much smaller company today.

Departments that routinely loose money get closed down and products stop getting made. A business will not continue to spend money on a loosing venture so they are stopping their offers in the exchanges. It's a smart business move on their part. Lets hope that it leads to lower prices for the rest of their customers since they don't have to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Have you ever managed a large company, or worked in management? If you have, what was your major responsibilities?
I worked in management positions for 80% of my working career.

Are you saying that companies who have products that loose money will continue to spend money on that product?

I didn't say that. You're making statements that you dream up. That's plain ignorance.

Claims departments in every insurance company lose money. They're not profit centres. That doesn't mean they're going to close the departments down.

Insurance companies make money in two ways - premiums and investments. With low interest rates, it puts pressure on premiums to be increased. It was already happening with private insurers before Obamacare. Saying it happened because of Obamacare is incorrect. I understand why opponents of Obamacare try, but the realities of the market before the implementation of Obamacare don't support the argument.